Biogeosciences www.biogeosciences.net 1726-4170 1726-4189 7 1 2010 10.5194/bg-7-71-2010 http://www.biogeosciences.net/7/71/2010/ http://www.biogeosciences.net/7/71/2010/bg-7-71-2010.html http://www.biogeosciences.net/7/71/2010/bg-7-71-2010.pdf 71 80 2010-01-07 A spatial resolution threshold of land cover in estimating terrestrial carbon sequestration in four counties in Georgia and Alabama, USA S. Q. Zhao sqzhao@urban.pku.edu.cn S. Liu Z. Li T. L. Sohl College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) Research and Technology Solutions, Contractor to US Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198, USA USGS EROS Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198, USA Work performed under USGS contract 08HQCN0007 Changes in carbon density (i.e., carbon stock per unit area) and land cover greatly affect carbon sequestration. Previous studies have shown that land cover change detection strongly depends on spatial scale. However, the influence of the spatial resolution of land cover change information on the estimated terrestrial carbon sequestration is not known. Here, we quantified and evaluated the impact of land cover change databases at various spatial resolutions (250 m, 500 m, 1 km, 2 km, and 4 km) on the magnitude and spatial patterns of regional carbon sequestration in four counties in Georgia and Alabama using the General Ensemble biogeochemical Modeling System (GEMS). Results indicated a threshold of 1 km in the land cover change databases and in the estimated regional terrestrial carbon sequestration. Beyond this threshold, significant biases occurred in the estimation of terrestrial carbon sequestration, its interannual variability, and spatial patterns. In addition, the overriding impact of interannual climate variability on the temporal change of regional carbon sequestration was unrealistically overshadowed by the impact of land cover change beyond the threshold. The implications of these findings directly challenge current continental- to global-scale carbon modeling efforts relying on information at coarse spatial resolution without incorporating fine-scale land cover dynamics. Achard, F., Eva, H. D., Mayaux, P., Stibig, H. J., and Belward, A.: Improved estimates of net carbon emissions from land cover change in the tropics for the 1990s, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 18, GB2008, doi:10.1029/2003GB002142, 2004. Binford, M. W., Gholz, H. L., Starr, G., and Martin, T. A.: Regional carbon dynamics in the southeastern U.S. coastal plain: Balancing land cover type, timber harvesting, fire, and environmental variation, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D24S92, doi:10.1029/2005JD006820, 2006. Bondeau, A., Smith, P. C., Zaehle, S., Schaphoff, S., Lucht, W., Cramer, W., Gerten, D., Lotze-Campen, H., Muller, C., Reichstein, M., and Smith, B.: Modelling the role of agriculture for the 20th century global terrestrial carbon balance, Glob. Change Biol., 13, 1–28, 2007. Brown, S., Schroeder, P., and Birdsey, R.: Aboveground biomass distribution of US eastern hardwood forests and the use of large trees as an indicator of forest development, Forest Ecol. Manage., 96, 37–47, 1997. Cairns, M. A., Brown, S., Helmer, E. H., and Baumgardner, G. A.: Root biomass allocation in the world's upland forests, Oecologia, 111, 1–11, 1997. Canadell, J. G.: Land use effects on terrestrial carbon sources and sinks, Science in China Series C-Life Sciences, 45, 1–9, 2002. Chapin, F. S., Woodwell, G. M., Randerson, J. T., et al.: Reconciling carbon-cycle concepts, terminology, and methods, Ecosystems, 9, 1041–1050, 2006. Chase, J. M. and Leibold, M. A.: Spatial scale dictates the productivity–biodiversity relationship, Nature, 416, 427–430, 2002. Crawley, M. J. and Harral, J. E.: Scale dependence in plant biodiversity, Science, 291, 864–868, 2001. Fang, J. Y., Chen, A. P., Peng, C. H., Zhao, S. Q., and Ci, L.: Changes in forest biomass carbon storage in China between 1949 and 1998, Science, 292, 2320–2322, 2001. Garten, C. T. and Ashwood, T. L.: Land Cover Differences in Soil Carbon and Nitrogen at Fort Benning, Georgia, ORNL/TM-2004/14, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, 2004. Goodale, C. L., Apps, M. J., Birdsey, R. A., et al.: Forest carbon sinks in the Northern Hemisphere, Ecol. Appl., 12, 891–899, 2002. Häme, T., Stenberg, P., Anderson, K., Rauste, Y., Kennedy, P., Folving, S., and Sarkeala J.: AVHRR-based forest proportion map of the Pan-European area, Remote Sens. Environ., 77, 76–91, 2001. Houghton, R. A., Hackler, J. L., and Lawrence, K. T.: The US carbon budget: Contributions from land-use change, Science, 285, 574–578, 1999. Houghton, R. A.: Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850–2000, Tellus B, 55, 378–390, 2003. Houghton, R. A. and Goodale, C. L.: Effects of land-use change on the carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems, in: Ecosystems and land use change, edited by: DeFries, R. S., Asner, G. P., and Houghton, R. A., American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 85–98, 2004. Hurtt, G. C., Pacala, S. W., Moorcroft, P. R., Caspersen, J., Shevliakova, E., Houghton, R. A., and Moore III, B.: Predicting the future of the U.S. carbon sink, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 1389–1394, 2002. Jenkins, J. C., Birdsey, R. A., and Pan, Y.: Biomass and NPP estimation for the mid-Atlantic region (USA) using plot-level forest inventory data, Ecol. Appl., 11, 1174–1193, 2001. Jung, M., Vetter, M., and Herold, M., et al.: Uncertainties of modeling gross primary productivity over Europe: A systematic study on the effects of using different drivers and terrestrial biosphere models, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 21, GB4021, doi:10.1029/2006GB002915, 2007. Kauppi, P. E., Ausubel, J. H., Fang, J. Y., Mather, A. S., Sedjo, R. A., and Waggoner, P. E.: Returning forests analyzed with the forest identity, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 103, 17574–17579, 2006. Kimball, J. S., Running, S. W., and Saatchi, S. S.: Sensitivity of boreal forest regional water flux and net primary production simulations to sub-grid-scale land cover complexity, J. Geophys. Res., 104(D22), 27789–27801, 1999. Krinner, G., Viovy, N., de Noblet-Ducoudre, N., Ogee, J., Polcher, J., Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., Sitch, S., and Prentice, I. C.: A dynamic global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere-biosphere system, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1015, doi:10.1029/2003GB002199, 2005. Liu, S.: Quantifying the spatial details of carbon sequestration potential and performance, in: Science and Technology of Carbon Sequestration, edited by: McPherson, B. and Sundquist, E., American Geophysical Union, in press, 2010. Liu, S., Bliss, N., Sundquist, E., and Huntington, T. G.: Modeling carbon dynamics in vegetation and soil under the impact of soil erosion and deposition, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1074, doi:10.1029/2002GB002010, 2003. Liu, S., Loveland, T. R., and Kurtz, R. M.: Contemporary carbon dynamics in terrestrial ecosystems in the Southeastern plains of the United States, Environ. Manage., 33, S442–S456, 2004a. Liu, S., Kaire, M., Wood, E., Diallo, O., and Tieszen, L. L.: Impacts of land use and climate change on carbon dynamics in south-central Senegal, J. Arid Environ., 59, 583–604, 2004b. Loveland, T. R., Sohl, T. L., Stehman, S. V., Gallant, A. L., Sayler, K. L., and Napton, D. E.: A strategy for estimating the rates of recent United States land-cover changes, Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens., 68, 1091–1099, 2002. McGuire, A. D., Sitch, S., Clein, J. S., et al.: Carbon Balance of the Terrestrial Biosphere in the Twentieth Century: Analyses of CO₂, Climate and Land Use Effects with Four Process-Based Ecosystem Models, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 15, 183–206, 2001. Meldahl, R. S., Kush, J. S., Rayamaijhi, J. N., and Farrar Jr., R. M.: Productivity of natural stands of longleaf pine in relation to competition and climatic factors, in: The productivity and sustainability of southern forest ecosystems in a changing environment, edited by: Mickler, R. A. and Fox, S., Springer-Verlag, New York, 231–235, 1998. Myneni, R. B., Dong, J., Tucker, C. J., et al.: A large carbon sink in the woody biomass of northern forests, P. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 98, 14784–14789, 2001. Parton, W. J., Schimel, D. S., Cole, C. V., and Ojima, D. S.: Analysis of factors controlling soil organic matter levels in Great Plains grasslands, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 51, 1173–1179, 1987. Prentice, I. C.: The carbon cycle and atmospheric carbon dioxide, in: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, edited by: Houghton, J. T. and Ding, Y. H., Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 183–237, 2001. Quaife, T., Quegan, S., Disney, M., Lewis, P., Lomas, M., and Woodward, F. I.: Impact of land cover uncertainties on estimates of biospheric carbon fluxes, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 22, GB4016, doi:10.1029/2007GB003097, 2008. Raich, J. W. and Nadelhoffer, K. J.: Belowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems: global trends, Ecology, 70, 1346–1354, 1989. Ramankutty, N., Gibbs, H. K., Achard, F., et al.: Challenges to estimating carbon emissions from tropical deforestation, Glo. Change Biol., 13, 51–66, 2007. Reiners, W. A., Liu, S., Gerow, K. G., Keller, M., and Schimel, D. S.: Historical and future land use effects on trace gas emissions using an ensemble modeling approach: Costa Rica's Caribbean Lowlands as an example, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 16, 1068, doi:10.1029/2001GB001437, 2002. Schimel, D., Melillo, J., Tian, H., et al.: Contribution of increasing CO2 and climate to carbon storage by ecosystems in the United States, Science, 287, 2004–2006, 2000. Schimel, D. S., House, J. I., Hibbard, K. A., et al.: Recent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems, Nature, 414, 169–172, 2001. Sitch, S., Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Cramer, W., Kaplan, J. O., Levis, S., Lucht, W., Sykes, M. T., Thonicke, K., and Venevsky, S.: Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model, Glob. Change Biol., 9, 161–185, 2003. Sitch, S., Brovkin, V., von Bloh, W., van Vuuren, D., Eickhout, B., and Ganopolski, A.: Impacts of future land cover changes on atmospheric CO₂ and climate, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB2013, doi:10.1029/2004GB002311, 2005. Smith J. E., Heath, L. S., and Woodbury, P. B.: How to estimate forest carbon for large areas from inventory data, J. Forest., 102, 25–31, 2004. Smith, J. E., Heath, L. S., Skog, K. E., and Birdsey, R. A.: Methods for calculating forest ecosystem and harvested carbon with standard estimates for forest types of the United States, US Forest Service General Technical Report NE-GTR-343, 216~pp., 2006. Strassmann, K. M., Joos, F., and Fischer, G.: Simulating effects of land use changes on carbon fluxes: past contributions to atmospheric CO₂ increases and future commitments due to losses of terrestrial sink capacity, Tellus, 60B, 583–603, 2008. Tan, Z., Liu, S., Johnston, C. A., Loveland, T. R.,Tieszen, L .L., Liu, J. X., and Kurtz, R.: Soil organic carbon dynamics as related to land use history in the Northwestern Great Plains, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB3011, doi:10.1029/2005GB002536, 2005. Tan, Z., Liu, S., Johnston, C. A., Liu, J. X., and Tieszen, L. L.: Analysis of ecosystem controls on soil carbon source-sink relationships in the northwest Great Plains, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 20, GB4012, doi:10.1029/2005GB002610, 2006. Tan, Z., Liu, S., Li, Z. P., and Loveland, T. R.: Simulated responses of soil organic carbon stock to tillage management scenarios in the Northwest Great Plains, Carbon Balance Manage., 2(7), doi:10.1186/1750-0680-2-7, 2007. Turner, D. P., Cohen, W. B., and Kennedy, R. E.: Alternative spatial resolutions and estimation of carbon flux over a managed forest landscape in western Oregon, Landsc. Ecol., 15, 441–452, 2000. Zaehle, S.: Process-based simulation of the European terrestrial biosphere – An evaluation of present-day and future terrestrial carbon balance estimates and their uncertainty, PhD thesis, Universitat Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany, 2005. Zhao, S. Q., Liu, S., Li, Z., and Sohl, T. L.: Ignoring detailed fast-changing dynamics of land use overestimates regional terrestrial carbon sequestration, Biogeosciences, 6, 1647–1654, 2009.