Articles | Volume 14, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2603-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2603-2021
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
12 May 2021
Methods for assessment of models |  | 12 May 2021

Cutting out the middleman: calibrating and validating a dynamic vegetation model (ED2-PROSPECT5) using remotely sensed surface reflectance

Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Michael C. Dietze, Istem Fer, Toni Viskari, and Shawn P. Serbin

Related authors

Hector V3.2.0: functionality and performance of a reduced-complexity climate model
Kalyn Dorheim, Skylar Gering, Robert Gieseke, Corinne Hartin, Leeya Pressburger, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Steven J. Smith, Claudia Tebaldi, Dawn L. Woodard, and Ben Bond-Lamberty
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4855–4869, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024, 2024
Short summary
A permafrost implementation in the simple carbon–climate model Hector v.2.3pf
Dawn L. Woodard, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Ben Kravitz, Corinne Hartin, and Ben Bond-Lamberty
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4751–4767, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4751-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4751-2021, 2021
Short summary
The fortedata R package: open-science datasets from a manipulative experiment testing forest resilience
Jeff W. Atkins, Elizabeth Agee, Alexandra Barry, Kyla M. Dahlin, Kalyn Dorheim, Maxim S. Grigri, Lisa T. Haber, Laura J. Hickey, Aaron G. Kamoske, Kayla Mathes, Catherine McGuigan, Evan Paris, Stephanie C. Pennington, Carly Rodriguez, Autym Shafer, Alexey Shiklomanov, Jason Tallant, Christopher M. Gough, and Ben Bond-Lamberty
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 943–952, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-943-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-943-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeosciences
An improved model for air–sea exchange of elemental mercury in MITgcm-ECCOv4-Hg: the role of surfactants and waves
Ling Li, Peipei Wu, Peng Zhang, Shaojian Huang, and Yanxu Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8683–8695, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8683-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8683-2024, 2024
Short summary
BOATSv2: new ecological and economic features improve simulations of high seas catch and effort
Jerome Guiet, Daniele Bianchi, Kim J. N. Scherrer, Ryan F. Heneghan, and Eric D. Galbraith
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8421–8454, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8421-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8421-2024, 2024
Short summary
A dynamical process-based model for quantifying global agricultural ammonia emissions – AMmonia–CLIMate v1.0 (AMCLIM v1.0) – Part 1: Land module for simulating emissions from synthetic fertilizer use
Jize Jiang, David S. Stevenson, and Mark A. Sutton
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8181–8222, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024, 2024
Short summary
Simulating Ips typographus L. outbreak dynamics and their influence on carbon balance estimates with ORCHIDEE r8627
Guillaume Marie, Jina Jeong, Hervé Jactel, Gunnar Petter, Maxime Cailleret, Matthew J. McGrath, Vladislav Bastrikov, Josefine Ghattas, Bertrand Guenet, Anne Sofie Lansø, Kim Naudts, Aude Valade, Chao Yue, and Sebastiaan Luyssaert
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8023–8047, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8023-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8023-2024, 2024
Short summary
Biological nitrogen fixation of natural and agricultural vegetation simulated with LPJmL 5.7.9
Stephen Björn Wirth, Johanna Braun, Jens Heinke, Sebastian Ostberg, Susanne Rolinski, Sibyll Schaphoff, Fabian Stenzel, Werner von Bloh, Friedhelm Taube, and Christoph Müller
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7889–7914, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7889-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7889-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Asner, G. P.: Biophysical and Biochemical Sources of Variability in Canopy Reflectance, Remote Sens. Environ., 64, 234–253, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(98)00014-5, 1998. a
Baker, I. T., Prihodko, L., Denning, A. S., Goulden, M., Miller, S., and da Rocha, H. R.: Seasonal Drought Stress in the Amazon: Reconciling Models and Observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G00B01, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000644, 2008. a
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011. a
Bonan, G. B.: Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests, Science, 320, 1444–1449, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121, 2008. a, b
Combal, B., Baret, F., Weiss, M., Trubuil, A., Macé, D., Pragnère, A., Myneni, R., Knyazikhin, Y., and Wang, L.: Retrieval of Canopy Biophysical Variables from Bidirectional Reflectance: Using Prior Information to Solve the Ill-Posed Inverse Problem, Remote Sens. Environ., 84, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00035-4, 2003. a, b
Download
Short summary
Airborne and satellite images are a great resource for calibrating and evaluating computer models of ecosystems. Typically, researchers derive ecosystem properties from these images and then compare models against these derived properties. Here, we present an alternative approach where we modify a model to predict what the satellite would see more directly. We then show how this approach can be used to calibrate model parameters using airborne data from forest sites in the northeastern US.