Comparison of carbon assimilation estimates over tropical forest types in India based on different satellite and climate data products
Carbon assimilation defined as the overall rate of fixation of carbon through the process of photosynthesis is central to the climate change research. The present study compares the two well-known algorithms in satellite based carbon assimilation estimation, the Vegetation Photosynthesis Model (VPM) and the MOD 17A2 GPP Model, over the tropical forest types in India for a period of two years (September, 2006–August, 2008). The results indicate that the evergreen forest assimilate carbon at a higher rate while the rate is lower for montane grasslands. The comparison between the model results shows that there are large differences between these estimates, and that the spatial resolution of the input datasets plays a larger role than the algorithms of the models. The comparison exercise will be helpful for the refinement and development of the existing and future GPP models by incorporating the empirical environmental conditions.
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Journal Article biblioteca |
Language: | English |
Published: |
2011
|
Subjects: | vegetation, carbon, climate change, tropical forests, |
Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/21022 https://www.cifor.org/knowledge/publication/3698 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Carbon assimilation defined as the overall rate of fixation of carbon through the process of photosynthesis is central to the climate change research. The present study compares the two well-known algorithms in satellite based carbon assimilation estimation, the Vegetation Photosynthesis Model (VPM) and the MOD 17A2 GPP Model, over the tropical forest types in India for a period of two years (September, 2006–August, 2008). The results indicate that the evergreen forest assimilate carbon at a higher rate while the rate is lower for montane grasslands. The comparison between the model results shows that there are large differences between these estimates, and that the spatial resolution of the input datasets plays a larger role than the algorithms of the models. The comparison exercise will be helpful for the refinement and development of the existing and future GPP models by incorporating the empirical environmental conditions. |
---|