Search for: All records

Savannas are water‐limited ecosystems characterized by two dominant plant types: trees and an understory primarily made up grass. Different phenology and root structures of these plant types complicate how savanna primary productivity responds to changes in water availability. We tested the hypothesis that productivity in savannas is controlled by the temporal and vertical distribution of soil water content (SWC) and differences in growing season length of understory and tree plant functional types. To quantify the relationship between tree, understory, and savanna‐wide phenology and productivity, we used PhenoCam and satellite observations surrounding an eddy covariance tower at a semiarid savanna site in Arizona, USA. We distinguished between SWC across two different depth intervals (shallow, <0–30 cm and deep, >30–100 cm). We found that tree greenness increased with SWC at both depths, while understory greenness was only sensitive to the shallower SWC measurements. Onset of ecosystem dormancy, estimated from satellite observations close to the eddy covariance tower, explained more variability in annual gross primary productivity (GPP) than in other phenometrics. Higher SWC led to an extended growing season, caused by delayed dormancy in trees, but the understory showed no evidence of delayed dormancy in wetter periods. We infer that the timing of ecosystem scale dormancy, driven by trees, is important in understanding changes in a savanna's GPP. These findings highlight the important effects of rainfall during the winter. These findings suggest that savanna GPP is conditional on different responses to moisture availability in each of the dominant vegetation components.

 

A frequently expressed viewpoint across the Earth science community is that global soil moisture estimates from satellite L‐band (1.4 GHz) measurements represent moisture only in a shallow surface layer (0–5 cm) and consequently are of limited value for studying global terrestrial ecosystems because plants use water from deeper rootzones. Using this argumentation, many observation‐based land surface studies avoid satellite‐observed soil moisture. Here, based on peer‐reviewed literature across several fields, we argue that such a viewpoint is overly limiting for two reasons. First, microwave soil emission depth considerations and statistical considerations of vertically correlated soil moisture information together indicate that L‐band measurements carry information about soil moisture extending below the commonly referenced 5 cm in many conditions. However, spatial variations of effective depths of representation remain uncertain. Second, in reviewing isotopic tracer field studies of plant water uptake, we find a prevalence of vegetation that primarily draws moisture from these upper soil layers. This is especially true for grasslands and croplands covering more than a third of global vegetated surfaces. Even some deeper‐rooted species (i.e., shrubs and trees) preferentially or seasonally draw water from the upper soil layers. Therefore, L‐band satellite soil moisture estimates are more relevant to global vegetation water uptake than commonly appreciated (i.e., relevant beyond only shallow soil processes like soil evaporation). Our commentary encourages the application of satellite soil moisture across a broader range of terrestrial hydrosphere and biosphere studies while urging more rigorous estimates of its effective depth of representation.

 

Solar-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence (SIF) can provide key information about the state of photosynthesis and offers the prospect of defining remote sensing-based estimation of Gross Primary Production (GPP). There is strong theoretical support for the link between SIF and GPP and this relationship has been empirically demonstrated using ground-based, airborne, and satellite-based SIF observations, as well as modeling. However, most evaluations have been based on monthly and annual scales, yet the GPP:SIF relations can be strongly influenced by both vegetation structure and physiology. At the monthly timescales, the structural response often dominates but short-term physiological variations can strongly impact the GPP:SIF relations. Here, we test how well SIF can predict the inter-daily variation of GPP during the growing season and under stress conditions, while taking into account the local effect of sites and abiotic conditions. We compare the accuracy of GPP predictions from SIF at different timescales (half-hourly, daily, and weekly), while evaluating effect of adding environmental variables to the relationship. We utilize observations for years 2018–2019 at 31 mid-latitudes, forested, eddy covariance (EC) flux sites in North America and Europe and use TROPOMI satellite data for SIF. Our results show that SIF is a good predictor of GPP, when accounting for inter-site variation, probably due to differences in canopy structure. Seasonally averaged leaf area index, fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (fPAR) and canopy conductance provide a predictor to the site-level effect. We show that fPAR is the main factor driving errors in the linear model at high temporal resolution. Adding water stress indicators, namely canopy conductance, to a multi-linear SIF-based GPP model provides the best improvement in the model precision at the three considered timescales, showing the importance of accounting for water stress in GPP predictions, independent of the SIF signal. SIF is a promising predictor for GPP among other remote sensing variables, but more focus should be placed on including canopy structure, and water stress effects in the relationship, especially when considering intra-seasonal, and inter- and intra-daily resolutions.