English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/149064
COMPARTIR / IMPACTO:
Estadísticas
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:
Título

Quantifying water stress effect on daily light use efficiency in Mediterranean ecosystems using satellite data

AutorSánchez-Ruiz, Sergio; Moreno, Álvaro; Piles, María ; Maselli, Fabio; Carrara, Arnaud; Running, Stven; Gilabert, María Amparo
Palabras claveLight use efficiency
Water stress
GPP
Monteith
Mediterranean ecosystems
Fecha de publicaciónfeb-2017
EditorTaylor & Francis
CitaciónInternational Journal of Digital Earth 10(6): 623-638 (2017)
ResumenThe capacity of six water stress factors (ε′i) to track daily light use efficiency (ε) of water-limited ecosystems was evaluated. These factors are computed with remote sensing operational products and a limited amount of ground data: ε′1 uses ground precipitation and air temperature, and satellite incoming global solar radiation; ε′2 uses ground air temperature, and satellite actual evapotranspiration and incoming global solar radiation; ε′3 uses satellite actual and potential evapotranspiration; ε′4 uses satellite soil moisture; ε′5 uses satellite-derived photochemical reflectance index; and ε′6 uses ground vapor pressure deficit. These factors were implemented in a production efficiency model based on Monteith’s approach in order to assess their performance for modeling gross primary production (GPP). Estimated GPP was compared to reference GPP from eddy covariance (EC) measurements (GPPEC) in three sites placed in the Iberian Peninsula (two open shrublands and one savanna). ε′i were correlated to ε, which was calculated by dividing GPPEC by ground measured photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and satellite-derived fraction of absorbed PAR. Best results were achieved by ε′1, ε′2, ε′3 and ε′4 explaining around 40% and 50% of ε variance in open shurblands and savanna, respectively. In terms of GPP, R2 ≈ 0.70 were obtained in these cases
Descripción16 pages, 2 figures, 6 tables, supplemental material https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1247301
Versión del editorhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1247301
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/149064
DOI10.1080/17538947.2016.1247301
Identificadoresdoi: 10.1080/17538947.2016.1247301
issn: 1753-8947
e-issn: 1753-8955
Aparece en las colecciones: (ICM) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.
Mostrar el registro completo
 

Artículos relacionados:


NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.