An official website of the United States government
Abstract. Large changes in the Arctic carbon balance are expectedas warming linked to climate change threatens to destabilize ancientpermafrost carbon stocks. The eddy covariance (EC) method is an establishedtechnique to quantify net losses and gains of carbon between the biosphereand atmosphere at high spatiotemporal resolution. Over the past decades, agrowing network of terrestrial EC tower sites has been established acrossthe Arctic, but a comprehensive assessment of the network'srepresentativeness within the heterogeneous Arctic region is still lacking.This creates additional uncertainties when integrating flux data acrosssites, for example when upscaling fluxes to constrain pan-Arctic carbonbudgets and changes therein. This study provides an inventory of Arctic (here > = 60∘ N)EC sites, which has also been made available online(https://cosima.nceas.ucsb.edu/carbon-flux-sites/, last access: 25 January 2022). Our database currentlycomprises 120 EC sites, but only 83 are listed as active, and just 25 ofthese active sites remain operational throughout the winter. To map therepresentativeness of this EC network, we evaluated the similarity betweenenvironmental conditions observed at the tower locations and those withinthe larger Arctic study domain based on 18 bioclimatic and edaphicvariables. This allows us to assess a general level of similarity betweenecosystem conditions within the domain, while not necessarily reflectingchanges in greenhouse gas flux rates directly. We define two metrics basedon this representativeness score: one that measures whether a location isrepresented by an EC tower with similar characteristics (ER1) and a secondfor which we assess if a minimum level of representation for statisticallyrigorous extrapolation is met (ER4). We find that while half of the domainis represented by at least one tower, only a third has enough towers insimilar locations to allow reliable extrapolation. When we consider methanemeasurements or year-round (including wintertime) measurements, the valuesdrop to about 1/5 and 1/10 of the domain, respectively. With themajority of sites located in Fennoscandia and Alaska, these regions wereassigned the highest level of network representativeness, while large partsof Siberia and patches of Canada were classified as underrepresented.Across the Arctic, mountainous regions were particularly poorly representedby the current EC observation network. We tested three different strategies to identify new site locations orupgrades of existing sites that optimally enhance the representativeness ofthe current EC network. While 15 new sites can improve therepresentativeness of the pan-Arctic network by 20 %, upgrading as fewas 10 existing sites to capture methane fluxes or remain active duringwintertime can improve their respective ER1 network coverage by 28 % to 33 %. This targeted network improvement could be shown to be clearlysuperior to an unguided selection of new sites, therefore leading tosubstantial improvements in network coverage based on relatively smallinvestments.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on October 1, 2025
High‐Latitude Eddy Covariance Temporal Network Design and Optimization
Abstract Ecosystems at high latitudes are changing rapidly in response to climate change. To understand changes in carbon fluxes across seasonal to multi‐decadal timescales, long‐term in situ measurements from eddy covariance networks are needed. However, there are large spatiotemporal gaps in the high‐latitude eddy covariance network. Here we used the relative extrapolation error index in machine learning‐based upscaled gross primary production as a measure of network representativeness and as the basis for a network optimization. We show that the relative extrapolation error index has steadily decreased from 2001 to 2020, suggesting diminishing upscaling errors. In experiments where we limit site activity by either setting a maximum duration or by ending measurements at a fixed time those errors increase significantly, in some cases setting the network status back more than a decade. Our experiments also show that with equal site activity across different theoretical network setups, a more spread out design with shorter‐term measurements functions better in terms of larger‐scale representativeness than a network with fewer long‐term towers. We developed a method to select optimized site additions for a network extension, which blends an objective modeling approach with expert knowledge. This method greatly outperforms an unguided network extension and can compensate for suboptimal human choices. For the Canadian Arctic we show several optimization scenarios and find that especially the Canadian high Arctic and north east tundra benefit greatly from addition sites. Overall, it is important to keep sites active and where possible make the extra investment to survey new strategic locations.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2316114
- PAR ID:
- 10580761
- Publisher / Repository:
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
- Volume:
- 129
- Issue:
- 10
- ISSN:
- 2169-8953
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This Arctic Observing Network (AON) project focuses on maintaining and expanding our long-term network of measurements of carbon, water, and energy exchange in terrestrial systems in Alaska. These exchanges help regulate the Arctic System and its feedbacks to global climate. Thus, extending long-term observations is a key science priority for the observing-change component of the Study of Environmental Arctic Change (SEARCH). Detecting and interpreting change in arctic carbon (C), water, and energy fluxes requires a continuous year-round record over multiple years. Recent data syntheses and modeling studies of Arctic Carbon balance suggest that tundra is either a carbon dioxide (CO2) sink, a source, or neutral (e.g., McGuire et al., 2009, McGuire et al., 2012) . This uncertainty arises mainly from a lack of data on winter CO2 flux and how tundra responds to recent warming. Because of harsh, remote environments and the lack of line power, long-term measurements of arctic CO2 fluxes over the full year are rare. We have been measuring year-round C, water, and energy fluxes for eleven years in two broadly representative flagship observatories with long-term histories of research, at Imnavait Creek near Toolik Lake, Alaska, and near Cherskiy, Siberia. Similar versions of these eddy covariance and biomet data are available from Ameriflux as sites US-ICx. https://ameriflux.lbl.gov/data/download-data/ Our three Imnavait Creek Alaska sites retained multiple names over the years. The following clarification is needed. The 'official' site name is followed by the technical station name (IC_xxxx), the positional name (Ridge), and the Ameriflux site name (US-ICx), and finally the site coordinates. Wet Sedge tundra (IC_1523, Fen, US-ICs) 68.6058 -149.3110 Tussock tundra (IC_1993, Tussock, US-ICt) 68.6063 -149.3041 Dry Heath tundra (IC_1991, Ridge, US-ICh) 68.6068 -149.2958more » « less
-
This Arctic Observing Network (AON) project focuses on maintaining and expanding our long-term network of measurements of carbon, water, and energy exchange in terrestrial systems in Alaska. These exchanges help regulate the Arctic System and its feedbacks to global climate. Thus, extending long-term observations is a key science priority for the observing-change component of the Study of Environmental Arctic Change (SEARCH). Detecting and interpreting change in arctic C, water, and energy fluxes requires a continuous year-round record over multiple years. Recent data syntheses and modeling studies of Arctic Carbon balance suggest that tundra is either a carbon dioxide (CO2) sink, a source, or neutral (e.g., McGuire et al., 2009, McGuire et al., 2012) . This uncertainty arises mainly from a lack of data on winter CO2 flux and how tundra responds to recent warming. Because of harsh, remote environments and the lack of line power, long-term measurements of arctic CO2 fluxes over the full year are rare. We have been measuring year-round C, water, and energy fluxes for eleven years in two broadly representative flagship observatories with long-term histories of research, at Imnavait Creek near Toolik Lake, Alaska, and near Cherskiy, Siberia. Similar versions of these eddy covariance and biomet data are available from Ameriflux as sites US-ICx. https://ameriflux.lbl.gov/data/download-data/ Our three Imnavait Creek Alaska sites retained multiple names over the years. The following clarification is needed. The 'official' site name is followed by the technical station name (IC_xxxx), the positional name (Ridge), and the Ameriflux site name (US-ICx), and finally the site coordinates. Wet Sedge tundra (IC_1523, Fen, US-ICs) 68.6058 -149.3110 Tussock tundra (IC_1993, Tussock, US-ICt) 68.6063 -149.3041 Dry Heath tundra (IC_1991, Ridge, US-ICh) 68.6068 -149.2958more » « less
-
This Arctic Observing Network (AON) project focuses on maintaining and expanding our long-term network of measurements of carbon, water, and energy exchange in terrestrial systems in Alaska. These exchanges help regulate the Arctic System and its feedbacks to global climate. Thus, extending long-term observations is a key science priority for the observing-change component of the Study of Environmental Arctic Change (SEARCH). Detecting and interpreting change in arctic C, water, and energy fluxes requires a continuous year-round record over multiple years. Recent data syntheses and modeling studies of Arctic Carbon balance suggest that tundra is either a carbon dioxide (CO2) sink, a source, or neutral (e.g., McGuire et al., 2009, McGuire et al., 2012) . This uncertainty arises mainly from a lack of data on winter CO2 flux and how tundra responds to recent warming. Because of harsh, remote environments and the lack of line power, long-term measurements of arctic CO2 fluxes over the full year are rare. We have been measuring year-round C, water, and energy fluxes for eleven years in two broadly representative flagship observatories with long-term histories of research, at Imnavait Creek near Toolik Lake, Alaska, and near Cherskiy, Siberia. Similar versions of these eddy covariance and biomet data are available from Ameriflux as sites US-ICx. https://ameriflux.lbl.gov/data/download-data/ Our three Imnavait Creek Alaska sites retained multiple names over the years. The following clarification is needed. The 'official' site name is followed by the technical station name (IC_xxxx), the positional name (Ridge), and the Ameriflux site name (US-ICx), and finally the site coordinates. Wet Sedge tundra (IC_1523, Fen, US-ICs) 68.6058 -149.3110 Tussock tundra (IC_1993, Tussock, US-ICt) 68.6063 -149.3041 Dry Heath tundra (IC_1991, Ridge, US-ICh) 68.6068 -149.2958more » « less
-
This Arctic Observing Network (AON) project focuses on maintaining and expanding our long-term network of measurements of carbon, water, and energy exchange in terrestrial systems in Alaska. These exchanges help regulate the Arctic System and its feedbacks to global climate. Thus, extending long-term observations is a key science priority for the observing-change component of the Study of Environmental Arctic Change (SEARCH). Detecting and interpreting change in arctic C, water, and energy fluxes requires a continuous year-round record over multiple years. Recent data syntheses and modeling studies of Arctic Carbon balance suggest that tundra is either a carbon dioxide (CO2) sink, a source, or neutral (e.g., McGuire et al., 2009, McGuire et al., 2012) . This uncertainty arises mainly from a lack of data on winter CO2 flux and how tundra responds to recent warming. Because of harsh, remote environments and the lack of line power, long-term measurements of arctic CO2 fluxes over the full year are rare. We have been measuring year-round C, water, and energy fluxes for eleven years in two broadly representative flagship observatories with long-term histories of research, at Imnavait Creek near Toolik Lake, Alaska, and near Cherskiy, Siberia. Similar versions of these eddy covariance and biomet data are available from Ameriflux as sites US-ICx. https://ameriflux.lbl.gov/data/download-data/ Our three Imnavait Creek Alaska sites retained multiple names over the years. The following clarification is needed. The 'official' site name is followed by the technical station name (IC_xxxx), the positional name (Ridge), and the Ameriflux site name (US-ICx), and finally the site coordinates. Wet Sedge tundra (IC_1523, Fen, US-ICs) 68.6058 -149.3110 Tussock tundra (IC_1993, Tussock, US-ICt) 68.6063 -149.3041 Dry Heath tundra (IC_1991, Ridge, US-ICh) 68.6068 -149.2958more » « less
