Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70259550

Dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity issues in process-based models of carbon and nitrogen cycles in northern forest ecosystems

Abstract

Many process-based models on carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles have been developed for northern forest ecosystems. These models are widely used to evaluate the long-term decisions in forest management dealing with effects like particulate pollution, productivity and climate change. Regarding climate change, one of the key questions that have sensitive political implications is whether northern forests will sequester atmospheric C or not. Whilst many process-based models have been tested for accuracy by evaluating or validating against observed data, few have dealt with the complexity of the incorporated procedures to estimate uncertainties associated with model predictions or the sensitivity of these predictions to input factors in a systematic, inter-model comparison fashion. In general, models differ in their underlying attempts to match natural complexities with assumed or imposed model structure and process formulations to estimate model parameters, to gather data and to address issues on scope, scale and natural variations. Uncertainties may originate from model structure, estimation of model parameters, data input, representation of natural variation and scaling exercises. Model structure relates to the mathematical representation of the processes modelled and the type of state variables that a model contains. The modelling of partitioning among above- and below-ground C and N pools and the interdependence among these pools remain a major source of uncertainty in model structure and error propagation. Most soil C models use at least three state variables to represent the different types of soil organic matter (SOM). This approach results in creating three artificial SOM pools, assuming that each one contains C compounds with same turnover rate. In reality, SOM consists of many different types of C compounds with widely different turnover rates. Uncertainty in data and parameter estimates are closely linked. Data uncertainties are associated with high variations in estimating forest biomass, productivity and soil organic matter and may be incomplete for model initialization, calibration, validation and sensitivity analysis of generalized predictor models. The scale at which a model is being used also affects the level of uncertainty, as the errors in the prediction of the C and N dynamics differ from the site to the landscape levels and across climatic regions. If the spatial or temporal scale of a model application is changed, additional uncertainty arises from neglecting natural variability in system variables in time and space. Uncertainty issues are also intimately related to model validation and sensitivity analysis. The estimation of uncertainties is needed to inform decision process, in order to detect the possible corridor of development. Uncertainty in this context is an essential measure of quality for stakeholder and decision makers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Guy R. Larocque, Jagtar S. Bhatti, A.M. Gordon, N. Luckai, Jinxun Liu, Shuguang Liu, P.A. Arp, C.F. Zhang, A Komarov, P. Grabarnik, M. Wattenbach, C. Peng, Jianfeng Sun, Thomas White. 2006. Dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity issues in process-based models of carbon and nitrogen cycles in northern forest ecosystems. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70259550

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Time-to-depth conversion of seismic-reflection data from eastern Lake Superior and implications for the eastern arm of the Midcontinent Rift

Seismic-reflection data were acquired in the mid 1980s along several lines across eastern Lake Superior by industry and the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE) (Fig. 1). The lines form part of a larger network of crossing lines over the entire lake, which can be used to develop three-dimensional geologic models of the Mesoproterozoic Midcontinent Rift that lies below. To better interpret these lines, we developed velocity models to convert seismic reflections versus two-way travel time (TWTT) to reflections versus depth. In addition, the velocity models themselves provide insights into the structure of the Midcontinent Rift by recognizing common velocity ranges for certain rock types (Grauch, 2023).

eastern Lake Superior

Revisiting the utility of regional-scale, high-quality geophysical data in mineral exploration - A case study featuring the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly, Pinal County, Arizona

Regional aeromagnetic surveys passively measure the total magnetic intensity (TMI) and are a foundational tool used in mineral exploration (Airo, 2015). With the increased global demand and the number of critical mineral resources required for manufacturing high-tech devices, developing high-quality, regional-scale geophysical surveys could aid critical mineral exploration efforts and geologic mapping. In 2019, the U. S. Geological Survey launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the geologic and geophysical mapping of regions that have the potential to contain critical mineral resources within the United States. In support of planning Earth MRI geophysical surveys, Drenth and Grauch (2019) defined five aeromagnetic data quality rankings (rank 1 through rank 5) applying them to the airborne geophysical survey inventory of the United States (Johnson et al., 2021). Rank 1 aeromagnetic surveys are of the highest quality, meeting modern standards and allowing best practices for qualitative and quantitative interpretation; whereas rank 5 aeromagnetic surveys are of the lowest quality, being useful only for qualitative interpretation of broad features. Through the Earth MRI effort, 48 high-quality, regional-scale rank 1 and 2 airborne magnetic and radiometric geophysical surveys have been planned, collected, or publicly release through May 2025 (U. S. Geological Survey, 2025). Here, a portion of a rank 1 Earth MRI aeromagnetic survey in southeast Arizona is presented and compared to a legacy rank 5 aeromagnetic survey over the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly (MMA), demonstrating how modern, high-quality aeromagnetic data improves our view of crustal geology, aiding mineral exploration.

Arizona

Early Miocene volcanic rocks and associated tectonics, Lava Hills and southern Bristol Mountains, California

Volcanic rocks of latest Oligocene to early Miocene age form an east-west belt across part of the central eastern Mojave Desert from the Whipple Mountains on the east to the Rosamond Hills on the west. We term this the central belt because it is separated from northern and southern belts by swaths with no volcanic rocks. Limited geochronologic data indicate that much of the belt is latest Oligocene and early Miocene in age, about 24 to 19 Ma, a finding that is consistent with these rocks being overlain by the 18.8 Ma Peach Spring Tuff in many places. We describe Miocene geology in a central area of the belt, in the Lava Hills, southern Bristol Mountains, and southern Old Dad Mountains. Sedimentary basins formed coeval with early andesite to rhyolite volcanism, progressing from fluvial and lacustrine tuffaceous sandstone to volcanic lavas, tuffs, and breccias, indicating that early basins formed proximal to volcanic edifices. Higher strata are fluvial and lacustrine with lavas punctuating the sequence. Although basins may partly have been formed within topographic lows bounded by volcanic domes, plateaus, and stratovolcanoes, consistent stratigraphic sections over wide areas indicate that tectonic basin evolution affected broad areas. The volcanic section is capped by local basalt flows and the regional Peach Spring Tuff. Limited data on normal faults support interpretations of early extensional basin development caused by northeast-southwest oriented stretching. Later extension caused stratal rotations, tilting early deposits down to the southwest. This tilted and subsequently beveled basin architecture was overlain by the youngest volcanic deposits, primarily rhyolite and basalt. The Peach Spring Tuff, 18.8 Ma, lies within this upper unit. Similar stratigraphic and structural relations are exposed in the nearby Marble Mountains and Van Winkle Mountain sections, reinforcing that a broad area underwent similar volcanism and tectonism. In our study area the upper unit is only very gently tilted except near dextral strike-slip faults of the eastern California shear zone. These late Miocene to Recent faults are represented as four main fault zones spaced about 5 km apart, representing distributed shear north of the Bristol Lake basin.

California