Articles | Volume 18, issue 21
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-8157-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-8157-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
05 Nov 2025
Development and technical paper |
| 05 Nov 2025
| 05 Nov 2025
Development of a model framework for terrestrial carbon flux prediction: the Regional Carbon and Climate Analytics Tool (RCCAT) applied to non-tidal wetlands
Earth and Environmental Sciences Area, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Zelalem A. Mekonnen
Earth and Environmental Sciences Area, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
Bhavna Arora
Earth and Environmental Sciences Area, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
William J. Riley
Earth and Environmental Sciences Area, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
Kunxiaojia Yuan
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
Yi Xu
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Yu Zhang
Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
Qing Zhu
Earth and Environmental Sciences Area, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA
Tyler L. Anthony
California Department of Water Resources, Sacramento, CA, USA
Adina Paytan
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Related authors
No articles found.
Elias C. Massoud, Nathan Collier, Yaoping Wang, Jiafu Mao, Adrian Harpold, Steven A. Kannenberg, Gerbrand Koren, Mukesh Kumar, Pushpendra Raghav, Pallav Ray, Mingjie Shi, Jing Tao, Sreedevi P. Vasu, Huiqi Wang, Qing Zhu, and Forrest M. Hoffman
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3517, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3517, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
We studied how well Earth System Models simulate soil moisture and its connection to plant growth and water use. Using a model evaluation tool and real-world data, we found that models generally perform well at the surface but struggle deeper in the soil. These issues vary by region, especially in colder regions. Our results can help improve future model development and support better predictions of how ecosystems respond to a changing environment.
Xiang Huang, Yu Zhang, Bo Gao, Charles J. Abolt, Ryan L. Crumley, Cansu Demir, Richard P. Fiorella, Bob Busey, Bob Bolton, Scott L. Painter, and Katrina E. Bennett
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1753, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1753, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting hydrological runoff in Arctic permafrost regions is difficult due to limited observations and complex terrain. We used a detailed physics-based model to improve runoff estimates in a Earth system land model. Our method improved runoff accuracy and worked well across two different Arctic regions. This helps make climate models more reliable for understanding water flow in permafrost areas under a changing climate.
Marielle Saunois, Adrien Martinez, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, Peter A. Raymond, Pierre Regnier, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Bousquet, Philippe Ciais, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Xin Lan, George H. Allen, David Bastviken, David J. Beerling, Dmitry A. Belikov, Donald R. Blake, Simona Castaldi, Monica Crippa, Bridget R. Deemer, Fraser Dennison, Giuseppe Etiope, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Meredith A. Holgerson, Peter O. Hopcroft, Gustaf Hugelius, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Rajesh Janardanan, Matthew S. Johnson, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ronny Lauerwald, Tingting Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe R. Melton, Jens Mühle, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Shufen Pan, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Gerard Rocher-Ros, Judith A. Rosentreter, Motoki Sasakawa, Arjo Segers, Steven J. Smith, Emily H. Stanley, Joël Thanwerdas, Hanqin Tian, Aki Tsuruta, Francesco N. Tubiello, Thomas S. Weber, Guido R. van der Werf, Douglas E. J. Worthy, Yi Xi, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1873–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2). A consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists synthesise and update the budget of the sources and sinks of CH4. This edition benefits from important progress in estimating emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. For the 2010s decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated at 575 Tg CH4 yr-1, including ~65 % from anthropogenic sources.
Natalie M. Mahowald, Longlei Li, Julius Vira, Marje Prank, Douglas S. Hamilton, Hitoshi Matsui, Ron L. Miller, P. Louis Lu, Ezgi Akyuz, Daphne Meidan, Peter Hess, Heikki Lihavainen, Christine Wiedinmyer, Jenny Hand, Maria Grazia Alaimo, Célia Alves, Andres Alastuey, Paulo Artaxo, Africa Barreto, Francisco Barraza, Silvia Becagli, Giulia Calzolai, Shankararaman Chellam, Ying Chen, Patrick Chuang, David D. Cohen, Cristina Colombi, Evangelia Diapouli, Gaetano Dongarra, Konstantinos Eleftheriadis, Johann Engelbrecht, Corinne Galy-Lacaux, Cassandra Gaston, Dario Gomez, Yenny González Ramos, Roy M. Harrison, Chris Heyes, Barak Herut, Philip Hopke, Christoph Hüglin, Maria Kanakidou, Zsofia Kertesz, Zbigniew Klimont, Katriina Kyllönen, Fabrice Lambert, Xiaohong Liu, Remi Losno, Franco Lucarelli, Willy Maenhaut, Beatrice Marticorena, Randall V. Martin, Nikolaos Mihalopoulos, Yasser Morera-Gómez, Adina Paytan, Joseph Prospero, Sergio Rodríguez, Patricia Smichowski, Daniela Varrica, Brenna Walsh, Crystal L. Weagle, and Xi Zhao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4665–4702, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4665-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4665-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol particles are an important part of the Earth system, but their concentrations are spatially and temporally heterogeneous, as well as being variable in size and composition. Here, we present a new compilation of PM2.5 and PM10 aerosol observations, focusing on the spatial variability across different observational stations, including composition, and demonstrate a method for comparing the data sets to model output.
Elsa Abs, Christoph Keuschnig, Pierre Amato, Chris Bowler, Eric Capo, Alexander Chase, Luciana Chavez Rodriguez, Abraham Dabengwa, Thomas Dussarrat, Thomas Guzman, Linnea Honeker, Jenni Hultman, Kirsten Küsel, Zhen Li, Anna Mankowski, William Riley, Scott Saleska, and Lisa Wingate
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1716, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1716, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
Meta-omics technologies offer new tools to understand how microbial and plant functional diversity shape biogeochemical cycles across ecosystems. This perspective explores how integrating omics data with ecological and modeling approaches can improve our understanding of greenhouse gas fluxes and nutrient dynamics, from soils to clouds, and from the past to the future. We highlight challenges and opportunities for scaling omics insights from local processes to Earth system models.
Jinyun Tang and William J. Riley
Biogeosciences, 22, 1809–1819, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1809-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1809-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A new mathematical formulation of the dynamic energy budget model is presented for the growth of biological organisms. This new formulation combines mass conservation law and chemical kinetics theory and is computationally faster than the standard formulation of dynamic energy budget models. In simulating the growth of Thalassiosira weissflogii in a nitrogen-limiting chemostat, the new model is as good as the standard dynamic energy budget model using almost the same parameter values.
Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Joe R. Melton, William J. Riley, George H. Allen, David J. Beerling, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Philippe Ciais, Nicola Gedney, Peter O. Hopcroft, Akihiko Ito, Robert B. Jackson, Atul K. Jain, Katherine Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Sara H. Knox, Tingting Li, Xin Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle McDonald, Gavin McNicol, Paul A. Miller, Jurek Müller, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Zhangcai Qin, Ryan M. Riggs, Marielle Saunois, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Xiaoming Xu, Yuanzhi Yao, Yi Xi, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Biogeosciences, 22, 305–321, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses global methane emissions from wetlands between 2000 and 2020 using multiple models. We found that wetland emissions increased by 6–7 Tg CH4 yr-1 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s. Rising temperatures primarily drove this increase, while changes in precipitation and CO2 levels also played roles. Our findings highlight the importance of wetlands in the global methane budget and the need for continuous monitoring to understand their impact on climate change.
Kamal Nyaupane, Umakant Mishra, Feng Tao, Kyongmin Yeo, William J. Riley, Forrest M. Hoffman, and Sagar Gautam
Biogeosciences, 21, 5173–5183, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Representing soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics in Earth system models (ESMs) is a key source of uncertainty in predicting carbon–climate feedbacks. Using machine learning, we develop and compare predictive relationships in observations (Obs) and ESMs. We find different relationships between environmental factors and SOC stocks in Obs and ESMs. SOC prediction in ESMs may be improved by representing the functional relationships of environmental controllers in a way consistent with observations.
Hanqin Tian, Naiqing Pan, Rona L. Thompson, Josep G. Canadell, Parvadha Suntharalingam, Pierre Regnier, Eric A. Davidson, Michael Prather, Philippe Ciais, Marilena Muntean, Shufen Pan, Wilfried Winiwarter, Sönke Zaehle, Feng Zhou, Robert B. Jackson, Hermann W. Bange, Sarah Berthet, Zihao Bian, Daniele Bianchi, Alexander F. Bouwman, Erik T. Buitenhuis, Geoffrey Dutton, Minpeng Hu, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Aurich Jeltsch-Thömmes, Fortunat Joos, Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Paul B. Krummel, Xin Lan, Angela Landolfi, Ronny Lauerwald, Ya Li, Chaoqun Lu, Taylor Maavara, Manfredi Manizza, Dylan B. Millet, Jens Mühle, Prabir K. Patra, Glen P. Peters, Xiaoyu Qin, Peter Raymond, Laure Resplandy, Judith A. Rosentreter, Hao Shi, Qing Sun, Daniele Tonina, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Junjie Wang, Kelley C. Wells, Luke M. Western, Chris Wilson, Jia Yang, Yuanzhi Yao, Yongfa You, and Qing Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2543–2604, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas 273 times more potent than carbon dioxide, have increased by 25 % since the preindustrial period, with the highest observed growth rate in 2020 and 2021. This rapid growth rate has primarily been due to a 40 % increase in anthropogenic emissions since 1980. Observed atmospheric N2O concentrations in recent years have exceeded the worst-case climate scenario, underscoring the importance of reducing anthropogenic N2O emissions.
Jinyun Tang and William J. Riley
Biogeosciences, 21, 1061–1070, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1061-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1061-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A chemical kinetics theory is proposed to explain the non-monotonic relationship between temperature and biochemical rates. It incorporates the observed thermally reversible enzyme denaturation that is ensured by the ceaseless thermal motion of molecules and ions in an enzyme solution and three well-established theories: (1) law of mass action, (2) diffusion-limited chemical reaction theory, and (3) transition state theory.
Natalie M. Mahowald, Longlei Li, Julius Vira, Marje Prank, Douglas S. Hamilton, Hitoshi Matsui, Ron L. Miller, Louis Lu, Ezgi Akyuz, Daphne Meidan, Peter Hess, Heikki Lihavainen, Christine Wiedinmyer, Jenny Hand, Maria Grazia Alaimo, Célia Alves, Andres Alastuey, Paulo Artaxo, Africa Barreto, Francisco Barraza, Silvia Becagli, Giulia Calzolai, Shankarararman Chellam, Ying Chen, Patrick Chuang, David D. Cohen, Cristina Colombi, Evangelia Diapouli, Gaetano Dongarra, Konstantinos Eleftheriadis, Corinne Galy-Lacaux, Cassandra Gaston, Dario Gomez, Yenny González Ramos, Hannele Hakola, Roy M. Harrison, Chris Heyes, Barak Herut, Philip Hopke, Christoph Hüglin, Maria Kanakidou, Zsofia Kertesz, Zbiginiw Klimont, Katriina Kyllönen, Fabrice Lambert, Xiaohong Liu, Remi Losno, Franco Lucarelli, Willy Maenhaut, Beatrice Marticorena, Randall V. Martin, Nikolaos Mihalopoulos, Yasser Morera-Gomez, Adina Paytan, Joseph Prospero, Sergio Rodríguez, Patricia Smichowski, Daniela Varrica, Brenna Walsh, Crystal Weagle, and Xi Zhao
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-1, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-1, 2024
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol particles can interact with incoming solar radiation and outgoing long wave radiation, change cloud properties, affect photochemistry, impact surface air quality, and when deposited impact surface albedo of snow and ice, and modulate carbon dioxide uptake by the land and ocean. Here we present a new compilation of aerosol observations including composition, a methodology for comparing the datasets to model output, and show the implications of these results using one model.
Fa Li, Qing Zhu, William J. Riley, Lei Zhao, Li Xu, Kunxiaojia Yuan, Min Chen, Huayi Wu, Zhipeng Gui, Jianya Gong, and James T. Randerson
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 869–884, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-869-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-869-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We developed an interpretable machine learning model to predict sub-seasonal and near-future wildfire-burned area over African and South American regions. We found strong time-lagged controls (up to 6–8 months) of local climate wetness on burned areas. A skillful use of such time-lagged controls in machine learning models results in highly accurate predictions of wildfire-burned areas; this will also help develop relevant early-warning and management systems for tropical wildfires.
Daniel François, Adina Paytan, Olga Maria Oliveira de Araújo, Ricardo Tadeu Lopes, and Cátia Fernandes Barbosa
Biogeosciences, 19, 5269–5285, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-5269-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-5269-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Our analysis revealed that under the two most conservative acidification projections foraminifera assemblages did not display considerable changes. However, a significant decrease in species richness was observed when pH decreases to 7.7 pH units, indicating adverse effects under high-acidification scenarios. A micro-CT analysis revealed that calcified tests of Archaias angulatus were of lower density in low pH, suggesting no acclimation capacity for this species.
Qing Zhu, Fa Li, William J. Riley, Li Xu, Lei Zhao, Kunxiaojia Yuan, Huayi Wu, Jianya Gong, and James Randerson
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1899–1911, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1899-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1899-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfire is a devastating Earth system process that burns about 500 million hectares of land each year. It wipes out vegetation including trees, shrubs, and grasses and causes large losses of economic assets. However, modeling the spatial distribution and temporal changes of wildfire activities at a global scale is challenging. This study built a machine-learning-based wildfire surrogate model within an existing Earth system model and achieved high accuracy.
Jinyun Tang, William J. Riley, and Qing Zhu
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1619–1632, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1619-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1619-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We here describe version 2 of BeTR, a reactive transport model created to help ease the development of biogeochemical capability in Earth system models that are used for quantifying ecosystem–climate feedbacks. We then coupled BeTR-v2 to the Energy Exascale Earth System Model to quantify how different numerical couplings of plants and soils affect simulated ecosystem biogeochemistry. We found that different couplings lead to significant uncertainty that is not correctable by tuning parameters.
Jing Tao, Qing Zhu, William J. Riley, and Rebecca B. Neumann
The Cryosphere, 15, 5281–5307, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-5281-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-5281-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We improved the DOE's E3SM land model (ELMv1-ECA) simulations of soil temperature, zero-curtain period durations, cold-season CH4, and CO2 emissions at several Alaskan Arctic tundra sites. We demonstrated that simulated CH4 emissions during zero-curtain periods accounted for more than 50 % of total emissions throughout the entire cold season (Sep to May). We also found that cold-season CO2 emissions largely offset warm-season net uptake currently and showed increasing trends from 1950 to 2017.
Kyle B. Delwiche, Sara Helen Knox, Avni Malhotra, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Gavin McNicol, Sarah Feron, Zutao Ouyang, Dario Papale, Carlo Trotta, Eleonora Canfora, You-Wei Cheah, Danielle Christianson, Ma. Carmelita R. Alberto, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, David P. Billesbach, Gil Bohrer, Rosvel Bracho, Nina Buchmann, David I. Campbell, Gerardo Celis, Jiquan Chen, Weinan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Sigrid Dengel, Ankur R. Desai, Matteo Detto, Han Dolman, Elke Eichelmann, Eugenie Euskirchen, Daniela Famulari, Kathrin Fuchs, Mathias Goeckede, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Scott L. Graham, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, David Hollinger, Lukas Hörtnagl, Hiroki Iwata, Adrien Jacotot, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Kuno Kasak, John King, Janina Klatt, Franziska Koebsch, Ken W. Krauss, Derrick Y. F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Luca Belelli Marchesini, Giovanni Manca, Jaclyn Hatala Matthes, Trofim Maximov, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Mats B. Nilsson, Shuli Niu, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Michele L. Reba, Andrew D. Richardson, William Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Camilo Rey Sanchez, Edward A. Schuur, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Jed P. Sparks, Ellen Stuart-Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne J. Szutu, Jonathan E. Thom, Margaret S. Torn, Eeva-Stiina Tuittila, Jessica Turner, Masahito Ueyama, Alex C. Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, Andrej Varlagin, Alma Vazquez-Lule, Joseph G. Verfaillie, Timo Vesala, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Georg Wohlfahrt, Guan Xhuan Wong, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, Lisamarie Windham-Myers, Benjamin Poulter, and Robert B. Jackson
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 3607–3689, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-3607-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-3607-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Methane is an important greenhouse gas, yet we lack knowledge about its global emissions and drivers. We present FLUXNET-CH4, a new global collection of methane measurements and a critical resource for the research community. We use FLUXNET-CH4 data to quantify the seasonality of methane emissions from freshwater wetlands, finding that methane seasonality varies strongly with latitude. Our new database and analysis will improve wetland model accuracy and inform greenhouse gas budgets.
Jiancong Chen, Bhavna Arora, Alberto Bellin, and Yoram Rubin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4127–4146, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4127-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4127-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a stochastic framework with indicator random variables to characterize the spatiotemporal distribution of environmental hot spots and hot moments (HSHMs) that represent rare locations and events exerting a disproportionate influence over the environment. HSHMs are characterized by static and dynamic indicators. This framework is advantageous as it allows us to calculate the uncertainty associated with HSHMs based on uncertainty associated with its contributors.
Robert Ladwig, Paul C. Hanson, Hilary A. Dugan, Cayelan C. Carey, Yu Zhang, Lele Shu, Christopher J. Duffy, and Kelly M. Cobourn
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1009–1032, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1009-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1009-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Using a modeling framework applied to 37 years of dissolved oxygen time series data from Lake Mendota, we identified the timing and intensity of thermal energy stored in the lake water column, the lake's resilience to mixing, and surface primary production as the most important drivers of interannual dynamics of low oxygen concentrations at the lake bottom. Due to climate change, we expect an increase in the spatial and temporal extent of low oxygen concentrations in Lake Mendota.
Robinson I. Negrón-Juárez, Jennifer A. Holm, Boris Faybishenko, Daniel Magnabosco-Marra, Rosie A. Fisher, Jacquelyn K. Shuman, Alessandro C. de Araujo, William J. Riley, and Jeffrey Q. Chambers
Biogeosciences, 17, 6185–6205, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6185-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6185-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The temporal variability in the Landsat satellite near-infrared (NIR) band captured the dynamics of forest regrowth after disturbances in Central Amazon. This variability was represented by the dynamics of forest regrowth after disturbances were properly represented by the ELM-FATES model (Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) Land Model (ELM)).
Kuang-Yu Chang, William J. Riley, Patrick M. Crill, Robert F. Grant, and Scott R. Saleska
Biogeosciences, 17, 5849–5860, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5849-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5849-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is a strong greenhouse gas that can accelerate climate change and offset mitigation efforts. A key assumption embedded in many large-scale climate models is that ecosystem CH4 emissions can be estimated by fixed temperature relations. Here, we demonstrate that CH4 emissions cannot be parameterized by emergent temperature response alone due to variability driven by microbial and abiotic interactions. We also provide mechanistic understanding for observed CH4 emission hysteresis.
Cited articles
Abril, G. and Iversen, N.: Methane dynamics in a shallow non-tidal estuary (Randers Fjord, Denmark), Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 230, 171–181, 2002.
Anderson, F. E., Bergamaschi, B., Sturtevant, C., Knox, S., Hastings, L., Windham-Myers, L., Detto, M., Hestir, E. L., Drexler, J., Miller, R. L., Matthes, J. H., Verfaillie, J., Baldocchi, D., Snyder, R. L., and Fujii, R.: Variation of energy and carbon fluxes from a restored temperate freshwater wetland and implications for carbon market verification protocols, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 121, 777–795, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JG003083, 2016.
Anderson, M., Gao, F., Knipper, K., Hain, C., Dulaney, W., Baldocchi, D., Eichelmann, E., Hemes, K., Yang, Y., and Medellin-Azuara, J.: Field-scale assessment of land and water use change over the California Delta using remote sensing, Remote Sens., 10, 889, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10060889, 2018.
Arias-Ortiz, A., Oikawa, P. Y., Carlin, J., Masqué, P., Shahan, J., Kanneg, S., Paytan, A., and Baldocchi, D. D.: Tidal and Nontidal Marsh Restoration: A Trade-Off Between Carbon Sequestration, Methane Emissions, and Soil Accretion, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 126, e2021JG006573, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JG006573, 2021.
Arora, B., Wainwright, H. M., Dwivedi, D., Vaughn, L. J., Curtis, J. B., Torn, M. S., Dafflon, B., and Hubbard, S. S.: Evaluating temporal controls on greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes in an Arctic tundra environment: An entropy-based approach, Sci. Total Environ., 649, 284–299, 2019.
Arora, B., Briggs, M. A., Zarnetske, J. P., Stegen, J., Gomez-Velez, J. D., Dwivedi, D., and Steefel, C.: Hot Spots and Hot Moments in the Critical Zone: Identification of and Incorporation into Reactive Transport Models, in: Biogeochemistry of the Critical Zone, edited by: Wymore, A. S., Yang, W. H., Silver, W. L., McDowell, W. H., and Chorover, J., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 9–47, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95921-0_2, 2022.
Aubinet, M., Vesala, T., and Papale, D.: Eddy covariance: a practical guide to measurement and data analysis, Springer Science & Business Media, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1, 2012.
Baldocchi, D., Falge, E., Gu, L., Olson, R., Hollinger, D., Running, S., Anthoni, P., Bernhofer, C., Davis, K., and Evans, R.: FLUXNET: A new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 82, 2415–2434, 2001.
Bergmeir, C. and Benítez, J. M.: On the use of cross-validation for time series predictor evaluation, Inf. Sci., 191, 192–213, 2012.
Bernal, B. and Mitsch, W. J.: Comparing carbon sequestration in temperate freshwater wetland communities, Glob. Change Biol., 18, 1636–1647, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02619.x, 2012.
Bodesheim, P., Jung, M., Gans, F., Mahecha, M. D., and Reichstein, M.: Upscaled diurnal cycles of land–atmosphere fluxes: a new global half-hourly data product, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 1327–1365, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-1327-2018, 2018.
Breiman, L.: Random Forests, Mach. Learn., 45, 5–32, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324, 2001.
Brereton, A.: Regional Carbon Climate Analytics Tool (RCCAT), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14933820, 2025.
Brix, H., Sorrell, B. K., and Lorenzen, B.: Are Phragmites-dominated wetlands a net source or net sink of greenhouse gases?, Aquat. Bot., 69, 313–324, 2001.
Bubier, J., Costello, A., Moore, T. R., Roulet, N. T., and Savage, K.: Microtopography and methane flux in boreal peatlands, northern Ontario, Canada, Can. J. Bot., 71, 1056–1063, https://doi.org/10.1139/b93-122, 1993.
Carnell, P. E., Windecker, S. M., Brenker, M., Baldock, J., Masque, P., Brunt, K., and Macreadie, P. I.: Carbon stocks, sequestration, and emissions of wetlands in south eastern Australia, Glob. Change Biol., 24, 4173–4184, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14319, 2018.
Chen, T. and Guestrin, C.: XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System, in: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD '16: The 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco California USA, 785–794, https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785, 2016.
Chu, H., Luo, X., Ouyang, Z., Chan, W. S., Dengel, S., Biraud, S. C., Torn, M. S., Metzger, S., Kumar, J., and Arain, M. A.: Representativeness of Eddy-Covariance flux footprints for areas surrounding AmeriFlux sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 301, 108350, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108350, 2021.
Chung, J., Gulcehre, C., Cho, K., and Bengio, Y.: Empirical Evaluation of Gated Recurrent Neural Networks on Sequence Modeling, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.3555, 11 December 2014.
Ciais, P., Borges, A. V., Abril, G., Meybeck, M., Folberth, G., Hauglustaine, D., and Janssens, I. A.: The impact of lateral carbon fluxes on the European carbon balance, Biogeosciences, 5, 1259–1271, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-5-1259-2008, 2008.
Cortes, C.: Support-Vector Networks, Mach. Learn., https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018, 1995.
Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Sutton, P., Van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., and Turner, R. K.: Changes in the global value of ecosystem services, Glob. Environ. Change, 26, 152–158, 2014.
de Klein, J. J. and van der Werf, A. K.: Balancing carbon sequestration and GHG emissions in a constructed wetland, Ecol. Eng., 66, 36–42, 2014.
Ding, H.: Establishing a soil carbon flux monitoring system based on support vector machine and XGBoost, Soft Comput., 28, 4551–4574, 2024.
Eichelmann, E., Shortt, R., Knox, S., Sanchez, C. R., Valach, A., Sturtevant, C., Szutu, D., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: AmeriFlux BASE US-Tw4 Twitchell East End Wetland, Ver. 15-5, AmeriFlux AMP [data set], https://doi.org/10.17190/AMF/1246151, 2025.
Erlingis, J. M., Rodell, M., Peters-Lidard, C. D., Li, B., Kumar, S. V., Famiglietti, J. S., Granger, S. L., Hurley, J. V., Liu, P., and Mocko, D. M.: A High-Resolution Land Data Assimilation System Optimized for the Western United States, JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 57, 692–710, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12910, 2021.
Grande, E., Seybold, E. C., Tatariw, C., Visser, A., Braswell, A., Arora, B., Birgand, F., Haskins, J., and Zimmer, M.: Seasonal and tidal variations in hydrologic inputs drive salt marsh porewater nitrate dynamics, Hydrol. Process., 37, e14951, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14951, 2023.
Grant, R. F. and Roulet, N. T.: Methane efflux from boreal wetlands: Theory and testing of the ecosystem model Ecosys with chamber and tower flux measurements, Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001702, 2002.
Grant, R. F., Mekonnen, Z. A., Riley, W. J., Arora, B., and Torn, M. S.: 2. Microtopography determines how CO2 and CH4 exchange responds to changes in temperature and precipitation at an Arctic polygonal tundra site: mathematical modelling with ecosys, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 122, 3174–3187, 2017.
Harrison, R. B., Footen, P. W., and Strahm, B. D.: Deep soil horizons: contribution and importance to soil carbon pools and in assessing whole-ecosystem response to management and global change, For. Sci., 57, 67–76, 2011.
Hastie, T.: The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction, Springer, New York, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7, 2009.
Hemes, K. S., Chamberlain, S. D., Eichelmann, E., Anthony, T., Valach, A., Kasak, K., Szutu, D., Verfaillie, J., Silver, W. L., and Baldocchi, D. D.: Assessing the carbon and climate benefit of restoring degraded agricultural peat soils to managed wetlands, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 268, 202–214, 2019.
Hill, T., Chocholek, M., and Clement, R.: The case for increasing the statistical power of eddy covariance ecosystem studies: why, where and how?, Glob. Change Biol., 23, 2154–2165, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13547, 2017.
Hochreiter, S.: Long Short-term Memory, Neural Comput. MIT-Press, https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735, 1997.
Huete, A. R.: A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI), Remote Sens. Environ., 25, 295–309, 1988.
Justice, C. O., Townshend, J. R. G., Vermote, E. F., Masuoka, E., Wolfe, R. E., Saleous, N., Roy, D. P., and Morisette, J. T.: An overview of MODIS Land data processing and product status, Remote Sens. Environ., 83, 3–15, 2002.
Kaufman, S., Rosset, S., Perlich, C., and Stitelman, O.: Leakage in data mining: Formulation, detection, and avoidance, ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data, 6, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1145/2382577.2382579, 2012.
Ke, G., Meng, Q., Finley, T., Wang, T., Chen, W., Ma, W., Ye, Q., and Liu, T.-Y.: Lightgbm: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree, Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 30, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3294996.3295074 (last access: 1 September 2025), 2017.
Knox, S. H., Sturtevant, C., Matthes, J. H., Koteen, L., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: Agricultural peatland restoration: effects of land-use change on greenhouse gas (CO2 and CH4) fluxes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Glob. Change Biol., 21, 750–765, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12745, 2015.
Knox, S. H., Dronova, I., Sturtevant, C., Oikawa, P. Y., Matthes, J. H., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: Using digital camera and Landsat imagery with eddy covariance data to model gross primary production in restored wetlands, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 237, 233–245, 2017.
Knox, S. H., Bansal, S., McNicol, G., Schafer, K., Sturtevant, C., Ueyama, M., Valach, A. C., Baldocchi, D., Delwiche, K., Desai, A. R., Euskirchen, E., Liu, J., Lohila, A., Malhotra, A., Melling, L., Riley, W., Runkle, B. R. K., Turner, J., Vargas, R., Zhu, Q., Alto, T., Fluet-Chouinard, E., Goeckede, M., Melton, J. R., Sonnentag, O., Vesala, T., Ward, E., Zhang, Z., Feron, S., Ouyang, Z., Alekseychik, P., Aurela, M., Bohrer, G., Campbell, D. I., Chen, J., Chu, H., Dalmagro, H. J., Goodrich, J. P., Gottschalk, P., Hirano, T., Iwata, H., Jurasinski, G., Kang, M., Koebsch, F., Mammarella, I., Nilsson, M. B., Ono, K., Peichl, M., Peltola, O., Ryu, Y., Sachs, T., Sakabe, A., Sparks, J. P., Tuittila, E., Vourlitis, G. L., Wong, G. X., Windham-Myers, L., Poulter, B., and Jackson, R. B.: Identifying dominant environmental predictors of freshwater wetland methane fluxes across diurnal to seasonal time scales, Glob. Change Biol., 27, 3582–3604, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15661, 2021.
Kumar, A., Bhatia, A., Fagodiya, R. K., Malyan, S. K., and Meena, B. L.: Eddy covariance flux tower: A promising technique for greenhouse gases measurement, Adv. Plants Agric. Res., 7, 337–340, 2017.
Laćan, I. and Resh, V. H.: A case study in integrated management: Sacramento–San Joaquin Rivers and Delta of California, USA, Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol., 16, 215–228, 2016.
Landsat, U.: Landsat 8-9 Operational Land Imager (OLI)-Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS) Collection 2 Level 2 (L2) Data Format Control Book (DFCB), U. S. Geol. Surv. Rest. VA USA, 78 pp., https://www.usgs.gov/media/files/landsat-8-9-olitirs-collection-2-level-2-data-format-control-book (last access: 1 September 2025), 2020.
Lee, H., Calvin, K., Dasgupta, D., Krinner, G., Mukherji, A., Thorne, P., Trisos, C., Romero, J., Aldunce, P., and Barrett, K.: Climate change 2023: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, The Australian National University, https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647, 2023.
Li, C.: The DNDC Model, in: Evaluation of Soil Organic Matter Models, edited by: Powlson, D. S., Smith, P., and Smith, J. U., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 263–267, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61094-3_20, 1996.
Lolu, A. J., Ahluwalia, A. S., Sidhu, M. C., Reshi, Z. A., and Mandotra, S. K.: Carbon Sequestration and Storage by Wetlands: Implications in the Climate Change Scenario, in: Restoration of Wetland Ecosystem: A Trajectory Towards a Sustainable Environment, edited by: Upadhyay, A. K., Singh, R., and Singh, D. P., Springer Singapore, Singapore, 45–58, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7665-8_4, 2020.
López, D., Sepúlveda, M., and Vidal, G.: Phragmites australis and Schoenoplectus californicus in constructed wetlands: Development and nutrient uptake, J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 16, 763–777, 2016.
Lund, J., Hanak, E., Fleenor, W., Bennett, W., and Howitt, R.: Comparing futures for the Sacramento, San Joaquin delta, Univ of California Press, https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520261976.001.0001, 2010.
Mack, S. K., Lane, R. R., Deng, J., Morris, J. T., and Bauer, J. J.: Wetland carbon models: Applications for wetland carbon commercialization, Ecol. Model., 476, 110228, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110228, 2023.
Matthes, J. H., Sturtevant, C., Oikawa, P., Chamberlain, S. D., Szutu, D., Arias-Ortiz, A., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: AmeriFlux BASE US-Myb Mayberry Wetland, Ver. 15-5, AmeriFlux AMP [data set], https://doi.org/10.17190/AMF/1246139, 2025.
Meyer, H. and Pebesma, E.: Machine learning-based global maps of ecological variables and the challenge of assessing them, Nat. Commun., 13, 2208, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29838-9, 2022.
Miller, R. L., Fram, M., Fujii, R., and Wheeler, G.: Subsidence reversal in a re-established wetland in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA, San Franc. Estuary Watershed Sci., 6, https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2008v6iss3art1, 2008.
Mitsch, W. J. and Gosselink, J. G.: Wetlands, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 9781119826934, 2015.
Mitsch, W. J., Bernal, B., Nahlik, A. M., Mander, Ü., Zhang, L., Anderson, C. J., Jørgensen, S. E., and Brix, H.: Wetlands, carbon, and climate change, Landsc. Ecol., 28, 583–597, 2013.
Moomaw, W. R., Chmura, G. L., Davies, G. T., Finlayson, C. M., Middleton, B. A., Natali, S. M., Perry, J. E., Roulet, N., and Sutton-Grier, A. E.: Wetlands In a Changing Climate: Science, Policy and Management, Wetlands, 38, 183–205, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-018-1023-8, 2018.
Nahlik, A. M. and Fennessy, M. S.: Carbon storage in US wetlands, Nat. Commun., 7, 1–9, 2016.
Nelson, J. A., Walther, S., Gans, F., Kraft, B., Weber, U., Novick, K., Buchmann, N., Migliavacca, M., Wohlfahrt, G., Šigut, L., Ibrom, A., Papale, D., Göckede, M., Duveiller, G., Knohl, A., Hörtnagl, L., Scott, R. L., Dušek, J., Zhang, W., Hamdi, Z. M., Reichstein, M., Aranda-Barranco, S., Ardö, J., Op de Beeck, M., Billesbach, D., Bowling, D., Bracho, R., Brümmer, C., Camps-Valls, G., Chen, S., Cleverly, J. R., Desai, A., Dong, G., El-Madany, T. S., Euskirchen, E. S., Feigenwinter, I., Galvagno, M., Gerosa, G. A., Gielen, B., Goded, I., Goslee, S., Gough, C. M., Heinesch, B., Ichii, K., Jackowicz-Korczynski, M. A., Klosterhalfen, A., Knox, S., Kobayashi, H., Kohonen, K.-M., Korkiakoski, M., Mammarella, I., Gharun, M., Marzuoli, R., Matamala, R., Metzger, S., Montagnani, L., Nicolini, G., O'Halloran, T., Ourcival, J.-M., Peichl, M., Pendall, E., Ruiz Reverter, B., Roland, M., Sabbatini, S., Sachs, T., Schmidt, M., Schwalm, C. R., Shekhar, A., Silberstein, R., Silveira, M. L., Spano, D., Tagesson, T., Tramontana, G., Trotta, C., Turco, F., Vesala, T., Vincke, C., Vitale, D., Vivoni, E. R., Wang, Y., Woodgate, W., Yepez, E. A., Zhang, J., Zona, D., and Jung, M.: X-BASE: the first terrestrial carbon and water flux products from an extended data-driven scaling framework, FLUXCOM-X, Biogeosciences, 21, 5079–5115, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5079-2024, 2024.
Novick, K. A., Biederman, J. A., Desai, A. R., Litvak, M. E., Moore, D. J., Scott, R. L., and Torn, M. S.: The AmeriFlux network: A coalition of the willing, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 249, 444–456, 2018.
Oh, M., Lee, J., Kim, J., and Kim, H.: Machine learning-based statistical downscaling of wind resource maps using multi-resolution topographical data, Wind Energy, 25, 1121–1141, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2718, 2022.
Ouyang, Z., Jackson, R. B., McNicol, G., Fluet-Chouinard, E., Runkle, B. R., Papale, D., Knox, S. H., Cooley, S., Delwiche, K. B., and Feron, S.: Paddy rice methane emissions across Monsoon Asia, Remote Sens. Environ., 284, 113335, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.113335, 2023.
Parton, W. J., Hartman, M., Ojima, D., and Schimel, D.: DAYCENT and its land surface submodel: description and testing, Glob. Planet. Change, 19, 35–48, 1998.
Pastorello, G., Trotta, C., Canfora, E., Chu, H., Christianson, D., Cheah, Y.-W., Poindexter, C., Chen, J., Elbashandy, A., and Humphrey, M.: The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data, Sci. Data, 7, 225, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0534-3, 2020.
Peltola, O., Vesala, T., Gao, Y., Räty, O., Alekseychik, P., Aurela, M., Chojnicki, B., Desai, A. R., Dolman, A. J., Euskirchen, E. S., Friborg, T., Göckede, M., Helbig, M., Humphreys, E., Jackson, R. B., Jocher, G., Joos, F., Klatt, J., Knox, S. H., Kowalska, N., Kutzbach, L., Lienert, S., Lohila, A., Mammarella, I., Nadeau, D. F., Nilsson, M. B., Oechel, W. C., Peichl, M., Pypker, T., Quinton, W., Rinne, J., Sachs, T., Samson, M., Schmid, H. P., Sonnentag, O., Wille, C., Zona, D., and Aalto, T.: Monthly gridded data product of northern wetland methane emissions based on upscaling eddy covariance observations, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1263–1289, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1263-2019, 2019.
Perry, G. L. W., Seidl, R., Bellvé, A. M., and Rammer, W.: An Outlook for Deep Learning in Ecosystem Science, Ecosystems, 25, 1700–1718, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-022-00789-y, 2022.
Raissi, M., Perdikaris, P., and Karniadakis, G. E.: Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations, J. Comput. Phys., 378, 686–707, 2019.
Räsänen, A., Manninen, T., Korkiakoski, M., Lohila, A., and Virtanen, T.: Predicting catchment-scale methane fluxes with multi-source remote sensing, Landsc. Ecol., 36, 1177–1195, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-021-01194-x, 2021.
Rey-Sanchez, C., Wharton, S., Vilà-Guerau De Arellano, J., Paw U, K. T., Hemes, K. S., Fuentes, J. D., Osuna, J., Szutu, D., Ribeiro, J. V., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: Evaluation of Atmospheric Boundary Layer Height From Wind Profiling Radar and Slab Models and Its Responses to Seasonality of Land Cover, Subsidence, and Advection, J. Geophys. Res. Atmospheres, 126, e2020JD033775, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033775, 2021.
Saunois, M., Martinez, A., Poulter, B., Zhang, Z., Raymond, P. A., Regnier, P., Canadell, J. G., Jackson, R. B., Patra, P. K., Bousquet, P., Ciais, P., Dlugokencky, E. J., Lan, X., Allen, G. H., Bastviken, D., Beerling, D. J., Belikov, D. A., Blake, D. R., Castaldi, S., Crippa, M., Deemer, B. R., Dennison, F., Etiope, G., Gedney, N., Höglund-Isaksson, L., Holgerson, M. A., Hopcroft, P. O., Hugelius, G., Ito, A., Jain, A. K., Janardanan, R., Johnson, M. S., Kleinen, T., Krummel, P. B., Lauerwald, R., Li, T., Liu, X., McDonald, K. C., Melton, J. R., Mühle, J., Müller, J., Murguia-Flores, F., Niwa, Y., Noce, S., Pan, S., Parker, R. J., Peng, C., Ramonet, M., Riley, W. J., Rocher-Ros, G., Rosentreter, J. A., Sasakawa, M., Segers, A., Smith, S. J., Stanley, E. H., Thanwerdas, J., Tian, H., Tsuruta, A., Tubiello, F. N., Weber, T. S., van der Werf, G. R., Worthy, D. E. J., Xi, Y., Yoshida, Y., Zhang, W., Zheng, B., Zhu, Q., Zhu, Q., and Zhuang, Q.: Global Methane Budget 2000–2020, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1873–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, 2025.
Sharma, S. and Singh, P.: Wetlands conservation: Current challenges and future strategies, John Wiley & Sons, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119692621, 2021.
Stewart, G. A., Sharp, S. J., Taylor, A. K., Williams, M. R., and Palmer, M. A.: High spatial variability in wetland methane fluxes is tied to vegetation patch types, Biogeochemistry, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-024-01188-2, 2024.
Tashman, L. J.: Out-of-sample tests of forecasting accuracy: an analysis and review, Int. J. Forecast., 16, 437–450, 2000.
Tramontana, G., Jung, M., Schwalm, C. R., Ichii, K., Camps-Valls, G., Ráduly, B., Reichstein, M., Arain, M. A., Cescatti, A., Kiely, G., Merbold, L., Serrano-Ortiz, P., Sickert, S., Wolf, S., and Papale, D.: Predicting carbon dioxide and energy fluxes across global FLUXNET sites with regression algorithms, Biogeosciences, 13, 4291–4313, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-4291-2016, 2016.
Uhran, B. R., Windham-Myers, L., Bliss, N. B., Nahlik, A., Sundquist, E. T., and Stagg, C. L.: Harmonizing wetland soil organic carbon datasets to improve spatial representation of 2011 soil carbon stocks in the conterminous United States, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), https://doi.org/10.5066/P9H1PIX3, 2022.
Upadhyay, A. K., Singh, R., and Singh, D. P. (Eds.): Restoration of Wetland Ecosystem: A Trajectory Towards a Sustainable Environment, Springer Singapore, Singapore, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7665-8, 2020.
Valach, A., Shortt, R., Szutu, D., Eichelmann, E., Knox, S., Hemes, K., Verfaillie, J., and Baldocchi, D.: AmeriFlux BASE US-Tw1 Twitchell Wetland West Pond, Ver. 11-5, AmeriFlux AMP [data set], https://doi.org/10.17190/AMF/1246147, 2024.
Vaswani, A.: Attention is all you need, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762, 2017.
Villa, J. A. and Bernal, B.: Carbon sequestration in wetlands, from science to practice: An overview of the biogeochemical process, measurement methods, and policy framework, Ecol. Eng., 114, 115–128, 2018.
Weiler, D. A., Tornquist, C. G., Zschornack, T., Ogle, S. M., Carlos, F. S., and Bayer, C.: Daycent simulation of methane emissions, grain yield, and soil organic carbon in a subtropical paddy rice system, Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo, 42, e0170251, https://doi.org/10.1590/18069657rbcs20170251, 2018.
Whiting, G. J. and Chanton, J. P.: Primary production control of methane emission from wetlands, Nature, 364, 794–795, 1993.
Windham-Myers, L., Bergamaschi, B., Anderson, F., Knox, S., Miller, R., and Fujii, R.: Potential for negative emissions of greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4 and N2O) through coastal peatland re-establishment: Novel insights from high frequency flux data at meter and kilometer scales, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 045005, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaae74, 2018.
Wood, D. A.: Machine learning and regression analysis reveal different patterns of influence on net ecosystem exchange at two conifer woodland sites, Res. Ecol., 4, 24–50, 2022.
Workgroup, C. W. M.: EcoAtlas, Bilingual Publishing Group, https://www.ecoatlas.org (last accessed 1 September 2025), 2019.
Xu, X. and Trugman, A. T.: Trait-Based Modeling of Terrestrial Ecosystems: Advances and Challenges Under Global Change, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 7, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-020-00168-6, 2021.
Xu, Y., Liu, X., Cao, X., Huang, C., Liu, E., Qian, S., Liu, X., Wu, Y., Dong, F., and Qiu, C.-W.: Artificial intelligence: A powerful paradigm for scientific research, The Innovation, 2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100179, 2021.
Yao, S., Chen, C., Chen, Q., Zhang, J., and He, M.: Combining process-based model and machine learning to predict hydrological regimes in floodplain wetlands under climate change, J. Hydrol., 626, 130193, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130193, 2023.
Yin, X., Jiang, C., Xu, S., Yu, X., Yin, X., Wang, J., Maihaiti, M., Wang, C., Zheng, X., and Zhuang, X.: Greenhouse gases emissions of constructed wetlands: mechanisms and affecting factors, Water, 15, 2871, https://doi.org/10.3390/w15162871, 2023.
Yuan, K., Zhu, Q., Li, F., Riley, W. J., Torn, M., Chu, H., McNicol, G., Chen, M., Knox, S., and Delwiche, K.: Causality guided machine learning model on wetland CH4 emissions across global wetlands, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 324, 109115, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2022.109115, 2022.
Yuan, K., Li, F., McNicol, G., Chen, M., Hoyt, A., Knox, S., Riley, W. J., Jackson, R., and Zhu, Q.: Boreal–Arctic wetland methane emissions modulated by warming and vegetation activity, Nat. Clim. Change, 14, 282–288, 2024.
Yvon-Durocher, G., Allen, A. P., Bastviken, D., Conrad, R., Gudasz, C., St-Pierre, A., Thanh-Duc, N., and Del Giorgio, P. A.: Methane fluxes show consistent temperature dependence across microbial to ecosystem scales, Nature, 507, 488–491, 2014.
Zhang, Y., Li, C., Trettin, C. C., Li, H., and Sun, G.: An integrated model of soil, hydrology, and vegetation for carbon dynamics in wetland ecosystems, Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001838, 2002.
Zou, H., Chen, J., Li, X., Abraha, M., Zhao, X., and Tang, J.: Modeling net ecosystem exchange of CO2 with gated recurrent unit neural networks, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 350, 109985, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2024.109985, 2024.
Short summary
Wetlands absorb carbon dioxide (CO2), helping slow climate change, but they also release methane, a potent warming gas. We developed a collection of AI-based models to estimate magnitudes of CO2 and methane exchanged between the land and the atmosphere, for wetlands on a regional scale. This approach helps to inform land-use planning, restoration, and greenhouse gas accounting, while also creating a foundation for future advancements in prediction accuracy.
Wetlands absorb carbon dioxide (CO2), helping slow climate change, but they also release...
