TY - JOUR
T1 - Comprehensive comparison of gap-filling techniques for eddy covariance net carbon fluxes
AU - Moffat, Antje M.
AU - Papale, Dario
AU - Reichstein, Markus
AU - Hollinger, David Y.
AU - Richardson, Andrew D.
AU - Barr, Alan G.
AU - Beckstein, Clemens
AU - Braswell, Bobby H.
AU - Churkina, Galina
AU - Desai, Ankur R.
AU - Falge, Eva
AU - Gove, Jeffrey H.
AU - Heimann, Martin
AU - Hui, Dafeng
AU - Jarvis, Andrew J.
AU - Kattge, Jens
AU - Noormets, Asko
AU - Stauch, Vanessa J.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the Carboeurope IP research program funded by the European Commission, and the Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry for providing funding for the Gap Filling Comparison Workshop. Dario Papale was also supported by the Carboeurope IP project. We thank David Schimel, Bill Sacks and Stephen Hagen for their role in this implementation of the Bayesian neural network regression; and David MacKay and Christopher Bishop for developing the underlying algorithm. Asko Noormets was supported by the University of Toledo and the Southern Global Change Program of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. David Y. Hollinger and Andrew D. Richardson gratefully acknowledge support from the Office of Science (BER), U.S. Department of Energy, Interagency Agreement No. DE-AI02-00ER63028. Site PIs Marc Aubinet (Vielsalm), Werner Kutsch (Hainich), André Granier (Hesse), Serge Rambal (Puechabon), Riccardo Valentini (Roccarespampani) and Timo Vesala (Hyytiälä) are thanked for making their data available. We also thank the editor Brian Amiro and two anonymous reviewers for their comments and constructive criticism, which have greatly helped to improve this paper.
PY - 2007/12/10
Y1 - 2007/12/10
N2 - We review 15 techniques for estimating missing values of net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) in eddy covariance time series and evaluate their performance for different artificial gap scenarios based on a set of 10 benchmark datasets from six forested sites in Europe. The goal of gap filling is the reproduction of the NEE time series and hence this present work focuses on estimating missing NEE values, not on editing or the removal of suspect values in these time series due to systematic errors in the measurements (e.g., nighttime flux, advection). The gap filling was examined by generating 50 secondary datasets with artificial gaps (ranging in length from single half-hours to 12 consecutive days) for each benchmark dataset and evaluating the performance with a variety of statistical metrics. The performance of the gap filling varied among sites and depended on the level of aggregation (native half-hourly time step versus daily), long gaps were more difficult to fill than short gaps, and differences among the techniques were more pronounced during the day than at night. The non-linear regression techniques (NLRs), the look-up table (LUT), marginal distribution sampling (MDS), and the semi-parametric model (SPM) generally showed good overall performance. The artificial neural network based techniques (ANNs) were generally, if only slightly, superior to the other techniques. The simple interpolation technique of mean diurnal variation (MDV) showed a moderate but consistent performance. Several sophisticated techniques, the dual unscented Kalman filter (UKF), the multiple imputation method (MIM), the terrestrial biosphere model (BETHY), but also one of the ANNs and one of the NLRs showed high biases which resulted in a low reliability of the annual sums, indicating that additional development might be needed. An uncertainty analysis comparing the estimated random error in the 10 benchmark datasets with the artificial gap residuals suggested that the techniques are already at or very close to the noise limit of the measurements. Based on the techniques and site data examined here, the effect of gap filling on the annual sums of NEE is modest, with most techniques falling within a range of ±25 g C m-2 year-1.
AB - We review 15 techniques for estimating missing values of net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) in eddy covariance time series and evaluate their performance for different artificial gap scenarios based on a set of 10 benchmark datasets from six forested sites in Europe. The goal of gap filling is the reproduction of the NEE time series and hence this present work focuses on estimating missing NEE values, not on editing or the removal of suspect values in these time series due to systematic errors in the measurements (e.g., nighttime flux, advection). The gap filling was examined by generating 50 secondary datasets with artificial gaps (ranging in length from single half-hours to 12 consecutive days) for each benchmark dataset and evaluating the performance with a variety of statistical metrics. The performance of the gap filling varied among sites and depended on the level of aggregation (native half-hourly time step versus daily), long gaps were more difficult to fill than short gaps, and differences among the techniques were more pronounced during the day than at night. The non-linear regression techniques (NLRs), the look-up table (LUT), marginal distribution sampling (MDS), and the semi-parametric model (SPM) generally showed good overall performance. The artificial neural network based techniques (ANNs) were generally, if only slightly, superior to the other techniques. The simple interpolation technique of mean diurnal variation (MDV) showed a moderate but consistent performance. Several sophisticated techniques, the dual unscented Kalman filter (UKF), the multiple imputation method (MIM), the terrestrial biosphere model (BETHY), but also one of the ANNs and one of the NLRs showed high biases which resulted in a low reliability of the annual sums, indicating that additional development might be needed. An uncertainty analysis comparing the estimated random error in the 10 benchmark datasets with the artificial gap residuals suggested that the techniques are already at or very close to the noise limit of the measurements. Based on the techniques and site data examined here, the effect of gap filling on the annual sums of NEE is modest, with most techniques falling within a range of ±25 g C m-2 year-1.
KW - Carbon flux
KW - Eddy covariance
KW - FLUXNET
KW - Gap-filling comparison
KW - Net ecosystem exchange (NEE)
KW - Review of gap-filling techniques
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34948852706&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34948852706&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.agrformet.2007.08.011
DO - 10.1016/j.agrformet.2007.08.011
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:34948852706
SN - 0168-1923
VL - 147
SP - 209
EP - 232
JO - Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
JF - Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
IS - 3-4
ER -