Peak growing season gross uptake of carbon in north america is largest in the midwest usa

Peak growing season gross uptake of carbon in north america is largest in the midwest usa

Play all audios:

Loading...

ABSTRACT Gross primary production (GPP) is a first-order uncertainty in climate predictions. Large-scale CO2 observations can provide information about the carbon cycle, but are not directly


useful for GPP. Recently carbonyl sulfide (COS or OCS) has been proposed as a potential tracer for regional and global GPP. Here we present the first regional assessment of GPP using COS.


We focus on the North American growing season—a global hotspot for COS air-monitoring and GPP uncertainty. Regional variability in simulated vertical COS concentration gradients was driven


by variation in GPP rather than other modelled COS sources and sinks. Consequently we are able to show that growing season GPP in the Midwest USA significantly exceeds that of any other


region of North America. These results are inconsistent with some ecosystem models, but are supportive of new ecosystem models from CMIP6. This approach provides valuable insight into the


accuracy of various ecosystem land models. Access through your institution Buy or subscribe This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution ACCESS OPTIONS Access


through your institution Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription $32.99 / 30 days cancel any time Learn more Subscribe to


this journal Receive 12 print issues and online access $209.00 per year only $17.42 per issue Learn more Buy this article * Purchase on SpringerLink * Instant access to full article PDF Buy


now Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout ADDITIONAL ACCESS OPTIONS: * Log in * Learn about institutional subscriptions * Read our FAQs * Contact customer


support SIMILAR CONTENT BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS AGRICULTURAL FERTILIZATION SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCES AMPLITUDE OF LAND-ATMOSPHERE CO2 EXCHANGE Article Open access 18 February 2025 A DECLINE IN


ATMOSPHERIC CO2 LEVELS UNDER NEGATIVE EMISSIONS MAY ENHANCE CARBON RETENTION IN THE TERRESTRIAL BIOSPHERE Article Open access 19 November 2022 BIOME-SCALE TEMPERATURE SENSITIVITY OF


ECOSYSTEM RESPIRATION REVEALED BY ATMOSPHERIC CO2 OBSERVATIONS Article Open access 15 June 2023 REFERENCES * Ciais, P. et al. in _Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis_ (eds


Stocker, T. F. et al.) 465–570 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013). Google Scholar  * Arneth, A. et al. Terrestrial biogeochemical feedbacks in the climate system. _Nat. Geosci._ 3, 525–532


(2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Guanter, L. et al. Global and time-resolved monitoring of crop photosynthesis with chlorophyll fluorescence. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 111,


E1327–E1333 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Friedlingstein, P. et al. Climate-carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4 MIP model intercomparison. _J. Clim._ 19, 3337–3353


(2006). Article  Google Scholar  * Friedlingstein, P. et al. Uncertainties in CMIP5 climate projections due to carbon cycle feedbacks. _J. Clim._ 27, 511–526 (2014). Article  Google Scholar


  * Huntzinger, D. et al. North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison. _Ecol. Model._ 232, 144–157 (2012). Article  CAS 


Google Scholar  * Hilton, T. W., Davis, K. J. & Keller, K. Evaluating terrestrial CO2 flux diagnoses and uncertainties from a simple land surface model and its residuals.


_Biogeosciences_ 11, 217–235 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Schaefer, K. et al. A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity. _J. Geophys. Res._ 117, G03010 (2012). Article


  Google Scholar  * Jung, M. et al. Global patterns of land-atmosphere fluxes of carbon dioxide, latent heat, and sensible heat derived from eddy covariance, satellite, and meteorological


observations. _J. Geophys. Res._ 116, G00J07 (2011). Article  Google Scholar  * Miles, N. L. et al. Large amplitude spatial and temporal gradients in atmospheric boundary layer CO2 mole


fractions detected with a tower-based network in the US Upper Midwest. _J. Geophys. Res._ 117, G01019 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Schuh, A. E. et al. Evaluating atmospheric CO2


inversions at multiple scales over a highly inventoried agricultural landscape. _Glob. Change Biol._ 19, 1424–1439 (2013). Article  Google Scholar  * Montzka, S. A. et al. On the global


distribution, seasonality, and budget of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide (COS) and some similarities to CO2 . _J. Geophys. Res._ 112, D09302 (2007). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Campbell, J.


E. et al. Photosynthetic control of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide during the growing season. _Science_ 322, 1085–1088 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Suntharalingam, P., Kettle, A.


J., Montzka, S. M. & Jacob, D. J. Global 3-D model analysis of the seasonal cycle of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide: implications for terrestrial vegetation uptake. _Geophys. Res. Lett._


35, L19801 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Stimler, K., Montzka, S. A., Berry, J. A., Rudich, Y. & Yakir, D. Relationships between carbonyl sulfide (COS) and CO2 during leaf gas


exchange. _New Phytol._ 186, 869–878 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Maseyk, K. et al. Sources and sinks of carbonyl sulfide in an agricultural field in the Southern Great Plains.


_Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 111, 9064–9069 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Commane, R. et al. Seasonal fluxes of carbonyl sulfide in a midlatitude forest. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_


112, 14162–14167 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Berry, J. et al. A coupled model of the global cycles of carbonyl sulfide and CO2: a possible new window on the carbon cycle. _J.


Geophys. Res._ 118, 842–852 (2013). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Huete, A. et al. Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS vegetation indices. _Remote Sens.


Environ._ 83, 195–213 (2002). Article  Google Scholar  * Guanter, L. et al. Retrieval and global assessment of terrestrial chlorophyll fluorescence from {GOSAT} space measurements. _Remote


Sens. Environ._ 121, 236–251 (2012). Article  Google Scholar  * Huete, A., Justice, C. & van Leeuwen, W. _MODIS Vegetation Index (MOD 13) Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document, Version 3_


(1999); http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/atbd/atbd_mod13.pdf * Launois, T., Peylin, P., Belviso, S. & Poulter, B. A new model of the global biogeochemical cycle of carbonyl sulfide—Part


2: use of carbonyl sulfide to constrain gross primary productivity in current vegetation models. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 15, 9285–9312 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Stimler, K.,


Berry, J. A., Montzka, S. A. & Yakir, D. Association between carbonyl sulfide uptake and 18Δ during gas exchange in C3 and C4 leaves. _Plant Physiol._ 157, 509–517 (2011). Article  CAS 


Google Scholar  * Hilton, T. W. et al. Large variability in ecosystem models explains uncertainty in a critical parameter for quantifying GPP with carbonyl sulphide. _Tellus B_ 67, 26329


(2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kettle, A. J., Kuhn, U., von Hobe, M., Kesselmeier, J. & Andreae, M. O. Global budget of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide: temporal and spatial


variations of the dominant sources and sinks. _J. Geophys. Res._ 107, ACH 25-1–ACH 25-16 (2002). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Asaf, D. et al. Ecosystem photosynthesis inferred from


measurements of carbonyl sulphide flux. _Nat. Geosci._ 6, 186–190 (2013). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Whelan, M. E. et al. Carbonyl sulfide exchange in soils for better estimates of


ecosystem carbon uptake. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 16, 3711–3726 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Campbell, J. E. et al. Atmospheric carbonyl sulfide sources from anthropogenic activity:


implications for carbon cycle constraints. _Geophys. Res. Lett._ 42, 3004–3010 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zumkehr, A., Hilton, T. W., Whelan, M., Smith, S. & Campbell, J. E.


Gridded anthropogenic emissions inventory and atmospheric transport of carbonyl sulfide in the US. _J. Geophys. Res._ 122, 2169–2178 (2017). CAS  Google Scholar  * Kulkarni, S. et al.


Source sector and region contributions to BC and PM2.5 in Central Asia. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 15, 1683–1705 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Campbell, J. E. et al. Analysis of


anthropogenic CO2 signal in ICARTT using a regional chemical transport model and observed tracers. _Tellus B_ 59, 199–210 (2007). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * van der Werf, G. R. et al.


Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997–2009). _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 10, 11707–11735 (2010). Article  CAS  Google


Scholar  * Sellers, P. J. et al. A revised land surface parameterization (SiB2) for atmospheric GCMS. Part I: model formulation. _J. Clim._ 9, 676–705 (1996). Article  Google Scholar  *


Sellers, P. J. et al. A revised land surface parameterization (SiB2) for atmospheric GCMS. Part II: the generation of global fields of terrestrial biophysical parameters from satellite data.


_J. Clim._ 9, 706–737 (1996). Article  Google Scholar  * Baker, I. T., Denning, A. S. & Stöckli, R. North American gross primary productivity: regional characterization and interannual


variability. _Tellus B_ 62, 533–549 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Baker, I. T. et al. Seasonal drought stress in the Amazon: reconciling models and observations. _J. Geophys. Res._


113, G00B01 (2008). Article  Google Scholar  * Liu, J., Price, D. T. & Chen, J. M. Nitrogen controls on ecosystem carbon sequestration: a model implementation and application to


Saskatchewan, Canada. _Ecol. Model._ 186, 178–195 (2005). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. Statistical data analysis in the computer age. _Science_ 253, 390–395


(1991). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Lokupitiya, E. et al. Incorporation of crop phenology in Simple Biosphere Model (SiBcrop) to improve land-atmosphere carbon exchanges from croplands.


_Biogeosciences_ 6, 969–986 (2009). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Corbin, K. D. et al. Assessing the impact of crops on regional CO2 fluxes and atmospheric concentrations. _Tellus B_ 62,


521–532 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Still, C. J., Berry, J. A., Collatz, G. J. & DeFries, R. S. in _ISLSCP Initiative II Collection_ (eds Hall, F. G. et al.) (Oak Ridge


National Laboratory, 2009); http://daac.ornl.gov from Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center. Google Scholar  * Stimler, K., Berry, J. A. & Yakir, D. Effects of


carbonyl sulfide and carbonic anhydrase on stomatal conductance. _Plant Physiol._ 158, 524–530 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kesselmeier, J., Teusch, N. & Kuhn, U. Controlling


variables for the uptake of atmospheric carbonyl sulfide by soil. _J. Geophys. Res._ 104, 11577–11584 (1999). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Sun, W., Maseyk, K., Lett, C. & Seibt, U. A


soil diffusion-reaction model for surface COS flux: COSSM v1. _Geosci. Model Dev._ 8, 3055–3070 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Ogée, J. et al. A new mechanistic framework to predict


OCS fluxes from soils. _Biogeosciences_ 13, 2221–2240 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Ramankutty, N., Evan, A. T., Monfreda, C. & Foley, J. A. Farming the planet: 1. Geographic


distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000. _Global Biogeochem. Cycles_ 22, GB1003 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Watts, S. F. The mass budgets of carbonyl sulfide,


dimethyl sulfide, carbon disulfide and hydrogen sulfide. _Atmos. Environ._ 34, 761–779 (2000). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Blake, N. J. et al. Carbonyl sulfide and carbon disulfide:


large-scale distributions over the western Pacific and emissions from Asia during TRACE-P. _J. Geophys. Res._ 109, D15S05 (2004). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * D’Allura, A. et al.


Meteorological and air quality forecasting using the WRF–STEM model during the 2008 ARCTAS field campaign. _Atmos. Environ._ 45, 6901–6910 (2011). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Canty, A.


& Ripley, B. D. boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions. R package version 1.3-18 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2016). * Davison, A. C. & Hinkley, D. V. _Bootstrap Methods


and their Applications_ (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997). Book  Google Scholar  * R Core Team _R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing_ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing,


2015); https://www.R-project.org * Hilborn, R. & Mangel, M. _The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data_ (Princeton Univ. Press, 1997). Google Scholar  * Jones, E. et al.


_SciPy: Open Source Scientific Tools for Python_ (SciPy Developers, 2001); http://www.scipy.org Google Scholar  * Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. _Comput. Sci. Eng._ 9,


90–95 (2007). Article  Google Scholar  * McKinney, W. in _Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference_ (eds van der Walt, S. & Millman, J.) 51–56 (2010). Google Scholar  Download


references ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Terrestrial Ecosystem Sciences (DE-SC0011999). This research used resources


of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a DOE Office of Science User Facility supported by the Office of Science of the US Department of Energy under Contract No.


DE-AC02-05CH11231. We acknowledge the assistance of C. Siso and others at NOAA responsible for aircraft sampling program management, sampling, analysis, and logistics. NOAA contributions to


this work were supported in part by the NOAA Climate Program Office’s AC4 Program. AUTHOR INFORMATION Author notes * Sarika Kulkarni Present address: Present address: California Air Resource


Board, Sacramento, California 95812, USA., AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * Sierra Nevada Research Institute, University of California, Merced, Merced, California 95343, USA Timothy W. Hilton, 


Mary E. Whelan, Andrew Zumkehr & J. Elliott Campbell * Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution, Stanford, California 94305, USA Mary E. Whelan & Joseph A. Berry * Center


for Global and Regional Environmental Research, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA Sarika Kulkarni * Atmospheric Science Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins,


Colorado 80523, USA Ian T. Baker * Global Monitoring Division, NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA Stephen A. Montzka, Colm Sweeney & Benjamin R. Miller


Authors * Timothy W. Hilton View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Mary E. Whelan View author publications You can also search for this author


inPubMed Google Scholar * Andrew Zumkehr View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Sarika Kulkarni View author publications You can also search


for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Joseph A. Berry View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Ian T. Baker View author publications You can


also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Stephen A. Montzka View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Colm Sweeney View author


publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Benjamin R. Miller View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * J.


Elliott Campbell View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS T.W.H., J.E.C. and J.A.B. designed research; T.W.H. performed research;


M.E.W., S.A.M., C.S. and B.R.M. provided observed data; I.T.B. provided model results; S.K. provided transport model code and meteorology drivers; A.Z. provided anthropogenic COS flux


inventories; T.W.H. and J.E.C. wrote the paper. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Timothy W. Hilton. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing financial


interests. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Supplementary Information (PDF 3927 kb) RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reprints and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE


Hilton, T., Whelan, M., Zumkehr, A. _et al._ Peak growing season gross uptake of carbon in North America is largest in the Midwest USA. _Nature Clim Change_ 7, 450–454 (2017).


https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3272 Download citation * Received: 19 July 2016 * Accepted: 17 March 2017 * Published: 01 May 2017 * Issue Date: June 2017 * DOI:


https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3272 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not


currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative