Geology topics

Jinxun Liu

Publications and source records attributed to Jinxun Liu.

51 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

USGS2012

Effects of future climate change, CO 2 enrichment, and vegetation structure variation on hydrological processes in China

Investigating the relationship between factors (climate change, atmospheric CO 2 concentrations enrichment, and vegetation structure) and hydrological processes is important for understanding and predicting the interaction between the hydrosphere and biosphere. The Integrated Biosphere Simulator (IBIS) was used to evaluate the effects of climate change, rising CO 2 , and vegetation structure on hydrological processes in China at the end of the 21st century. Seven simulations were implemented using the assemblage of the IPCC climate and CO 2 concentration scenarios, SRES A2 and SRES B1. Analysis results suggest that (1) climate change will have increasing effects on runoff, evapotranspiration (ET), transpiration (T), and transpiration ratio (transpiration/evapotranspiration, T/E) in most hydrological regions of China except in the southernmost regions; (2) elevated CO 2 concentrations will have increasing effects on runoff at the national scale, but at the hydrological region scale, the physiology effects induced by elevated CO 2 concentration will depend on the vegetation types, climate conditions, and geographical background information with noticeable decreasing effects shown in the arid Inland region of China; (3) leaf area index (LAI) compensation effect and stomatal closure effect are the dominant factors on runoff in the arid Inland region and southern moist hydrological regions, respectively; (4) the magnitudes of climate change (especially the changing precipitation pattern) effects on the water cycle are much larger than those of the elevated CO 2 concentration effects; however, increasing CO 2 concentration will be one of the most important modifiers to the water cycle; (5) the water resource condition will be improved in northern China but depressed in southernmost China under the IPCC climate change scenarios, SRES A2 and SRES B1.

Global and Planetary Change↗

USGS2011

Simulating the impacts of disturbances on forest carbon cycling in North America: Processes, data, models, and challenges

Forest disturbances greatly alter the carbon cycle at various spatial and temporal scales. It is critical to understand disturbance regimes and their impacts to better quantify regional and global carbon dynamics. This review of the status and major challenges in representing the impacts of disturbances in modeling the carbon dynamics across North America revealed some major advances and challenges. First, significant advances have been made in representation, scaling, and characterization of disturbances that should be included in regional modeling efforts. Second, there is a need to develop effective and comprehensive process‐based procedures and algorithms to quantify the immediate and long‐term impacts of disturbances on ecosystem succession, soils, microclimate, and cycles of carbon, water, and nutrients. Third, our capability to simulate the occurrences and severity of disturbances is very limited. Fourth, scaling issues have rarely been addressed in continental scale model applications. It is not fully understood which finer scale processes and properties need to be scaled to coarser spatial and temporal scales. Fifth, there are inadequate databases on disturbances at the continental scale to support the quantification of their effects on the carbon balance in North America. Finally, procedures are needed to quantify the uncertainty of model inputs, model parameters, and model structures, and thus to estimate their impacts on overall model uncertainty. Working together, the scientific community interested in disturbance and its impacts can identify the most uncertain issues surrounding the role of disturbance in the North American carbon budget and develop working hypotheses to reduce the uncertainty

Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences↗

USGS2011

Baseline and projected future carbon storage and greenhouse-gas fluxes in the Great Plains region of the United States

This assessment was conducted to fulfill the requirements of section 712 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 and to improve understanding of carbon and greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes in the Great Plains region in the central part of the United States. The assessment examined carbon storage, carbon fluxes, and other GHG fluxes (methane and nitrous oxide) in all major terrestrial ecosystems (forests, grasslands/shrublands, agricultural lands, and wetlands) and freshwater aquatic systems (rivers, streams, lakes, and impoundments) in two time periods: baseline (generally in the first half of the 2010s) and future (projections from baseline to 2050). The assessment was based on measured and observed data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and many other agencies and organizations and used remote sensing, statistical methods, and simulation models.

Great Plains↗

USGS2010

Estimation of late twentieth century land-cover change in California

We present the first comprehensive multi-temporal analysis of land-cover change for California across its major ecological regions and primary land-cover types. Recently completed satellite-based estimates of land-cover and land-use change information for large portions of the United States allow for consistent measurement and comparison across heterogeneous landscapes. Landsat data were employed within a pure-panel stratified one-stage cluster sample to estimate and characterize land-cover change for 1973–2000. Results indicate anthropogenic and natural disturbances, such as forest cutting and fire, were the dominant changes, followed by large fluctuations between agriculture and rangelands. Contrary to common perception, agriculture remained relatively stable over the 27-year period with an estimated loss of 1.0% of agricultural land. The largest net declines occurred in the grasslands/shrubs class at 5,131 km 2 and forest class at 4,722 km 2 . Developed lands increased by 37.6%, composing an estimated 4.2% of the state’s land cover by 2000.

California↗

USGS2010

Public review draft: A method for assessing carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and greenhouse-gas fluxes in ecosystems of the United States under present conditions and future scenarios

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Section 712, authorizes the U.S. Department of the Interior to develop a methodology and conduct an assessment of the Nation's ecosystems focusing on carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and emissions of three greenhouse gases (GHGs): carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The major requirements include (1) an assessment of all ecosystems (terrestrial systems, such as forests, croplands, wetlands, shrub and grasslands; and aquatic ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and estuaries), (2) an estimation of annual potential capacities of ecosystems to increase carbon sequestration and reduce net GHG emissions in the context of mitigation strategies (including management and restoration activities), and (3) an evaluation of the effects of controlling processes, such as climate change, land use and land cover, and wildlfires. The purpose of this draft methodology for public review is to propose a technical plan to conduct the assessment. Within the methodology, the concepts of ecosystems, carbon pools, and GHG fluxes used for the assessment follow conventional definitions in use by major national and international assessment or inventory efforts. In order to estimate current ecosystem carbon stocks and GHG fluxes and to understand the potential capacity and effects of mitigation strategies, the method will use two time periods for the assessment: 2001 through 2010, which establishes a current ecosystem GHG baseline and will be used to validate the models; and 2011 through 2050, which will be used to assess future potential conditions based on a set of projected scenarios. The scenario framework is constructed using storylines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report Emission Scenarios (SRES), along with initial reference land-use and land-cover (LULC) and land-management scenarios. An additional three LULC and land-management mitigation scenarios will be constructed for each storyline to enhance carbon sequestration and reduce GHG fluxes in ecosystems. Input from regional experts and stakeholders will be solicited to construct realistic and meaningful scenarios. The methods for mapping the current LULC and ecosystem disturbances will require the extensive use of both remote-sensing data and in-situ (for example, forest inventory data) to capture and characterize landscape-change events. For future potential LULC and ecosystem disturbances, key drivers such as socioeconomic, policy, and climate assumptions will be used in addition to biophysical data. The product of these analyses will be a series of maps for each future year for each scenario. These annual maps will form the basis for estimating carbon storage and GHG emissions. For terrestrial ecosystems, carbon storage, carbon-sequestration capacities, and GHG emissions under the current and projected future conditions will be assessed using the LULC and ecosystem-disturbance estimates in map format with a spatially explicit biogeochemical ensemble modeling system that incorporates properties of management activities (such as tillage or harvesting) and properties of individual ecosystems (such as elevation, vegetation characteristics, and soil attributes). For aquatic ecosystems, carbon burial in sediments and GHG fluxes are functions of the current and projected future stream flow and sediment transports, and therefore will be assessed using empirical modeling methods. Validation and uncertainty analysis methods described in the methodology will follow established guidelines to assess the quality of the assessment results. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Level II ecoregions map (which delineates 24 ecoregions for the Nation) will be the practical instrument for developing and delivering assessment results. Consequently, the ecoregion will be the reporting unit of the assessment because the mitigation scenarios, assessment results, validation, and uncertainty analysis will be

Open-File Report↗

USGS2010

A method for assessing carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and greenhouse-gas fluxes in ecosystems of the United States under present conditions and future scenarios

he Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Section 712, mandates the U.S. Department of the Interior to develop a methodology and conduct an assessment of the Nation’s ecosystems, focusing on carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and emissions of three greenhouse gases (GHGs): carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The major requirements include (1) an assessment of all ecosystems (terrestrial systems, such as forests, croplands, wetlands, grasslands/shrublands; and aquatic ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and estuaries); (2) an estimate of the annual potential capacities of ecosystems to increase carbon sequestration and reduce net GHG emissions in the context of mitigation strategies (including management and restoration activities); and (3) an evaluation of the effects of controlling processes, such as climate change, land-use and land-cover change, and disturbances such as wildfires. The concepts of ecosystems, carbon pools, and GHG fluxes follow conventional definitions in use by major national and international assessment or inventory efforts. In order to estimate current ecosystem carbon stocks and GHG fluxes and to understand the potential capacity and effects of mitigation strategies, the method will use two time periods for the assessment: 2001 through 2010, which establishes a current ecosystem carbon and GHG baseline and will be used to validate the models; and 2011 through 2050, which will be used to assess potential capacities based on a set of scenarios. The scenario framework will be constructed using storylines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), along with both reference and enhanced land-use and land-cover (LULC) and land-management parameters. Additional LULC and land-management mitigation scenarios will be constructed for each storyline to increase carbon sequestration and reduce GHG fluxes in ecosystems. Input from regional experts and stakeholders will be solicited to construct these scenarios. The methods for mapping the current LULC and ecosystem disturbances will require the extensive use of both remote-sensing data and field-survey data (for example, forest inventories) to capture and characterize landscape-changing events. For potential LULC changes and ecosystem disturbances, key drivers such as socioeconomic and climate changes will be used in addition to the biophysical data. The result of these analyses will be a series of maps for each future year for each scenario. These annual maps will form the basis for estimating carbon storage and GHG emissions. For terrestrial ecosystems, carbon storage, carbon-sequestration capacities, and GHG emissions under the present conditions and future scenarios will be assessed using the LULC-change and ecosystem-disturbance estimates in map format with a spatially explicit biogeochemical ensemble modeling system that incorporates properties of management activities (such as tillage or harvesting) and properties of individual ecosystems (such as energy exchange, vegetation characteristics, hydrological cycling, and soil attributes). For aquatic ecosystems, carbon burial in sediments and fluxes of GHG are functions of the present and future potential stream flow and sediment transport and will be assessed using empirical hydrological modeling methods. Validation and uncertainty analysis methods described in the methodology will follow established guidelines to assess the quality of the assessment results. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Level II ecoregions map will be the practical instrument for developing and delivering assessment results. Consequently, the ecoregion (there are 22 modified ecoregions) will be the reporting unit of the assessment because the scenarios, assessment results, validation, and uncertainty analysis will be produced at that scale. The implementation of these methods will require collaborations among various Federal agencies, State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and the science community. Using the method described in this document, the assessment can be completed in approximately 3 to 4 years. The primary deliverables will be assessment reports containing tables, charts, and maps that will present the estimated GHG parameters annually for 2001 through 2050 by ecosystem, pool, and scenario. The results will permit the evaluation of a range of policies, mitigation options, and research topics, such as the demographic, LULC-change, or climate-change effects on carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and GHG fluxes in ecosystems.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2010

Developing a spatially distributed terrestrial biogeochemical cycle modeling system to support the management of Fort Benning and its surrounding areas

The overarching goal of this project is to develop an advanced, spatially distributed biogeochemical cycle modeling system to simulate the dynamics of ecosystem C and N cycles under historical, current, and future land use and disturbances scenarios. The modeling system and simulated results were used to facilitate the evaluation of the environmental consequences of various training and management activities and, therefore, to support future land use and training operations.

Georgia↗

USGS2008

The Importance of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis in Process-based Models of Carbon and Nitrogen Cycling in Terrestrial Ecosystems with Particular Emphasis on Forest Ecosystems — Selected Papers from a Workshop Organized by the International Society for Ecological Modelling (ISEM) at the Third Biennal Meeting of the International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (IEMSS) in Burlington, Vermont, USA, August 9-13, 2006

Many process-based models of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles have been developed for terrestrial ecosystems, including forest ecosystems. They address many basic issues of ecosystems structure and functioning, such as the role of internal feedback in ecosystem dynamics. The critical factor in these phenomena is scale, as these processes operate at scales from the minute (e.g. particulate pollution impacts on trees and other organisms) to the global (e.g. climate change). Research efforts remain important to improve the capability of such models to better represent the dynamics of terrestrial ecosystems, including the C, nutrient, (e.g. N) and water cycles. Existing models are sufficiently well advanced to help decision makers develop sustainable management policies and planning of terrestrial ecosystems, as they make realistic predictions when used appropriately. However, decision makers must be aware of their limitations by having the opportunity to evaluate the uncertainty associated with process-based models ( Smith and Heath, 2001 and Allen et al., 2004 ). The variation in scale of issues currently being addressed by modelling efforts makes the evaluation of uncertainty a daunting task.

Ecological Modelling↗

USGS2008

Uncertainty and sensitivity issues in process-based models of carbon and nitrogen cycles in terrestrial ecosystems

Many process-based models of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles have been developed for northern forest ecosystems. These models are widely used to evaluate the long-term decisions in forest management dealing with effects like particulate pollution, productivity and climate change. Regarding climate change, one of the key questions that have sensitive political implications is whether northern forests will sequester atmospheric C or not. Whilst many process-based models have been tested for accuracy by evaluating or validating against observed data, few have dealt with the complexity of the incorporated procedures to estimate uncertainties associated with model predictions or the sensitivity of these predictions to input factors in a systematic, inter-model comparison fashion. In general, models differ in their underlying attempts to match natural complexities with assumed or imposed model structure and process formulations to estimate model parameters, to gather data and to address issues on scope, scale and natural variations. Uncertainties may originate from model structure, estimation of model parameters, data input, representation of natural variation and scaling exercises. Model structure relates to the mathematical representation of the processes modelled and the type of state variables that a model contains. The modelling of partitioning among above- and below-ground C and N pools and the interdependence among these pools remain a major source of uncertainty in model structure and error propagation. For example, most soil C models use at least three state variables to represent the different types of soil organic matter (SOM). This approach results in creating three artificial SOM pools, assuming that each one contains C compounds with the same turnover rate. In reality, SOM consists of many different types of C compounds with widely different turnover rates. Uncertainty in data and parameter estimates are closely linked. Data uncertainties are associated with high variations in estimating forest biomass, productivity and soil organic matter and their estimates may be incomplete for model initialisation, calibration, validation and sensitivity analysis of generalised predictor models. The scale at which a model is being used also affects the level of uncertainty, as the errors in the prediction of the C and N dynamics differ from site to landscape levels and across climatic regions. If the spatial or temporal scale of a model application is changed, additional uncertainty arises from neglecting natural variability in system variables in time and space. Uncertainty issues are also intimately related to model validation and sensitivity analysis. The estimation of uncertainties is needed to inform decision processes in order to detect the possible corridor of development. Uncertainty in this context is an essential measure of quality for stakeholder and decision makers.

Book chapter↗

USGS2007

Estimating soil erosion using the USPED model and consecutive remotely sensed land cover observations

Intensified soil erosion contributes to the degradation of ecosystems. Better estimation of soil erosion across landscapes is a necessary part of understanding ecosystem biogeochemical cycles and ecosystem sustainability. In this study, we used the Unit Stream Power-based Erosion Deposition (USPED) model to estimate the lateral movement of soils across Fort Benning, a military training installation in western Georgia, USA. A land cover weight factor was used in the calculation of surface flow accumulation. The simulation results were compared with observations of the total suspended sediments in stream water for ten watersheds, and showed a significant linear relationship (R 2 = 0.72). Erosion estimates of the ten watersheds are also related to the land disturbance index that is a measure of the intensity of military training disturbances. Results suggest that the USPED model is an effective tool to quantify erosion and deposition at military installations.

Georgia↗

USGS2006

Dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity issues in process-based models of carbon and nitrogen cycles in northern forest ecosystems

Many process-based models on carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles have been developed for northern forest ecosystems. These models are widely used to evaluate the long-term decisions in forest management dealing with effects like particulate pollution, productivity and climate change. Regarding climate change, one of the key questions that have sensitive political implications is whether northern forests will sequester atmospheric C or not. Whilst many process-based models have been tested for accuracy by evaluating or validating against observed data, few have dealt with the complexity of the incorporated procedures to estimate uncertainties associated with model predictions or the sensitivity of these predictions to input factors in a systematic, inter-model comparison fashion. In general, models differ in their underlying attempts to match natural complexities with assumed or imposed model structure and process formulations to estimate model parameters, to gather data and to address issues on scope, scale and natural variations. Uncertainties may originate from model structure, estimation of model parameters, data input, representation of natural variation and scaling exercises. Model structure relates to the mathematical representation of the processes modelled and the type of state variables that a model contains. The modelling of partitioning among above- and below-ground C and N pools and the interdependence among these pools remain a major source of uncertainty in model structure and error propagation. Most soil C models use at least three state variables to represent the different types of soil organic matter (SOM). This approach results in creating three artificial SOM pools, assuming that each one contains C compounds with same turnover rate. In reality, SOM consists of many different types of C compounds with widely different turnover rates. Uncertainty in data and parameter estimates are closely linked. Data uncertainties are associated with high variations in estimating forest biomass, productivity and soil organic matter and may be incomplete for model initialization, calibration, validation and sensitivity analysis of generalized predictor models. The scale at which a model is being used also affects the level of uncertainty, as the errors in the prediction of the C and N dynamics differ from the site to the landscape levels and across climatic regions. If the spatial or temporal scale of a model application is changed, additional uncertainty arises from neglecting natural variability in system variables in time and space. Uncertainty issues are also intimately related to model validation and sensitivity analysis. The estimation of uncertainties is needed to inform decision process, in order to detect the possible corridor of development. Uncertainty in this context is an essential measure of quality for stakeholder and decision makers.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2006