Environmental Research Letters (Jan 2017)

Regional contribution to variability and trends of global gross primary productivity

  • Min Chen,
  • Rashid Rafique,
  • Ghassem R Asrar,
  • Ben Bond-Lamberty,
  • Philippe Ciais,
  • Fang Zhao,
  • Christopher P O Reyer,
  • Sebastian Ostberg,
  • Jinfeng Chang,
  • Akihiko Ito,
  • Jia Yang,
  • Ning Zeng,
  • Eugenia Kalnay,
  • Tristram West,
  • Guoyong Leng,
  • Louis Francois,
  • Guy Munhoven,
  • Alexandra Henrot,
  • Hanqin Tian,
  • Shufen Pan,
  • Kazuya Nishina,
  • Nicolas Viovy,
  • Catherine Morfopoulos,
  • Richard Betts,
  • Sibyll Schaphoff,
  • Jörg Steinkamp,
  • Thomas Hickler

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa8978
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 10
p. 105005

Abstract

Read online

Terrestrial gross primary productivity (GPP) is the largest component of the global carbon cycle and a key process for understanding land ecosystems dynamics. In this study, we used GPP estimates from a combination of eight global biome models participating in the Inter-Sectoral Impact-Model Intercomparison Project phase 2a (ISIMIP2a), the Moderate Resolution Spectroradiometer (MODIS) GPP product, and a data-driven product (Model Tree Ensemble, MTE) to study the spatiotemporal variability of GPP at the regional and global levels. We found the 2000–2010 total global GPP estimated from the model ensemble to be 117 ± 13 Pg C yr ^−1 (mean ± 1 standard deviation), which was higher than MODIS (112 Pg C yr ^−1 ), and close to the MTE (120 Pg C yr ^−1 ). The spatial patterns of MODIS, MTE and ISIMIP2a GPP generally agree well, but their temporal trends are different, and the seasonality and inter-annual variability of GPP at the regional and global levels are not completely consistent. For the model ensemble, Tropical Latin America contributes the most to global GPP, Asian regions contribute the most to the global GPP trend, the Northern Hemisphere regions dominate the global GPP seasonal variations, and Oceania is likely the largest contributor to inter-annual variability of global GPP. However, we observed large uncertainties across the eight ISIMIP2a models, which are probably due to the differences in the formulation of underlying photosynthetic processes. The results of this study are useful in understanding the contributions of different regions to global GPP and its spatiotemporal variability, how the model- and observational-based GPP estimates differ from each other in time and space, and the relative strength of the eight models. Our results also highlight the models’ ability to capture the seasonality of GPP that are essential for understanding the inter-annual and seasonal variability of GPP as a major component of the carbon cycle.

Keywords