Geology topics

Sarah Feron

Publications and source records attributed to Sarah Feron.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

A cross-site comparison of ecosystem- and plot-scale methane fluxes across multiple sites

Wetland and upland ecosystems play significant but opposing roles in the global methane (CH 4 ) budget, acting as natural sources and sinks, respectively. Two of the most common approaches for measuring CH 4 fluxes (FCH 4 ) are chambers, which measure fluxes at fine spatial scales (ca. 1 m 2 ), and eddy covariance (EC) towers, which integrate fluxes across larger footprints (ca. 100–10 000 m 2 ). Although chamber and EC observations have been combined in various syntheses and databases to estimate CH 4 budgets, a unified cross-site evaluation of FCH 4 estimates at plot and ecosystem scales is lacking. As a first step toward a systematic spatiotemporal scaling of EC tower and chamber footprints, we quantified differences in site-level aggregate FCH 4 between EC and chamber measurements ( Δ FCH 4 ) across ten wetland and upland sites at half-hourly, hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, and annual timescales. We found that ecosystem-scale median FCH 4 was consistently higher than plot-scale FCH 4 at all temporal scales, with the smallest difference at the daily timescale (multi-site median Δ FCH 4 : 1.36 nmol m −2 s −1 ; median ecosystem-scale FCH 4 = 1.56 nmol m −2 s −1 , median plot-scale FCH 4 = 0.06 nmol m −2 s −1 ) and the largest at annual scales (2.58 nmol m −2 s −1 ; median ecosystem-scale FCH 4 = 25.91 nmol m −2 s −1 , median plot-scale FCH 4 = 6.55 nmol m −2 s −1 ). In general, the agreement between ecosystem- and plot-scale FCH 4 decreased with finer temporal resolution (from Spearman ρ = 0.95 at the annual scale to ρ = 0.65 at the half-hourly scale), while Δ FCH 4 variation was greatest at daily-to-annual scales. Key environmental predictors of Δ FCH 4 across the ten sites included plot-scale spatial heterogeneity, dominant vegetation type, vapor pressure deficit, atmospheric pressure, and friction velocity at the daily and monthly scales. Wind direction was a significant predictor only at the monthly scale, suggesting EC footprint effects at these sites. These findings suggest that accounting for variability in EC footprint extent, chamber measurement placement, and measurement artifacts is key to reconciling multi-scale FCH 4 observations across diverse ecosystems and refining CH 4 budgets.

Biogeosciences↗

USGS2024

Recent increases in annual, seasonal, and extreme methane fluxes driven by changes in climate and vegetation in boreal and temperate wetland ecosystems

Climate warming is expected to increase global methane (CH 4 ) emissions from wetland ecosystems. Although in situ eddy covariance (EC) measurements at ecosystem scales can potentially detect CH 4 flux changes, most EC systems have only a few years of data collected, so temporal trends in CH 4 remain uncertain. Here, we use established drivers to hindcast changes in CH 4 fluxes (FCH 4 ) since the early 1980s. We trained a machine learning (ML) model on CH 4 flux measurements from 22 [methane-producing sites] in wetland, upland, and lake sites of the FLUXNET-CH 4 database with at least two full years of measurements across temperate and boreal biomes. The gradient boosting decision tree ML model then hindcasted daily FCH 4 over 1981–2018 using meteorological reanalysis data. We found that, mainly driven by rising temperature, half of the sites ( n = 11) showed significant increases in annual, seasonal, and extreme FCH 4 , with increases in FCH 4 of ca. 10% or higher found in the fall from 1981–1989 to 2010–2018. The annual trends were driven by increases during summer and fall, particularly at high-CH 4 -emitting fen sites dominated by aerenchymatous plants. We also found that the distribution of days of extremely high FCH 4 (defined according to the 95th percentile of the daily FCH 4 values over a reference period) have become more frequent during the last four decades and currently account for 10–40% of the total seasonal fluxes. The share of extreme FCH 4 days in the total seasonal fluxes was greatest in winter for boreal/taiga sites and in spring for temperate sites, which highlights the increasing importance of the non-growing seasons in annual budgets. Our results shed light on the effects of climate warming on wetlands, which appears to be extending the CH 4 emission seasons and boosting extreme emissions.

Global Change Biology↗

USGS2023

Upscaling wetland methane emissions from the FLUXNET-CH4 Eddy Covariance Network (UpCH4 v1.0): Model development, network assessment, and budget comparison

Wetlands are responsible for 20%–31% of global methane (CH 4 ) emissions and account for a large source of uncertainty in the global CH 4 budget. Data-driven upscaling of CH 4 fluxes from eddy covariance measurements can provide new and independent bottom-up estimates of wetland CH 4 emissions. Here, we develop a six-predictor random forest upscaling model (UpCH4), trained on 119 site-years of eddy covariance CH 4 flux data from 43 freshwater wetland sites in the FLUXNET-CH4 Community Product. Network patterns in site-level annual means and mean seasonal cycles of CH 4 fluxes were reproduced accurately in tundra, boreal, and temperate regions (Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency ∼0.52–0.63 and 0.53). UpCH4 estimated annual global wetland CH 4 emissions of 146 ± 43 TgCH 4 y −1 for 2001–2018 which agrees closely with current bottom-up land surface models (102–181 TgCH 4 y −1 ) and overlaps with top-down atmospheric inversion models (155–200 TgCH 4 y −1 ). However, UpCH4 diverged from both types of models in the spatial pattern and seasonal dynamics of tropical wetland emissions. We conclude that upscaling of eddy covariance CH 4 fluxes has the potential to produce realistic extra-tropical wetland CH 4 emissions estimates which will improve with more flux data. To reduce uncertainty in upscaled estimates, researchers could prioritize new wetland flux sites along humid-to-arid tropical climate gradients, from major rainforest basins (Congo, Amazon, and SE Asia), into monsoon (Bangladesh and India) and savannah regions (African Sahel) and be paired with improved knowledge of wetland extent seasonal dynamics in these regions. The monthly wetland methane products gridded at 0.25° from UpCH4 are available via ORNL DAAC ( https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2253 ).

AGU Advances↗

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

Identifying dominant environmental predictors of freshwater wetland methane fluxes across diurnal to seasonal time scales

While wetlands are the largest natural source of methane (CH 4 ) to the atmosphere, they represent a large source of uncertainty in the global CH 4 budget due to the complex biogeochemical controls on CH 4 dynamics. Here we present, to our knowledge, the first multi-site synthesis of how predictors of CH 4 fluxes (FCH4) in freshwater wetlands vary across wetland types at diel, multiday (synoptic), and seasonal time scales. We used several statistical approaches (correlation analysis, generalized additive modeling, mutual information, and random forests) in a wavelet-based multi-resolution framework to assess the importance of environmental predictors, nonlinearities and lags on FCH4 across 23 eddy covariance sites. Seasonally, soil and air temperature were dominant predictors of FCH4 at sites with smaller seasonal variation in water table depth (WTD). In contrast, WTD was the dominant predictor for wetlands with smaller variations in temperature (e.g., seasonal tropical/subtropical wetlands). Changes in seasonal FCH4 lagged fluctuations in WTD by ~17 ± 11 days, and lagged air and soil temperature by median values of 8 ± 16 and 5 ± 15 days, respectively. Temperature and WTD were also dominant predictors at the multiday scale. Atmospheric pressure (PA) was another important multiday scale predictor for peat-dominated sites, with drops in PA coinciding with synchronous releases of CH 4 . At the diel scale, synchronous relationships with latent heat flux and vapor pressure deficit suggest that physical processes controlling evaporation and boundary layer mixing exert similar controls on CH 4 volatilization, and suggest the influence of pressurized ventilation in aerenchymatous vegetation. In addition, 1- to 4-h lagged relationships with ecosystem photosynthesis indicate recent carbon substrates, such as root exudates, may also control FCH4. By addressing issues of scale, asynchrony, and nonlinearity, this work improves understanding of the predictors and timing of wetland FCH4 that can inform future studies and models, and help constrain wetland CH 4 emissions.

Global Change Biology↗

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↗