Alex C. Valach | USGS Science

USGS2021

FLUXNET-CH4: A global, multi-ecosystem database and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands

Methane (CH 4 ) emissions from natural landscapes constitute roughly half of global CH 4 contributions to the atmosphere, yet large uncertainties remain in the absolute magnitude and the seasonality of emission quantities and drivers. Eddy covariance (EC) measurements of CH 4 flux are ideal for constraining ecosystem-scale CH 4 emissions due to quasi-continuous and high-temporal-resolution CH 4 flux measurements, coincident carbon dioxide, water, and energy flux measurements, lack of ecosystem disturbance, and increased availability of datasets over the last decade. Here, we (1) describe the newly published dataset, FLUXNET-CH 4 Version 1.0, the first open-source global dataset of CH 4 EC measurements (available at https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ , last access: 7 April 2021). FLUXNET-CH 4 includes half-hourly and daily gap-filled and non-gap-filled aggregated CH 4 fluxes and meteorological data from 79 sites globally: 42 freshwater wetlands, 6 brackish and saline wetlands, 7 formerly drained ecosystems, 7 rice paddy sites, 2 lakes, and 15 uplands. Then, we (2) evaluate FLUXNET-CH 4 representativeness for freshwater wetland coverage globally because the majority of sites in FLUXNET-CH 4 Version 1.0 are freshwater wetlands which are a substantial source of total atmospheric CH 4 emissions; and (3) we provide the first global estimates of the seasonal variability and seasonality predictors of freshwater wetland CH 4 fluxes. Our representativeness analysis suggests that the freshwater wetland sites in the dataset cover global wetland bioclimatic attributes (encompassing energy, moisture, and vegetation-related parameters) in arctic, boreal, and temperate regions but only sparsely cover humid tropical regions. Seasonality metrics of wetland CH 4 emissions vary considerably across latitudinal bands. In freshwater wetlands (except those between 20 ∘ S to 20 ∘ N) the spring onset of elevated CH 4 emissions starts 3 d earlier, and the CH 4 emission season lasts 4 d longer, for each degree Celsius increase in mean annual air temperature. On average, the spring onset of increasing CH 4 emissions lags behind soil warming by 1 month, with very few sites experiencing increased CH 4 emissions prior to the onset of soil warming. In contrast, roughly half of these sites experience the spring onset of rising CH 4 emissions prior to the spring increase in gross primary productivity (GPP). The timing of peak summer CH 4 emissions does not correlate with the timing for either peak summer temperature or peak GPP. Our results provide seasonality parameters for CH 4 modeling and highlight seasonality metrics that cannot be predicted by temperature or GPP (i.e., seasonality of CH 4 peak). FLUXNET-CH 4 is a powerful new resource for diagnosing and understanding the role of terrestrial ecosystems and climate drivers in the global CH 4 cycle, and future additions of sites in tropical ecosystems and site years of data collection will provide added value to this database. All seasonality parameters are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4672601 (Delwiche et al., 2021). Additionally, raw FLUXNET-CH 4 data used to extract seasonality parameters can be downloaded from https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ (last access: 7 April 2021), and a complete list of the 79 individual site data DOIs is provided in Table 2 of this paper.

Earth System Science Data↗

USGS2021

Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands

Time series of wetland methane fluxes measured by eddy covariance require gap-filling to estimate daily, seasonal, and annual emissions. Gap-filling methane fluxes is challenging because of high variability and complex responses to multiple drivers. To date, there is no widely established gap-filling standard for wetland methane fluxes, with regards both to the best model algorithms and predictors. This study synthesizes results of different gap-filling methods systematically applied at 17 wetland sites spanning boreal to tropical regions and including all major wetland classes and two rice paddies. Procedures are proposed for: 1) creating realistic artificial gap scenarios, 2) training and evaluating gap-filling models without overstating performance, and 3) predicting half-hourly methane fluxes and annual emissions with realistic uncertainty estimates. Performance is compared between a conventional method (marginal distribution sampling) and four machine learning algorithms. The conventional method achieved similar median performance as the machine learning models but was worse than the best machine learning models and relatively insensitive to predictor choices. Of the machine learning models, decision tree algorithms performed the best in cross-validation experiments, even with a baseline predictor set, and artificial neural networks showed comparable performance when using all predictors. Soil temperature was frequently the most important predictor whilst water table depth was important at sites with substantial water table fluctuations, highlighting the value of data on wetland soil conditions. Raw gap-filling uncertainties from the machine learning models were underestimated and we propose a method to calibrate uncertainties to observations. The python code for model development, evaluation, and uncertainty estimation is publicly available. This study outlines a modular and robust machine learning workflow and makes recommendations for, and evaluates an improved baseline of, methane gap-filling models that can be implemented in multi-site syntheses or standardized products from regional and global flux networks (e.g., FLUXNET).

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology↗