Journal cover Journal topic
Biogeosciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic
Volume 12, issue 8
Biogeosciences, 12, 2311–2326, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2311-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Biogeosciences, 12, 2311–2326, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2311-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 17 Apr 2015

Research article | 17 Apr 2015

On the use of the post-closure methods uncertainty band to evaluate the performance of land surface models against eddy covariance flux data

J. Ingwersen et al.
Viewed  
Total article views: 1,598 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
816 579 203 1,598 60 76
  • HTML: 816
  • PDF: 579
  • XML: 203
  • Total: 1,598
  • BibTeX: 60
  • EndNote: 76
Views and downloads (calculated since 09 Dec 2014)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 09 Dec 2014)
Cited  
Saved (final revised paper)  
Saved (discussion paper)  
Discussed (final revised paper)  
No discussed metrics found.
Discussed (discussion paper)  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 19 Jan 2020
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
The energy balance of eddy covariance (EC) flux data is normally not closed. Therefore, EC flux data are usually post-closed, i.e. the measured turbulent fluxes are adjusted so as to close the energy balance. We propose to use in model evaluation the post-closure method uncertainty band (PUB) to account for the uncertainty in EC data originating from lacking energy balance closure. Working with only a single post-closing method might result in severe misinterpretations in model-data comparison.
The energy balance of eddy covariance (EC) flux data is normally not closed. Therefore, EC flux...
Citation