Understanding the dependencies of the terrestrial carbon and water cycle with meteorological conditions is a prerequisite to anticipate their behaviour under climate change conditions. However, terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere interact via a multitude of variables across temporal and spatial scales. Additionally these interactions might differ among vegetation types or climatic regions.
Today, novel algorithms aim to disentangle the causal structure behind such interactions from empirical data. The estimated causal structures can be interpreted as networks, where nodes represent relevant meteorological variables or land-surface fluxes and the links represent the dependencies among them (possibly including time lags and link strength). Here we derived causal networks for different seasons at 119 eddy covariance flux tower observations in the FLUXNET network. We show that the networks of biosphere–atmosphere interactions are strongly shaped by meteorological conditions. For example, we find that temperate and high-latitude ecosystems during peak productivity exhibit biosphere–atmosphere interaction networks very similar to tropical forests. In times of anomalous conditions like droughts though, both ecosystems behave more like typical Mediterranean ecosystems during their dry season. Our results demonstrate that ecosystems from different climate zones or vegetation types have similar biosphere–atmosphere interactions if their meteorological conditions are similar. We anticipate our analysis to foster the use of network approaches, as they allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the state of ecosystem functioning. Long-term or even irreversible changes in network structure are rare and thus can be indicators of fundamental functional ecosystem shifts.
Introduction
Terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere constantly exchange energy, matter, and momentum . These interactions result in biosphere–atmosphere fluxes (in particular carbon, water, and energy fluxes) that are shaped by a variety of climatic conditions and states of the terrestrial biosphere . Understanding how biosphere–atmosphere fluxes interact and how they causally depend on the short-term meteorological and long-term climate conditions is crucial for building predictive terrestrial-biosphere models . However, the exact causal structure of dependencies between surface and atmosphere variables is still subject to unknowns . For example, we still do not understand well under which conditions certain climate extremes turn ecosystems into carbon sources or sinks . One reason for our incomplete understanding is that the causal dependencies underlying biosphere–atmosphere interactions might vary among ecosystems depending on vegetation structure and its long-term adaptation to climatic conditions.
Conducting a comparative study across ecosystems, focusing on their interactions with the atmosphere, has two requirements: firstly, we need standardised data encoding biosphere fluxes and meteorological conditions. Secondly, an analytical tool is needed that extracts an interaction structure from these data empirically. The latter requires handling of multivariate processes and estimating dependencies beyond correlations. The first requirement is best met by the FLUXNET database , a collection of global long-term observations of biosphere–atmosphere fluxes measured via the eddy covariance method . The spatial distribution of FLUXNET sites is biased to European and North American sites, yet it still covers most climate zones and vegetation types ranging from boreal steppe to tropical rainforests surprisingly well . Further, the data are processed homogeneously across sites. The second requirement is addressed by causal inference. Various methods exist today seefor a recent overview, some of which have been applied already in the biogeosciences . One of that group is PCMCI , a causal graph discovery algorithm based on a combination of the PC algorithm (named after its inventors, Peter and Clark; ) and the test of momentary conditional independence (MCI) . By applying such tests, it becomes possible to account for common drivers and mediators which can cause two variables to correlate even though no direct causal link exists between them. Then MCI partial correlations estimated by PCMCI yield a better interpretation of the strength of a causal mechanism than the common Pearson correlation.
tested PCMCI regarding its suitability for interpreting eddy covariance data. The method proved to be consistent despite the data's inherent noisy character and was capable of extracting well-interpretable interaction structures. A causal interpretation of specific links, though, has to take into account regarding potentially unmet assumptions.
In this study, we investigate multivariate time series from FLUXNET tower data to understand how networks of biosphere–atmosphere interactions vary across vegetation types and climate zones.
The rationale is as follows: if biosphere–atmosphere interactions varied significantly across climate gradients or between vegetation types, this could indicate, for example, that ecosystem responses to climatic extremes could differ significantly and would require terrestrial-biosphere models to account for them differently. If, however, the opposite applies and ecosystems of the Earth exhibit similar biosphere–atmosphere interaction types, then common principles can be identified that can serve as empirical reference for global vegetation models.
We hypothesise first that the accessible states of biosphere–atmosphere interactions are limited and can be characterised by few functional states despite the complexity and differences among ecosystems. Second, attributing to an ecosystem's adaptation, we further hypothesise that a specific ecosystem can only access a limited fraction of the functional states.
The study is designed as follows:
firstly, we perform causal discovery by PCMCI at each eddy covariance site and season. Secondly, we solely investigate the resulting interaction networks and visualise them in a low-dimensional space. We then interpret the low-dimensional space of biosphere–atmosphere interactions and investigate seasonal cycles, characteristic states, and the role of vegetation types and finally discuss the potential role of adaptation to the underlying climate space.
Data and methodsEddy covariance observations
We used eddy covariance data from the FLUXNET database aggregated to daily time resolution. To maximise the available ecosystems and time series length, we took the union of the LaThuile fair-use and FLUXNET2015 Tier 1 datasets with at least 5 years of measurement. If a site year was available in both datasets, we selected the one from FLUXNET2015. A detailed list of used sites and years is given in Table . The final dataset contains 119 sites from the major plant functional types and covers the major Köppen–Geiger climate classes, i.e. tropical to polar climate zones. The majority of sites belong to evergreen needleleaf forests, grasslands, and deciduous broadleaf forests. The dominant climate classes are continental, temperate, and dry climates.
The dataset's variables, including meteorological and eddy covariance measurements, were quality-checked, filtered, gap-filled, and partitioned with standard tools and provided with per-variable quality flags.
We extracted the following variables, comparable between the two datasets, and their corresponding quality controls (if available): short-wave downward radiation (or global radiation, Rg), air temperature (T), net ecosystem exchange (NEE) (inverted so that positive values signify carbon uptake into the biosphere), vapour pressure deficit (VPD), sensible heat (H), latent heat flux (LE), gross primary productivity (GPP), precipitation (P), and soil water content (SWC, measured at the shallowest sensor).
Within the FLUXNET2015 dataset these variables are named as “SW_IN_F_MDS”, “TA_F_MDS”, “NEE_VUT_USTAR50”, “VPD_F_MDS”, “H_F_MDS”, “LE_F_MDS”, “GPP_NT_VUT_USTAR50”, “P”, and “SWC_F_MDS_1”, respectively. Correspondingly for the LaThuile dataset they are “Rg_f”, “Tair_f”, “NEE_f”, “VPD_f”, “LE_f”, “H_f”, “GPP_f”, “precip”, and “SWC1_f”, respectively.
GPP is calculated via the commonly used nighttime flux partitioning . Here GPP is the difference between ecosystem respiration and NEE. The latter is estimated via a model which is parameterised using nighttime values of NEE.
PCMCI
To analyse biosphere–atmosphere interactions, we estimated network structures using the causal-network discovery algorithm PCMCI.
PCMCI is tailored to estimate time-lagged dependencies from potentially high-dimensional and autocorrelated multivariate time series. Dependencies can be interpreted causally under certain assumptions. The algorithm is explained from a biogeoscientific viewpoint in . A comprehensive description from theoretical assumptions to numerical experiments is given in .
As a brief summary, PCMCI efficiently conducts conditional independence tests among
variables to reconstruct a dependency network.
While PCMCI can also be combined with non-linear tests, here we estimate conditional independence using partial correlation (ParCorr), implying that we only consider linear dependencies. Partial correlation between two variables X and Y given a variable set Z is defined as the correlation between the residuals of X and Y after regressing out the (potentially multivariate) conditions Z. The conditions Z can consist of lagged third variables or time lags of X and Y.
PCMCI has two phases. In the first phase, the “condition selection”, a superset of lagged parents (up to some maximum time lag τmax) of each variable Xtj is estimated based on a fast variant of the PC algorithm . A parent of Xtj is any lagged variable Xt-τi that is directly influencing Xtj. This can be the own past, i=j, τ>0, or other variables, i≠j, τ>0. A pseudo-code of this procedure is given in the Supplement of .
In the second phase, “momentary conditional independence” (MCI) is estimated among all pairs of contemporaneous and lagged variables (Xt-τi, Xtj) for τ≥0. The MCI test removes the influence of the lagged drivers (obtained in the first phase) using ParCorr and yields link strengths and p values (based on a two-sided t test). The link strength is here given by the MCI partial correlation. In short, the MCI value gives an estimate of dependence between two time series, one potentially lagged, with the influence of other lagged drivers including autocorrelation removed, yielding a better interpretation of the strength of a causal mechanism than the common Pearson correlation. For a more detailed discussion of the interpretation, see . As a particular partial correlation, the MCI value is independent of the variables' mean value and is normalised in [-1, 1] and can, hence, be compared between variable pairs with different units of measurement. Lagged links are directed forward in time. Contemporaneous dependencies are left undirected, as no time information reveals the direction of influence unless they are defined as unidirectional by the user (PCMCI parameter selected_links; see Table ). A causal interpretation of links rests on the standard assumptions of causal discovery.
Here we assume time order, the causal Markov condition, faithfulness, causal sufficiency, causal stationarity, and no contemporaneous causal effects. The use of ParCorr additionally requires stationarity in the mean and variance and linear dependencies .
In particular, a statistical independence (here at a 0.1 two-sided significance level) between a pair of variables conditional on the other lagged variables is interpreted as the absence of a causal link (faithfulness condition). On the other hand, a causal interpretation of the estimated links is here to be understood only with respect to the variables included in the analysis.
The dependence structure among variables can finally be visualised by weighted networks with the nodes representing the variables and the links representing significant dependencies with its strengths given by the MCI partial correlation.
Network estimation
Dependencies are estimated using PCMCI among the variables Rg, T, NEE, VPD, H, and LE using time lags ranging from 0 to 5. As was already discussed by , eddy covariance data and the choice of our variable set do not fully fulfil all assumptions of PCMCI. Causal sufficiency and no contemporaneous links are obviously not fulfilled, which can lead to spurious links. Yet, in the present context we aim to compare networks, and a causal interpretation of each link is not the focus. We further can not rule out non-linear dependencies. In the case that they have a strong linear part, we nevertheless can detect them.
Based on findings in , we subtracted a smoothed seasonal mean from each variable to remove the common driver influence of the seasonal cycle that would yield spurious dependencies. The seasonal mean was smoothed by setting the high-frequency components (>20 d-1) of its Fourier transform to 0. This decreases the detection of false links, while it leaves the detection of true links largely unaffected.
We estimated networks in sliding windows of 3 months, taking the centre month as the time index of each network. The sliding windows help to capture the temporal evolution of biosphere–atmosphere interactions and provide enough data points for the network estimation via PCMCI. Additionally, we improve stationarity of the data further and address the requirement of causal stationarity; i.e. a causal link persists throughout the time period of network estimation. Further we set Rg as a potential driver of the system (by excluding its parents from the PCMCI parameter selected_links; see Table ). We acknowledge the possibility of Rg being influenced by other variables, e.g. via transpiration and subsequent cloud formation. Yet, on the ecosystem scale we work with, we presume this effect to be rather small and likely dominated by lateral transport. Besides these possibilities, setting Rg as a driver can account for remaining non-stationarities . The analysis was performed also without this setting, i.e. allowing influences of other variables on Rg. The conclusions we draw are not affected (cf. Fig. ).
Missing data were flagged as such and are ignored by PCMCI.
To avoid effects on the network structure from gap-filling, we used the following quality flag thresholds. A daily data point is not used if its quality flag is below 0.6 (i.e. more than 60 % of measured and good-quality gap-filled data). In the case that more than 25 % of data points of the 3-month window are flagged as bad quality, the time window is removed from the analysis.
To analyse the factors influencing network structure, we consider the mean values over the respective time period of the variables included in the network calculation and additionally those of GPP, P, and SWC. GPP, P, and SWC were not included in the network calculation because certain characteristics can impinge on network estimation. GPP is derived using NEE and T. Any of the links GPP–T and GPP–NEE thus could be due to its processing rather than an actual dependence. P, on the other hand, typically yields non-intuitive results due to its binary character (precipitation of a certain amount – zero precipitation), while its effects occur more smoothly (e.g. increase in transpiration or respiration), and its strong deviation is from a normal distribution. Further, it can happen that over the time period of network estimation no precipitation occurs, rendering such periods not analysable. The issue with SWC is its lower availability, and for those sites that have such measurements it might be applied at a differing depth. The depth that is mostly present is at shallow depths of 5 or 10 cm. The upper soil layer, however, dries out quickly and can explain only little of the latent heat flux.
Dimensionality reduction
For the dimensionality reduction, we tested principal component analysis PCA; , t-distributed stochastic neighbour embedding t-SNE; , and uniform manifold approximation and projection UMAP; .
PCA is the standard method for dimensionality reduction; it is commonly used, linear, fast, and easily interpretable regarding the meaning of its axes (the principal components). A PCA embedding typically fails to reveal complex clusterings because it maintains large-scale gradients but often produces embeddings in which far away points appear very close in the embedding. In contrast t-SNE aims to preserve local neighbourhoods. Therefore it calculates first similarity scores for each point pair using Euclidean distances and Gaussian distributions. Subsequently it randomly projects the data onto the lower-dimensional space and attempts to rearrange points in a way that the previously determined similarities are obtained. To assess the similarities in the low-dimensional space, however, it uses a Student t distribution. This helps to separate points which are also originally separated. This procedure makes t-SNE very good at visualising clusters in the data and non-linear relationships. Drawbacks are the difficult interpretability of the embedding axes due to the non-linear nature and its fairly long computation time for large datasets. Further, distances between far-separated points and those belonging to different clusters in the embedding space are not (necessarily) comparable to the original distances. This is as t-SNE does not preserve both the global and local structure at the same time, which is attempted by UMAP. UMAP was developed as an improvement of t-SNE regarding structure preservation and results also in a shorter run time especially for higher dimensions. A comparison of t-SNE and UMAP is given in Appendix C in . According to , the global structure preservation of UMAP is not an inherent characteristic of the method itself but rather stems from the chosen initialisation.
As we are dealing with an unsupervised method, there is no obvious measure to assess the quality of an embedding, as each method optimises a different error function. A measure commonly used for the comparison and characterisation of dimensionality methods is the agreement between K-ary neighbourhoods (the K nearest points to an observation) in the high-dimensional and low-dimensional space. The measure RNX(K) gives a measure of the improvement of the embedding of K-ary neighbourhoods over random embeddings. For an embedding with random coordinates we obtain RNX(K)≈0, and if the K-ary neighbourhoods are perfectly preserved we obtain RNX(K)=1. As this measure depends on the neighbourhood size K, we can draw a curve over K that characterises if the method is better at maintaining global or local neighbourhoods. The area under the RNX(K) curve gives an idea of the overall quality of the embedding. An intercomparison of the three dimensionality reduction methods using this measure shows t-SNE to perform best (see Figs. , , and ).
Distance correlation
Distance correlation is a non-linear measure to quantify the dependence between two vectors. It has been used successfully to assess the influence of variables on the low-dimensional embedding . details its empirical definition for a sample (X,Y)={(Xk,Yk):k=1,…,n} with X∈Rp and Y∈Rq as follows:
Rn2(X,Y)=Vn2(X,Y)Vn2(X,X)Vn2(Y,Y),Vn2(X,X)Vn2(Y,Y)>0,0,Vn2(X,X)Vn2(Y,Y)=0,
where Vn2(X,Y) is the empirical distance covariance with
Vn2(X,Y)=1n2∑k,l=1nAklBkl.Akl and Bkl are distance matrices defined by
Akl=akl-a‾k-a‾l+a‾,a‾=1n2∑k,l=1nakl,a‾k=1n∑k=1nakl,a‾l=1n∑l=1nakl,akl=|Xk-Xl|p,
with |⋅|p resembling the Euclidean norm in Rp.
Distance correlation can be used to quantify the dependence between two sets of observations of differing dimensionality. In our case these two vectors are firstly a link strength or an underlying quantity of the networks (Fig. 1d) and secondly the networks' position in the low-dimensional embedding (Fig. 2d). The resulting dependence value is used to rank the quantities in their ability to describe the structure of the low-dimensional embedding.
Clustering and median network trajectories
On the reduced space we applied a clustering method named “ordering points to identify the clustering structure” OPTICS; . OPTICS finds clusters by identifying regions of high density that contain a certain number of data points (minsamples). The cluster borders are defined by a certain drop in reachability of further data points (maxeps and xi). This allows points that lie outside the reachability of neighbouring clusters to remain unclustered. The following settings were used for clustering: min_samples = 80, max_eps = 8, and xi= 0.5.
We calculated mean networks for each cluster by calculating the mean MCI value for each contemporaneous link among all networks contained in the cluster and only took those links that had an absolute value above 0.2.
Visualising ecosystem trajectories
As we calculated networks for each month for each measurement year for each FLUXNET site (if data requirements are fulfilled; see Sect. ), annual trajectories can be visualised in the low-dimensional embedding by connecting the dots representing the monthly networks of a specific year.
Further, for each ecosystem, we calculated a monthly median trajectory within the t-SNE space which is composed of its monthly median networks. To this end, we calculated non-intersecting convex hulls which consisted of at least three data points (networks within the t-SNE space belonging to the same ecosystem, representing the same month, in at least 3 years). The monthly median network is the average of the networks lying on (greater than or equal to three networks) or in the inner hull (less than networks).
Schematic representation of the workflow. (a) Eddy covariance data from the FLUXNET database are selected (119 sites). (b) For each site we used the time series of global radiation Rg, air temperature T, vapour pressure deficit VPD, net ecosystem exchange NEE, sensible heat H, latent heat LE, gross primary productivity GPP, precipitation P, and soil water content SWC. Networks are estimated in 3-month moving windows using Rg, T, NEE, VPD, LE, and H. (c) An example interaction network for FI-Hyy (Hyytiälä) in May 2002. Contemporaneous links are given by straight (undirected) edges; lagged links are given by curved arrows with a number indicating the time lag. The strongest and most persistent links are contemporaneous. Thus we limit our analysis to those links.
(d) Each 3-month network can be interpreted as an observation in a 15-dimensional space (each contemporaneous link is one dimension). (e) Dimensionality reduction projects all interaction networks into a two-dimensional space preserving its local-neighbourhood structure. Here any subsequent analysis and interpretation will be realised.
Workflow
Our restrictions on the data length and quality resulted in a selection of 119 FLUXNET sites (Fig. a). Applying the above-described procedure we obtained 10 038 networks for the different months and sites. An example network estimated by PCMCI is shown in Fig. c.
The strongest and most consistent links are contemporaneous, indicating that interactions happen on timescales shorter than the time resolution. While lagged common drivers are excluded, contemporaneous links can still be spurious due to contemporaneous confounding (see Sect. ). Nevertheless, we focus our analysis on these 15 links, as they contain most information. This is done by performing the dimensionality reduction on contemporaneous links and neglecting the lagged ones. The rationale of employing a dimensionality reduction is the following.
Each of the estimated networks constitutes one observation in a high-dimensional space with a network's links spanning its axes (Fig. d). Projecting this high-dimensional space onto two dimensions (Fig. e) allows first of all for visualisation. In the case that the data consist of a structure that can be “identified” by the dimensionality reduction method, the visualisation reveals the dominant features of transitions between different states of biosphere–atmosphere interactions. The dominant features are the links that appear with strong gradients in the low-dimensional embedding. To quantify and later rank the gradients exhibited by each link, we use the measure distance correlation (see Sect. ). Therefore, we calculate the distance correlation of the link strengths (Fig. 1d) with their position on the low-dimensional embedding axes (Fig. 2d). We also examine the distance correlation of secondary quantities with the axes. The secondary quantities are firstly mean values of variables calculated for each 3-month period of network estimation as well as secondly static values like climate class, vegetation type, or location. The secondary quantities are used to find covariates of the low-dimensional embedding that can help to explain its structure. In a next step, we cluster the low-dimensional embedding to further understand to which network structures the gradients of link strength lead (see Sect. ) and calculate the cluster's average networks (a simple mean). Up to this point (Sect. and ), we have analysed the manifold of biosphere–atmosphere interactions and can address the first part of our hypothesis.
As each point of the low-dimensional embedding represents the biosphere–atmosphere interactions of a specific ecosystem at a specific time, we can investigate the behaviour of specific ecosystems (see Sect. ). Therefore we look at the monthly median and annual trajectories of certain ecosystems (Sect. and ). This leads to the answer of the second part of our hypothesis.
Results and discussionsTwo-dimensional embedding of biosphere–atmosphere networks
To find the most suitable dimensionality reduction method, we evaluated three different methods (PCA, t-SNE, and UMAP) with respect to their ability to project the high-dimensional network space onto two dimensions. To compare the low-dimensional embedding spaces, we used the RNX(K) measure (see Sect. ) which quantifies how well neighbourhoods are preserved when projecting the high-dimensional space onto fewer dimensions. We found that t-SNE achieved the best projection, by best preserving both local and distant neighbourhoods (cf. Sect. and Figs. and ). This is unexpected, as UMAP is said to intentionally preserve the global structure. Yet, as can be seen in Fig. a, the networks almost form a continuum. Thus, by maintaining the local-neighbourhood structure, also the global structure is preserved within t-SNE.
The two-dimensional embedding by t-SNE of biosphere–atmosphere interactions is ordered primarily by dependencies including carbon flux (NEE) and energy distributions (LE and H).
This can be seen in Fig. , which shows the Fig. 2d embedding colour-coded by the strength of individual links, i.e. MCI partial-correlation values. The colouring reveals that the link strengths are ordered along gradients; i.e. they exhibit some dependence with the t-SNE axes. Using distance correlation to rank those gradients (see Sect. ), we find the links NEE–LE (R=0.75), Rg–LE (R=0.73), and T–H (R=0.69) to have the strongest gradients. The connection between carbon and water fluxes as well as the role of energy input to sustain water fluxes (if available in the soil) are well-known and investigated dependencies .
Two-dimensional embedding of 3-monthly biosphere–atmosphere networks realised via t-SNE. Shown is the distribution of link strengths among the networks. The strength is estimated via MCI partial-correlation values. Panels are sorted by the distance correlation of the link's MCI value with the axes (value in the upper-right corner). As Rg is set as a potential driver (PCMCI parameter selected_links; see Table ), connections including Rg are directed →. This setting does not affect the results (see Fig. ).
To search for covariates that help to explain – and if thought further, help to predict the network structures – we colour-coded the embedding by the networks' underlying mean conditions, i.e. the average over the respective time window, of the exchange rates (GPP, NEE, LE, and H) as well as meteorological conditions (Rg, T, VPD, and P). This is shown in Fig. . Clearly, the mean exchange rates and meteorological conditions – although not considered in the estimation of the networks – are related to the observed biosphere–atmosphere interactions. On the contrary, corresponding vegetation types and Köppen-Geiger classes are not as much related as displayed in Fig. in the Appendix . The results show that a high-dimensional space encompassing more than 10 000 ecosystem networks representing the states of biosphere–atmosphere interactions from ecosystems of various geographic origins can be reduced to a compact two-dimensional manifold characterised by four edges and gradients of mean biosphere and atmosphere conditions. While gradients in MCI partial-correlation strength are expected, as they were used as features in the dimensionality reduction, gradients in mean climatic and biospheric conditions were not. This information thus must be entailed in the networks' structure. To better grasp the distribution of network structures, we further analyse the emerging clusters.
Two-dimensional embedding coloured by underlying mean exchange rates and meteorological conditions. The mean values are calculated over the respective time periods used for the network estimation. Each network is estimated on a 3-month window of daily time series data. Values are cut off at the highest and lowest percentile. Distance correlation of the shown quantity with the axes is given in the upper-right corner of each panel.
Structure of the two-dimensional embedding. (a)t-SNE space clustered by the OPTICS approach . Colours represent different clusters; black dots are not attributed to a cluster. Indicated are the four archetypes of network connectivity and the networks' underlying meteorological conditions.
(b) Convex hulls of clusters and their average network, i.e. average over all networks belonging to one cluster. Average networks are thresholded at a minimum link strength of 0.2. A finer clustering can be found in Fig. in the Appendix.
Clusters of characteristic ecosystem–atmosphere networks
As we apply a significance threshold to each link of the estimated network structures (see Sect. ), the networks typically lack weak links. This leads to a certain degree of clustering among the networks, which we identified using the OPTICS approach see Sect. ; (Fig. a). Cluster boundaries are shown by the convex hulls in Fig. b, where we also visualise the mean networks of each cluster. This visualisation reveals that the mean networks of the clusters situated at the embedding's edges can be regarded as archetypes of network structures, i.e. extremal, characteristic states (similar to the concept of endmember states). The four states can be described as follows:
Type 1 is a sparsely connected network. Links, if present, are very weak and predominantly exist among atmospheric variables. Mean atmospheric conditions are characterised by low energy input (low Rg and T). Carbon and water fluxes are consequently close to 0, and daily averages of sensible heat can even reach negative values. Such conditions reflect high-latitude ecosystem winter states experienced by ecosystems like the evergreen needleleaf forest (ENF) of Finland, i.e. Hyytiälä (FI-Hyy) and Sodankylä (FI-Sod), and Canada, i.e. the UCI-1850 burn site (CA-NS1) and the Quebec – Eastern Boreal (CA-Qcu) site during December and January.
Type 2 consists of strong links among atmospheric variables, but LE and NEE are weakly, not, or even negatively connected to the atmosphere, i.e. the meteorological variables. This network structure coincides with high energy input (high Rg and T) but low water availability (low P and SWC and high VPD). A high Bowen ratio, i.e. the ratio between sensible heat and latent heat, representing aridity, and low absolute carbon fluxes (GPP and NEE) are the consequence. These conditions are typically present at semi-arid ecosystems like the woody-savanna (WSA) Santa Rita Mesquite (US-SRM) as well as the grassland Santa Rita (US-SRG) sites, Audubon Research Ranch (US-Aud), and Sturt Plains (AU-Stp) during the dry season.
Type 3 exhibits the same strong links among Rg, VPD, and H as Type 2, but T is weakly or not connected. The opposite is true for links of LE and NEE, which are strongly connected to the other variables (except T). Rg and T are considerably lower than in Type 2 (approximately by 100 W m-2 and 10 ∘C), but because of sufficient water availability the Bowen ratio is between 0 and 1. Typical ecosystems in this state are mid- to high-latitude forests during spring or autumn, e.g. Harvard Forest EMS Tower (US-Ha1, deciduous broadleaf forest (DBF)), Roccarespampani 1 (IT-Ro1, DBF), Vielsalm (BE-Vie, mixed forest (MF)), and Hyytiälä (FI-Hyy, ENF).
Type 4 is fully and strongly connected. Both energy input and water availability are high, leading to Bowen ratios around 1. This network state is typically present in tropical forests like the Guyaflux site in French Guiana (GF-Guy) (evergreen broadleaf forest (EBF)) but can temporarily be also reached by a variety of other ecosystems, e.g. mid- and high-latitude forests like Hainich (DE-Hai, DBF), Tharandt (DE-Tha, ENF), BE-Vie (MF), and FI-Hyy (ENF) as well as woody savanna (WSA) such as Howard Springs (AU-How) and grassland (GRA) such as Daly River Savanna (AU-Dap).
The archetypes of networks are located at the edges of the two-dimensional space and thus could define two imaginary axes. From a physical point of view, energy is required for each process and interaction to occur, e.g. photosynthesis or evaporation . Therefore, transitions along the axis connecting the network types 1 and 4 might be interpreted as energy controlled, as dependencies among all variables fade or increase consistently. Transitions along the axis connecting network types 2 and 3 are explainable by a combination of water availability and a temperature gradient. Low water availability but high temperatures cause a shutdown of stomatal conductance or ecosystems to enter a dormant state, which leads to low carbon and water fluxes and low connectivity. On the other hand, sufficient water and medium temperatures (around the optimum of photosynthesis) allow for carbon and water fluxes but reduce the influence of varying temperatures, leading to connected NEE and LE but disconnected T. And indeed these patterns and gradients exist. Mean Rg is lowest at network type 1 and almost linearly increases towards network type 4. P is lowest at network types 1 and 2. In combination with high energy input network type 2 has the lowest SWC values and the highest Bowen ratios (see Appendix Fig. ). SWC is higher but quite dispersed elsewhere, suggesting that at a certain point water limitations are fading out. T values of course also show an increase not only from network types 1 to 4 (as radiation) but also from network types 3 to 2 and are actually rather low (8 to 15 ∘C) at network type 3 (see Fig. ). As meteorological conditions affect biosphere productivity, network types 1 and 2 exhibit low, type 3 medium, and type 4 high productivity, i.e. estimated as GPP.
In short, the clustering revealed that changes in energy and water availability can explain major transitions between different states of biosphere–atmosphere interactions.
This is in line with a recent study showing that a variety of land-surface processes can be largely summarised by on the one hand productivity measures and on the other hand water and energy availability. Both water and energy availability need to be high for highly productive states, yet the lack of either of them leads to low productivity .
This biosphere state triangle is found in our analysis by the network types 1 (cold – low connectivity), 2 (dry – NEE/LE weakly connected), and 4 (high productivity – fully connected). Yet, a fourth network type (type 3) is naturally occurring in the t-SNE space, as we here include interactions with the atmosphere.
Median trajectories of selected sites (a) and their corresponding mean values of radiation, precipitation, and the Bowen ratio (b). In winter months the Bowen ratio can turn negative. Nevertheless we set the lower limit of the y axis to 0. As networks are calculated using a centred 3-month moving window, each month is ascribed to a network. Thus, the behaviour of an ecosystem can be tracked by its monthly networks, which form trajectories for each year. An ecosystem's monthly median trajectory is composed of the two-dimensional monthly median networks (see Sect. for details).
Up to this point we have found strong evidence supporting our first hypothesis. The manifold of biosphere–atmosphere interactions can be represented rather well by two dimensions, which we identified to be most consistent with energy and water availabilities. It is confined by four characteristic states and populated homogeneously by the observed network states.
Having an understanding of the low-dimensional embedding's structure now allows us to analyse specific ecosystem behaviour.
Ecosystems' median trajectories
Each point in the reduced t-SNE space represents a biosphere–atmosphere interaction network for a given month and ecosystem. Hence, we can trace an ecosystem's trajectory through time. We are first focusing on an ecosystem's median monthly trajectory (see Sect. ) within the low-dimensional space. We can see that the median trajectories reflect seasonal patterns of meteorological conditions (Fig. ). For example, mid-latitude sites like FR-Pue (Puechabon, EBF), DE-Hai (DBF), and FI-Hyy (ENF) exhibit a strong seasonal variation of Rg and span a long distance in the t-SNE space. In contrast, tropical ecosystems like GF-Guy (EBF) constantly have high Rg and exhibit predominantly network type 4, indicative of highly productive conditions, while DE-Hai or FI-Hyy reach this connectivity pattern only during peak growing season. US-SRM (WSA), however, has similar or even higher Rg values throughout the year but barely manages to deviate from type 2, which is in accordance with its low water availability. The amount of precipitation further aligns with differences and characteristics of the trajectories of FR-Pue, DE-Hai, and FI-Hyy. For example, FI-Hyy shows some deviation towards edge 2 in February and March, as does FR-Pue in June, July, and August. For both, mean precipitation is lowest during these months.
These behaviours demonstrate what the previous figures (Figs. and ) have already suggested: ecosystems populate the low-dimensional space and migrate within as allowed by their climatic conditions. Thereby they can exhibit a wide range of interaction structures as can be seen from the mid-latitude sites. As these behaviours are multi-year averages, they could resemble more ecosystem adaptation to median climatic conditions than flexible adjustment of biosphere–atmosphere interactions to quickly changing meteorological conditions. If biosphere–atmosphere interactions are confined by adaptation shall be investigated in the final analysis section.
Deviations from ecosystem median trajectories
The remaining open question is how flexibly do the networks adjust to deviations from mean climatic conditions. Therefore, we look at climatic anomalies. Figure shows the trajectories of ecosystems during anomalous dry or wet conditions. During the European heatwave of 2003, in July and August the trajectories of two temperate central European forests, DE-Hai and DE-Tha, no longer manage to establish a network structure resembling network type 4, typical for these ecosystems during their highly productive phase. Instead they are shifted towards network type 2, associated with drier conditions (Fig. a and b). Similarly, the ecosystem BR-Sa3 (EBF) in the Brazilian tropical rainforest shows substantial deviations towards network type 2 during the exceptional dry season of 2001 (August, September, and October) (Fig. c). In contrast, US-Wkg (Walnut Gulch Kendall Grasslands) is a grassland accustomed to dry conditions and thus predominantly exhibits low water and carbon fluxes resulting in network structures like those of network type 2; i.e. water and carbon fluxes are barely or even not connected. Carbon and water fluxes of semi-arid ecosystems, however, are known to respond quickly and strongly to sufficient precipitation . This sensitivity is found to carry over to the network structure as well. The network structure of US-Wkg becomes fully connected (network type 4) in September 2014 with above-average precipitation (Fig. d).
In summary, climatic extremes are visible in an ecosystem's trajectory as strong deviations from the median trajectory. With this finding we have to reject our second hypothesis that owing to an ecosystem's adaptation its accessible functional states are limited to a certain range. The opposite seems to be valid. Biosphere–atmosphere interactions can flexibly follow atmospheric conditions and are not confined to certain states.
Abnormal conditions in meteorological conditions (here precipitation) become visible in an ecosystem's trajectory. (a) Trajectories within the low-dimensional space of the ecosystems Hainich (DE-Hai, DBF), Tharandt (DE-Tha, ENF), Santarem-Km83-Logged Forest (BR-Sa3, EBF), and Walnut Gulch Kendall Grasslands (US-Wkg, GRA); (b) 3-monthly average of daily precipitation data.
Functional convergence of biosphere–atmosphere interactions
We have seen that networks representing biosphere–atmosphere interactions strongly align with prevailing mean meteorological conditions. Moreover, the visualisation of ecosystem trajectories within the t-SNE space (Figs. and ) and the distributions of vegetation types and climatic regions (Appendix Fig. ) reveal that ecosystems across vegetation types and climatic regions can exhibit similar biosphere–atmosphere interactions if their meteorological conditions are similar. For example, we found a fully connected network (type 4) to be associated with high radiation and water availability and thus optimal growing conditions, which results in high carbon and water fluxes. Diverging from optimal growing conditions, links in the networks weaken and disappear. This behaviour can be understood as the functional convergence of ecosystems, which corroborates the hypothesis that ecosystems have a low number of key processes that determine ecosystem behaviour , rendering their behaviour transparent and predictable.
Criticism might rise, as the larger part of the biosphere–atmosphere interaction network indeed is a pure atmospheric network, i.e. Rg, T, VPD, and H. Thus strong associations of networks and their trajectories with atmospheric conditions could be dominated by changes in this atmospheric network. Figure , however, suggests the opposite. The strongest gradients are given by the links NEE–LE and Rg–LE, and transitions along the axis connecting types 2 and 3 (cf. Fig. ) are dominated by changes in biosphere connectivity, i.e. LE and NEE.
In fact, the dominance of climatic drivers in controlling the temporal evolution of ecosystem functioning emerges also in other studies , as they showed that carbon fluxes are primarily controlled by climatic factors. Yet, these and others also show the role of biotic factors in shaping the responses of ecosystem processes to climatic variability.
For example, revealed in a global ecosystem study that species diversity and ecosystem age decrease interannual variability of GPP. Similarly, showed biodiversity to increase long-term stability of ecosystem productivity. In regional studies found the stability of net primary production to be affected by the kind and severity of disturbances. showed that seasonal carbon fluxes were more sensitive to environmental conditions in a homogeneous forest compared to a heterogeneous one.
It would be of interest to investigate to which degree the effects of biotic factors also translates to the sensitivity of the network structure.
Furthermore, extreme heat and drought events or compound events in general can severely disrupt ecosystem functions. The time of recovery from such disturbances is a crucial parameter in assessing ecosystem resilience. showed that the recovery time measured, as the recovery in GPP is primarily influenced by climate but secondarily by biodiversity and CO2 fertilisation. Assessing the recovery time via GPP already puts the ecosystem functioning into focus. The presented framework here, i.e. the sensitivity of an ecosystem's network structure to meteorological conditions, might be a valuable asset in studying reaction time and strength to and recovery from extreme events, as it not only utilises one variable but also the interactions of a set of variables, thereby capturing more comprehensively an ecosystem state. A drawback is the reduced temporal resolution (a certain time period of daily or even half-hourly measurements is aggregated to one network), which can be offset by the moving window approach used here to a certain degree.
Especially with regard to climatic extreme conditions in recent years with observed vegetation dieback in, for example, DE-Hai , further studies could also shed light on the role of adaptation in shaping biosphere–atmosphere interactions. Our study suggests that adaptation to a lesser degree limits the range of possible interactions but enables sustaining and persisting certain conditions for longer periods.
The focus of further studies thus could be to elucidate the role of biotic factors in influencing ecosystem trajectories as well as the role of adaptation and the response to extreme events.
Limitations of the study
Finally, we would like to take a critical view on our analysis approach. As stated in Sect. , PCMCI might fail to identify some spurious links due to the occurrence of contemporaneous confounders. Thus networks can not be interpreted causally, but this does not severely hinder their value for the current analysis.
In addition we include a rather limited set of variables into the network estimation. Thus we cannot and do not claim that ecosystems become fully alike under similar meteorological conditions. Yet, on the timescale investigated the data show that the interactions among the chosen set of variables can be described by very similar structures. Follow-up studies might search for and include further biosphere variables.
Currently, an analysis of the biotic effects on the network structure is hampered because the t-SNE space is not metric. Thus, for instance, the effect of a drought with a similar magnitude in a boreal and temperate forest cannot simply be compared by the deviation from their median trajectory.
Conclusions
We analysed the functional behaviour of a variety of ecosystems using the FLUXNET database of carbon, water, and energy flux measurements. In particular, we examined the interaction structure between biosphere–atmosphere fluxes as well as atmospheric state variables using PCMCI, a method to estimate causal relationships from empirical time series under certain assumptions.
Using non-linear dimensionality reduction, we find evidence supporting our hypothesis that the manifold of existing states is bound by few, i.e. four, archetypes of network states. They are characterised on the one hand by a fully connected and almost unconnected network structure and on the other hand by an antagonistic coupling of carbon and water flux with temperature – when one is strongly coupled, the other is decoupled.
The transitions between these states correlate well with gradients of meteorological drivers, i.e. radiation and water availability.
The movement of an ecosystem within that space therefore strongly aligns with changes in meteorological conditions. This, however, also leads to similar behaviour under similar conditions for strongly contrasting ecosystems. For example, forests of mid or even high latitudes exhibit an interaction structure similar to tropical forests given high radiation and water availability during summer. Yet, this state can also be reached by predominantly dry ecosystems like steppe grasslands given sufficient precipitation. In contrast if productive ecosystems are struck by a severe drought, like central European ecosystems in 2003, the behaviour can adapt more to that of a Mediterranean ecosystem. Thus the second part of our hypothesis must be rejected. The analysis shows that the biosphere–atmosphere interaction structure can adapt flexibly to prevailing conditions and is widely independent of vegetation type and climatic region. Such behaviour is strong evidence for functional convergence of ecosystems; i.e. their behaviour is determined by a low number of key processes. For further studies, we suggest focusing on the role of
biotic factors such as, for example, plant functional types, ecosystem age, and adaptation. These factors could play a crucial role in understanding the ecosystem coping strategies to climatic extremes.
Methods
List of FLUXNET sites used for the generation of artificial datasets and the time period used. IGBP: International Geosphere–Biosphere Programme. DBF: deciduous broadleaf forest; OSH: open shrubland; WET: wetland; CRO: cropland; CSH: closed shrubland; MF: mixed forest; EBF: evergreen broadleaf forest; WSA: woody savanna; SAV: savanna; ENF: evergreen needleleaf forest; GRA: grassland.
PCMCI parameters that were used differently from default settings.
PCMCI parameterSettingsignificance α0.1αpcNonetau_min0tau_max5mask_type“y”fdr_method“fdr_bh”selected_links{0: [], (for variable set [Rg, T, NEE, VPD, H, LE])for i in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]: i: [(i, -1), (i, -2)] + [(j, 0), (j, -1), (j, -2) for j in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and j≠i]} Results and discussion
Quality assessment of dimensionality reduction techniques. To visualise and subsequently analyse the network space, we reduce its dimensionality. We compared PCA, t-SNE, and UMAP including various parameter settings (here: PCA's leading two principal components, t-SNE with perplexity 30 and UMAP with nneighbours equal to 5 for two dimensions). The test statistic RNX(k) (y axis) gives the improvement of the embedding of K-ary neighbourhoods (x axis) over a random embedding.
The area under the curves (preserving the log-scaled x axis) is given in the legend and gives an idea of the overall quality of the embedding . We chose t-SNE with perplexity 30, as it preserves best local neighbourhoods and performs well on larger distances.
Same metric as Fig. . Optimisation of the dimensionality reduction via t-SNE by using different perplexity values.
Same metric as Fig. . Optimisation of the dimensionality reduction to two dimensions via UMAP by using different values for the parameter nneighbours.
Same as Fig. but produced from a new run of the analysis which does allow influences on Rg. The orientation of data points in this plot has changed compared to Fig. due to the stochastic nature of t-SNE. But the embedding is almost merely mirrored.
Same as Fig. but with smaller clusters exhibiting the finer structure of the t-SNE space.
t-SNE space coloured by the underlying mean Bowen ratio and precipitation, as well as the ecosystem's respective Köppen–Geiger class and IGBP type.
Code availability
Code scripts can be found at https://github.com/ckrich/Functional (Krich, 2021).
Data availability
The eddy covariance data of the FLUXNET sites can be downloaded from the official web page (http://fluxnet.fluxdata.org/, last access: 14 April 2021).
Author contributions
CK and MDM designed the study with contributions from all other authors. CK conducted the analysis and wrote the manuscript. All authors helped to improve the manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.
Acknowledgements
Diego G. Miralles acknowledges support from the European Research Council (DRY-2-DRY; grant agreement no. 715254).
Christopher Krich thanks the Max Planck Research School for Global Biogeochemical Cycles for supporting his PhD project as well as Jacob A. Nelson in helping to assemble the dataset.
This work used eddy covariance data acquired and shared by the FLUXNET community, including the following networks: AmeriFlux, AfriFlux, AsiaFlux, CarboAfrica, CarboEuropeIP, CarboItaly, CarboMont, ChinaFlux, Fluxnet-Canada, GreenGrass, ICOS, KoFlux, LBA, NECC, OzFlux-TERN, TCOS-Siberia, and USCCC. The ERA-Interim reanalysis data are provided by ECMWF and processed by LSCE. The FLUXNET eddy covariance data processing and harmonisation were carried out by the European Fluxes Database Cluster, AmeriFlux Management Project, and FluxData project of FLUXNET, with the support of CDIAC; ICOS Ecosystem Thematic Centre; and the OzFlux, ChinaFlux, and AsiaFlux offices.
Financial support
The article processing charges for this open-access publication were covered by the Max Planck Society.
Review statement
This paper was edited by Alexandra Konings and reviewed by three anonymous referees.
ReferencesAcosta, M., Pavelka, M., Montagnani, L., Kutsch, W., Lindroth, A., Juszczak,
R., and Janouš, D.: Soil Surface CO2 Efflux Measurements in
Norway Spruce Forests: Comparison between Four Different Sites across
Europe – from Boreal to Alpine Forest, Geoderma, 192,
295–303, 10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.08.027, 2013.Ammann, C., Spirig, C., Leifeld, J., and Neftel, A.: Assessment of the Nitrogen
and Carbon Budget of Two Managed Temperate Grassland Fields, Agr.
Ecosys. Environ., 133, 150–162, 10.1016/j.agee.2009.05.006,
2009.
Ankerst, M., Breunig, M. M., Kriegel, H.-P., and Sander, J.: OPTICS: ordering
points to identify the clustering structure, ACM Sigmod record, 28, 49–60,
1999.Anthoni, P., Knohl, A., Rebmann, C., Freibauer, A., Mund, M., Ziegler, W.,
Kolle, O., and Schulze, E.-D.: Forest and agricultural land-use-dependent CO2
exchange in Thuringia, Germany, Glob. Change Biol., 10, 2005–2019,
2004a.Anthoni, P. M., Knohl, A., Rebmann, C., Freibauer, A., Mund, M., Ziegler, W.,
Kolle, O., and Schulze, E.-D.: Forest and Agricultural Land-Use-Dependent
CO2 Exchange in Thuringia, Germany, Glob. Change Biol., 10,
2005–2019, 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00863.x, 2004b.Archibald, S. A., Kirton, A., van der Merwe, M. R., Scholes, R. J., Williams,
C. A., and Hanan, N.: Drivers of Inter-Annual Variability in Net Ecosystem
Exchange in a Semi-Arid Savanna Ecosystem, South Africa,
Biogeosciences, 6, 251–266, 10.5194/bg-6-251-2009,
2009.Ardö, J., Mölder, M., El-Tahir, B. A., and Elkhidir, H. A. M.:
Seasonal Variation of Carbon Fluxes in a Sparse Savanna in Semi Arid
Sudan, Carbon Balance and Management, 3, 7, 10.1186/1750-0680-3-7,
2008.Armstrong, N. and Ernst, E.: The treatment of eczema with Chinese herbs: a
systematic review of randomized clinical trials, Brit. J. Clin.
Pharmaco., 48, 262, 10.4141/cjss93-034, 1999.Arndt, S., Hinko-Najera, N., Griebel, A., Beringer, J., and Livesley, S. J.:
FLUXNET2015 AU-Wom Wombat, 10.18140/FLX/1440207, 2021.Aubinet, M., Chermanne, B., Vandenhaute, M., Longdoz, B., Yernaux, M., and
Laitat, E.: Long Term Carbon Dioxide Exchange above a Mixed Forest in the
Belgian Ardennes, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 108, 293–315,
10.1016/S0168-1923(01)00244-1, 2001.
Aubinet, M., Vesala, T., and Papale, D.: Eddy covariance: a practical guide to
measurement and data analysis, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.Aurela, M., Riutta, T., Laurila, T., Tuovinen, J.-P., Vesala, T., Tuittila,
E.-S., Rinne, J., Haapanala, S., and Laine, J.: CO2 exchange of a sedge fen
in southern Finland-The impact of a drought period, Tellus B, 59, 826–837, 2007.Baker, I., Denning, A. S., Hanan, N., Prihodko, L., Uliasz, M., Vidale, P.-L.,
Davis, K., and Bakwin, P.: Simulated and Observed Fluxes of Sensible and
Latent Heat and CO2 at the WLEF-TV Tower Using SiB2.5, Glob.
Change Biol., 9, 1262–1277, 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00671.x, 2003.
Baldocchi, D.: “Breathing” of the terrestrial biosphere: lessons learned
from a global network of carbon dioxide flux measurement systems, Austr.
J. Bot., 56, 1–26, 2008.Baldocchi, D.: Measuring fluxes of trace gases and energy between ecosystems
and the atmosphere – the state and future of the eddy covariance method,
Glob. Change Biol., 20, 3600–3609, 10.1111/gcb.12649, 2014.Baldocchi, D., Falge, E., Gu, L., Olson, R., Hollinger, D., Running, S.,
Anthoni, P., Bernhofer, C., Davis, K., Evans, R., Fuentes, J., Goldstein, A.,
Katul, G., Law, B., Lee, X., Malhi, Y., Meyers, T., Munger, W., Oechel, W.,
Paw U, K. T., Pilegaard, K., Schmid, H. P., Valentini, R., Verma, S., Vesala,
T., Wilson, K., and Wofsy, S.: FLUXNET: A New Tool to Study the Temporal and
Spatial Variability of Ecosystem-Scale Carbon Dioxide, Water Vapor, and
Energy Flux Densities, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 82,
2415–2434, 10.1175/1520-0477(2001)082<2415:FANTTS>2.3.CO;2,
2001.Baldocchi, D., Ryu, Y., and Keenan, T.: Terrestrial Carbon Cycle Variability
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved, F1000Research, 5(F1000 Faculty Rev), 5, 2371,
10.12688/f1000research.8962.1, 2016.Beer, C., Reichstein, M., Tomelleri, E., Ciais, P., Jung, M., Carvalhais, N.,
Rödenbeck, C., Arain, M. A., Baldocchi, D., Bonan, G. B., Bondeau, A.,
Cescatti, A., Lasslop, G., Lindroth, A., Lomas, M., Luyssaert, S., Margolis,
H., Oleson, K. W., Roupsard, O., Veenendaal, E., Viovy, N., Williams, C.,
Woodward, F. I., and Papale, D.: Terrestrial Gross Carbon Dioxide Uptake:
Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate, Science, 329, 834–838,
10.1126/science.1184984, 2010.Berbigier, P., Bonnefond, J.-M., and Mellmann, P.: CO2 and Water Vapour
Fluxes for 2 Years above Euroflux Forest Site, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 108, 183–197, 10.1016/S0168-1923(01)00240-4, 2001.Beringer, J., Hutley, L. B., Tapper, N. J., and Cernusak, L. A.: Savanna Fires
and Their Impact on Net Ecosystem Productivity in North Australia, Glob.
Change Biol., 13, 990–1004,
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01334.x, 2007.Beringer, J., Hutley, L. B., Hacker, J. M., Neininger, B., and U, K. T. P.:
Patterns and Processes of Carbon, Water and Energy Cycles across Northern
Australian Landscapes: From Point to Region, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 151, 1409–1416, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.05.003,
2011a.Beringer, J., Hutley, L. B., Hacker, J. M., Neininger, B., and U, K. T. P.:
Patterns and Processes of Carbon, Water and Energy Cycles across Northern
Australian Landscapes: From Point to Region, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 151, 1409–1416,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.05.003,
2011b.Bernhofer, C., Grünwald, T., Moderow, U., Hehn, M., Eichelmann, U., Prasse,
H., and Postel, U.: FLUXNET2015 DE-Akm Anklam, 10.18140/FLX/1440213,
2021a.Bernhofer, C., Grünwald, T., Moderow, U., Hehn, M., Eichelmann, U., Prasse,
H., and Postel, U.: FLUXNET2015 DE-Obe Oberbärenburg,
10.18140/FLX/1440151, 2021b.Bernhofer, C., Grünwald, T., Moderow, U., Hehn, M., Eichelmann, U., Prasse,
H., and Postel, U.: FLUXNET2015 DE-Spw Spreewald, 10.18140/FLX/1440220,
2021c.Bonal, D., Bosc, A., Ponton, S., Goret, J.-Y., Burban, B., Gross, P.,
Bonnefond, J.-M., Elbers, J., Longdoz, B., Epron, D., Guehl, J.-M., and
Granier, A.: Impact of Severe Dry Season on Net Ecosystem Exchange in the
Neotropical Rainforest of French Guiana, Glob. Change Biol., 14,
1917–1933, 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01610.x, 2008.Bonan, G.: Ecological Climatology: Concepts and Applications, Cambridge
University Press, 3 Edn., 10.1017/CBO9781107339200, 2015.Bond-Lamberty, B., Wang, C., and Gower, S. T.: Net Primary Production and Net
Ecosystem Production of a Boreal Black Spruce Wildfire Chronosequence, Glob.
Change Biol., 10, 473–487, 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.0742.x, 2004.Carrara, A., Janssens, I. A., Yuste, J. C., and Ceulemans, R.: Seasonal Changes
in Photosynthesis, Respiration and NEE of a Mixed Temperate Forest,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 126, 15–31,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.05.002, 2004.Cassman, K. G., Dobermann, A., Walters, D. T., and Yang, H.: Meeting Cereal
Demand While Protecting Natural Resources and Improving Environmental
Quality, Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour., 28, 315–358,
10.1146/annurev.energy.28.040202.122858, 2003a.Cassman, K. G., Dobermann, A., Walters, D. T., and Yang, H.: Meeting Cereal
Demand While Protecting Natural Resources and Improving Environmental
Quality, Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour., 28, 315–358,
10.1146/annurev.energy.28.040202.122858, 2003b.Cernusak, L. A., Hutley, L. B., Beringer, J., Holtum, J. A. M., and Turner,
B. L.: Photosynthetic Physiology of Eucalypts along a Sub-Continental
Rainfall Gradient in Northern Australia, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 151, 1462–1470, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.01.006,
2011.Chen, J. M., Govind, A., Sonnentag, O., Zhang, Y., Barr, A., and Amiro, B.:
Leaf Area Index Measurements at Fluxnet-Canada Forest Sites,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 140, 257–268,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.08.005, 2006.Chiesi, M., Maselli, F., Bindi, M., Fibbi, L., Cherubini, P., Arlotta, E.,
Tirone, G., Matteucci, G., and Seufert, G.: Modelling Carbon Budget of
Mediterranean Forests Using Ground and Remote Sensing Measurements,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 135, 22–34,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.09.011, 2005.Claessen, J., Molini, A., Martens, B., Detto, M., Demuzere, M., and Miralles, D. G.: Global biosphere–climate interaction: a causal appraisal of observations and models over multiple temporal scales, Biogeosciences, 16, 4851–4874, 10.5194/bg-16-4851-2019, 2019.Cleverly, J., Boulain, N., Villalobos-Vega, R., Grant, N., Faux, R., Wood,
C., Cook, P. G., Yu, Q., Leigh, A., and Eamus, D.: Dynamics of Component
Carbon Fluxes in a Semi-Arid Acacia Woodland, Central Australia,
J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 118, 1168–1185,
10.1002/jgrg.20101, 2013.Delpierre, N., Berveiller, D., Granda, E., and Dufrêne, E.: Wood Phenology,
Not Carbon Input, Controls the Interannual Variability of Wood Growth in a
Temperate Oak Forest, New Phytol., 210, 459–470,
10.1111/nph.13771, 2016.Desai, A. R., Bolstad, P. V., Cook, B. D., Davis, K. J., and Carey, E. V.:
Comparing Net Ecosystem Exchange of Carbon Dioxide between an Old-Growth and
Mature Forest in the Upper Midwest, USA, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 128, 33–55, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.09.005, 2005.Detto, M., Molini, A., Katul, G., Stoy, P., Palmroth, S., and Baldocchi, D.:
Causality and Persistence in Ecological Systems: A Nonparametric Spectral
Granger Causality Approach, Am. Nat., 179, 524–535,
10.1086/664628, 2012.Dietiker, D., Buchmann, N., and Eugster, W.: Testing the Ability of the
DNDC Model to Predict CO2 and Water Vapour Fluxes of a Swiss
Cropland Site, Agr. Ecosys. Environ., 139, 396–401,
10.1016/j.agee.2010.09.002, 2010.Dušek, J., Čížková, H., Stellner, S., Czerný, R., and
Květ, J.: Fluctuating Water Table Affects Gross Ecosystem Production and
Gross Radiation Use Efficiency in a Sedge-Grass Marsh, Hydrobiologia, 692,
57–66, 10.1007/s10750-012-0998-z, 2012.Emmerich, W. E.: Carbon Dioxide Fluxes in a Semiarid Environment with High
Carbonate Soils, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 116, 91–102,
10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00231-9, 2003.Etzold, S., Ruehr, N. K., Zweifel, R., Dobbertin, M., Zingg, A., Pluess, P.,
Häsler, R., Eugster, W., and Buchmann, N.: The Carbon Balance of Two
Contrasting Mountain Forest Ecosystems in Switzerland: Similar Annual
Trends, but Seasonal Differences, Ecosystems, 14, 1289–1309,
10.1007/s10021-011-9481-3, 2011.Fischer, M. L., Billesbach, D. P., Berry, J. A., Riley, W. J., and Torn, M. S.:
Spatiotemporal Variations in Growing Season Exchanges of CO2,
H2O, and Sensible Heat in Agricultural Fields of the Southern
Great Plains, Earth Int., 11, 1–21, 10.1175/EI231.1, 2007.Flach, M., Sippel, S., Gans, F., Bastos, A., Brenning, A., Reichstein, M., and
Mahecha, M. D.: Contrasting biosphere responses to hydrometeorological
extremes: revisiting the 2010 western Russian heatwave, Biogeosciences, 15,
6067–6085, 10.5194/bg-15-6067-2018, 2018.Galvagno, M., Wohlfahrt, G., Cremonese, E., Rossini, M., Colombo, R., Filippa,
G., Julitta, T., Manca, G., Siniscalco, C., di Cella, U. M., and Migliavacca,
M.: Phenology and Carbon Dioxide Source/Sink Strength of a Subalpine
Grassland in Response to an Exceptionally Short Snow Season, Environ.
Res. Lett., 8, 025008, 10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/025008, 2013.Garbulsky, M. F., Peñuelas, J., Papale, D., and Filella, I.: Remote
Estimation of Carbon Dioxide Uptake by a Mediterranean Forest, Global
Change Biology, 14, 2860–2867, 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01684.x, 2008.Giasson, M.-A., Coursolle, C., and Margolis, H. A.: Ecosystem-level CO2 fluxes
from a boreal cutover in eastern Canada before and after scarification,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 140, 23–40, 2006.Gilmanov, T., Soussana, J.-F., Aires, L., et al.:
Partitioning European grassland net ecosystem CO2 exchange into gross primary
productivity and ecosystem respiration using light response function
analysis, Agr. Ecosys. Environ., 121, 93–120, 2007.Gilmanov, T. G., Tieszen, L. L., Wylie, B. K., Flanagan, L. B., Frank, A. B.,
Haferkamp, M. R., Meyers, T. P., and Morgan, J. A.: Integration of CO2 flux
and remotely-sensed data for primary production and ecosystem respiration
analyses in the Northern Great Plains: Potential for quantitative spatial
extrapolation, Glob. Ecol. Biogeo., 14, 271–292, 2005.Gitelson, A. A., Viña, A., Arkebauer, T. J., Rundquist, D. C., Keydan, G.,
and Leavitt, B.: Remote Estimation of Leaf Area Index and Green Leaf Biomass
in Maize Canopies, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30,
10.1029/2002GL016450, 2003.Goulden, M. L., Winston, G. C., McMILLAN, A. M. S., Litvak, M. E., Read, E. L.,
Rocha, A. V., and Elliot, J. R.: An Eddy Covariance Mesonet to Measure the
Effect of Forest Age on Land–Atmosphere Exchange, Glob. Change
Biol., 12, 2146–2162, 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01251.x, 2006.
Granier, A., Ceschia, E., Damesin, C., et al.: The carbon
balance of a young beech forest, Funct. Ecol., 14, 312–325, 2000.Green, J., G. Konings, A., Alemohammad, S. H., Berry, J., Entekhabi, D.,
Kolassa, J., Lee, J.-E., and Gentine, P.: Regionally strong feedbacks between
the atmosphere and terrestrial biosphere, Nat. Geosci., 10, 410–414,
10.1038/ngeo2957,
2017.Grünwald, T. and Bernhofer, C.: A Decade of Carbon, Water and Energy Flux
Measurements of an Old Spruce Forest at the Anchor Station Tharandt,
Tellus B, 59, 387–396,
10.1111/j.1600-0889.2007.00259.x, 2007.
Grünzweig, J., Lin, T., Rotenberg, E., Schwartz, A., and Yakir, D.: Carbon
sequestration in arid-land forest, Glob. Change Biol., 9, 791–799, 2003.Hatala, J. A., Detto, M., and Baldocchi, D. D.: Gross Ecosystem Photosynthesis
Causes a Diurnal Pattern in Methane Emission from Rice, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 39, 10.1029/2012GL051303, 2012.Hutley, L. B., Beringer, J., Isaac, P. R., Hacker, J. M., and Cernusak, L. A.:
A Sub-Continental Scale Living Laboratory: Spatial Patterns of Savanna
Vegetation over a Rainfall Gradient in Northern Australia, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 151, 1417–1428,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.03.002, 2011.Imer, D., Merbold, L., Eugster, W., and Buchmann, N.: Temporal and Spatial
Variations of Soil CO2, CH4 and
N2O Fluxes at Three Differently Managed Grasslands,
Biogeosciences, 10, 5931–5945,
10.5194/bg-10-5931-2013, 2013.Jacobs, C. M. J., Jacobs, A. F. G., Bosveld, F. C., Hendriks, D. M. D., Hensen,
A., Kroon, P. S., Moors, E. J., Nol, L., Schrier-Uijl, A., and Veenendaal,
E. M.: Variability of Annual CO2 Exchange from
Dutch Grasslands, Biogeosciences, 4, 803–816,
10.5194/bg-4-803-2007, 2007.Knohl, A., Schulze, E.-D., Kolle, O., and Buchmann, N.: Large Carbon Uptake by
an Unmanaged 250-Year-Old Deciduous Forest in Central Germany,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 118, 151–167,
10.1016/S0168-1923(03)00115-1, 2003.Kobak, D. and Linderman, G. C.: UMAP does not preserve global structure any
better than t-SNE when using the same initialization, bioRxiv,
10.1101/2019.12.19.877522,
2019.Kraemer, G., Camps-Valls, G., Reichstein, M., and Mahecha, M. D.: Summarizing the state of the terrestrial biosphere in few dimensions, Biogeosciences, 17, 2397–2424, 10.5194/bg-17-2397-2020, 2020a.
Kraemer, G., Reichstein, M., Camps-Valls, G., Smits, J., and Mahecha, M. D.:
The Low Dimensionality of Development, Soc. Indic. Res., 1–22, 999–1020,
2020b.Krich, C.: Functional convergence of biosphere atmosphere interactions in response to meteorology, available at: https://github.com/ckrich/Functional, last access: 12 April 2021.Krich, C., Runge, J., Miralles, D. G., Migliavacca, M., Perez-Priego, O.,
El-Madany, T., Carrara, A., and Mahecha, M. D.: Estimating causal networks in
biosphere–atmosphere interaction with the PCMCI approach, Biogeosciences,
17, 1033–1061, 10.5194/bg-17-1033-2020, 2020.Kurbatova, J., Li, C., Varlagin, A., Xiao, X., and Vygodskaya, N.: Modeling
Carbon Dynamics in Two Adjacent Spruce Forests with Different Soil Conditions
in Russia, Biogeosciences, 5, 969–980,
10.5194/bg-5-969-2008, 2008.
Lafleur, P. M., Roulet, N. T., Bubier, J. L., Frolking, S., and Moore, T. R.:
Interannual variability in the peatland-atmosphere carbon dioxide exchange at
an ombrotrophic bog, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 0886–6236, 2003.Lagergren, F., Lindroth, A., Dellwik, E., Ibrom, A., Lankreijer, H.,
Launiainen, S., Mölder, M., Kolari, P., Pilegaard, K., and Vesala, T.:
Biophysical controls on CO2 fluxes of three Northern forests based on
long-term eddy covariance data, Tellus B,
60, 143–152, 2008.
Lambert, W. D.: Functional convergence of ecosystems: evidence from body mass
distributions of North American late Miocene mammal faunas, Ecosystems, 9,
97–118, 2006.Lee, J. A., Peluffo-Ordóñez, D. H., and Verleysen, M.: Multi-Scale
Similarities in Stochastic Neighbour Embedding: Reducing Dimensionality
While Preserving Both Local and Global Structure, Neurocomputing, 169,
246–261, 10.1016/j.neucom.2014.12.095, 2015.Leon, E., Vargas, R., Bullock, S., Lopez, E., Panosso, A. R., and La Scala,
N.: Hot spots, hot moments, and spatio-temporal controls on soil CO2 efflux
in a water-limited ecosystem, Soil Biol. Biochem., 77, 12 – 21,
10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.05.029,
2014.Leuning, R., Cleugh, H. A., Zegelin, S. J., and Hughes, D.: Carbon and Water
Fluxes over a Temperate Eucalyptus Forest and a Tropical Wet/Dry Savanna
in Australia: Measurements and Comparison with MODIS Remote Sensing
Estimates, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 129, 151–173,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.12.004, 2005.Lindauer, M., Schmid, H. P., Grote, R., Mauder, M., Steinbrecher, R., and
Wolpert, B.: Net Ecosystem Exchange over a Non-Cleared Wind-Throw-Disturbed
Upland Spruce Forest–Measurements and Simulations, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 197, 219–234, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.07.005,
2014.Loubet, B., Laville, P., Lehuger, S., Larmanou, E., Fléchard, C., Mascher,
N., Genermont, S., Roche, R., Ferrara, R. M., Stella, P., Personne, E.,
Durand, B., Decuq, C., Flura, D., Masson, S., Fanucci, O., Rampon, J.-N.,
Siemens, J., Kindler, R., Gabrielle, B., Schrumpf, M., and Cellier, P.:
Carbon, Nitrogen and Greenhouse Gases Budgets over a Four Years Crop
Rotation in Northern France, Plant Soil, 343, 109,
10.1007/s11104-011-0751-9, 2011.Lund, M., Falk, J. M., Friborg, T., Mbufong, H. N., Sigsgaard, C., Soegaard,
H., and Tamstorf, M. P.: Trends in CO2 Exchange in a High Arctic
Tundra Heath, 2000–2010, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 117, 10.1029/2011JG001901, 2012.Luyssaert, S., Inglima, I., Jung, M., et al.: CO2
balance of boreal, temperate, and tropical forests derived from a global
database, Glob. Change Biol., 13, 2509–2537, 2007.Maaten, L. v. d. and Hinton, G.: Visualizing data using t-SNE, J.
Mach. Learn. Res., 9, 2579–2605, 2008.Marcolla, B., Pitacco, A., and Cescatti, A.: Canopy Architecture and
Turbulence Structure in a Coniferous Forest, Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 108, 39–59, 10.1023/A:1023027709805, 2003.Marcolla, B., Cescatti, A., Montagnani, L., Manca, G., Kerschbaumer, G., and
Minerbi, S.: Importance of advection in the atmospheric CO2 exchanges of an
alpine forest, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 130, 193–206, 2005.Marcolla, B., Cescatti, A., Manca, G., Zorer, R., Cavagna, M., Fiora, A.,
Gianelle, D., Rodeghiero, M., Sottocornola, M., and Zampedri, R.: Climatic
Controls and Ecosystem Responses Drive the Inter-Annual Variability of the
Net Ecosystem Exchange of an Alpine Meadow, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 151, 1233–1243, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.04.015, 2011.
Marengo, J. A., Alves, L. M., Alvala, R., Cunha, A. P., Brito, S., and Moraes,
O. L.: Climatic characteristics of the 2010–2016 drought in the semiarid
Northeast Brazil region, An. Acad. Bras. Cienc., 90,
1973–1985, 2018.Matsumoto, K., Ohta, T., Nakai, T., Kuwada, T., Daikoku, K., Iida, S., Yabuki,
H., Kononov, A. V., van der Molen, M. K., Kodama, Y., Maximov, T. C.,
Dolman, A. J., and Hattori, S.: Energy Consumption and Evapotranspiration at
Several Boreal and Temperate Forests in the Far East, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 148, 1978–1989, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2008.09.008,
2008.McDowell, N. G., Bowling, D. R., Bond, B. J., Irvine, J., Law, B. E., Anthoni,
P., and Ehleringer, J. R.: Response of the Carbon Isotopic Content of
Ecosystem, Leaf, and Soil Respiration to Meteorological and Physiological
Driving Factors in a Pinus Ponderosa Ecosystem, Global Biogeochem.
Cyc., 18, 10.1029/2003GB002049, 2004.
McInnes, L., Healy, J., and Melville, J.: UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation
and Projection for Dimension Reduction, 2018.McPherson, R. A.: A review of vegetation—atmosphere interactions and their
influences on mesoscale phenomena, Prog. Phys. Geogr., 31,
261–285, 10.1177/0309133307079055, 2007.
Medlyn, B. E., Berbigier, P., Clement, R., Grelle, A., Loustau, D., Linder, S.,
Wingate, L., Jarvis, P. G., Sigurdsson, B. D., and McMurtrie, R. E.: Carbon
balance of coniferous forests growing in contrasting climates: Model-based
analysis, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 131, 97–124, 2005.
Meinzer, F. C.: Functional convergence in plant responses to the environment,
Oecologia, 134, 1–11, 2003.Merbold, L., Ardö, J., Arneth, A., Scholes, R. J., Nouvellon, Y.,
de Grandcourt, A., Archibald, S., Bonnefond, J. M., Boulain, N., Brueggemann,
N., Bruemmer, C., Cappelaere, B., Ceschia, E., El-Khidir, H. a. M.,
El-Tahir, B. A., Falk, U., Lloyd, J., Kergoat, L., Dantec, V. L., Mougin,
E., Muchinda, M., Mukelabai, M. M., Ramier, D., Roupsard, O., Timouk, F.,
Veenendaal, E. M., and Kutsch, W. L.: Precipitation as Driver of Carbon
Fluxes in 11 African Ecosystems, Biogeosciences, 6, 1027–1041,
10.5194/bg-6-1027-2009, 2009.Merbold, L., Eugster, W., Stieger, J., Zahniser, M., Nelson, D., and Buchmann,
N.: Greenhouse Gas Budget (CO2, CH4 and N2O) of Intensively
Managed Grassland Following Restoration, Glob. Change Biol., 20,
1913–1928, 10.1111/gcb.12518, 2014.Meyer, W. S., Kondrlova, E., and Koerber, G. R.: Evaporation of Perennial
Semi-Arid Woodland in Southeastern Australia Is Adapted for Irregular but
Common Dry Periods, Hydrol. Process., 29, 3714–3726,
10.1002/hyp.10467, 2015.
Meyers, T. P. and Hollinger, S. E.: An assessment of storage terms in the
surface energy balance of maize and soybean, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 125, 105–115, 2004.
Miralles, D. G., Gentine, P., Seneviratne, S. I., and Teuling, A. J.:
Land–atmospheric feedbacks during droughts and heatwaves: state of the
science and current challenges, Ann. NY Acad. Sci.,
1436, 19, 2019.
Moors, E. J.: Water Use of Forests in the Netherlands, Tech. Rep. 41,
Vrije Universiteit, Alterra Scientific Contributions 41, Alterra, Amsterdam, 2012.Moureaux, C., Debacq, A., Bodson, B., Heinesch, B., and Aubinet, M.: Annual Net
Ecosystem Carbon Exchange by a Sugar Beet Crop, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 139, 25–39,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.05.009, 2006.Musavi, T., Migliavacca, M., Reichstein, M., et al.: Stand age
and species richness dampen interannual variation of ecosystem-level
photosynthetic capacity, Nat. Ecol. Evol., 1, 0048, 10.1038/s41559-016-0048, 2017.
Nagy, Z., Czóbel, S., Balogh, J., Horváth, L., Fóti, S.,
Pintér, K., Weidinger, T., Csintalan, Z., and Tuba, Z.: Some preliminary
results of the Hungarian grassland ecological research: carbon cycling and
greenhouse gas balances under changing, Cereal Res. Commun., 33,
279–281, 2005.
Nardino, M., Georgiadis, T., Rossi, F., Ponti, F., Miglietta, F., and Magliulo,
V.: Primary productivity and evapotranspiration of a mixed forest, in:
Congress CNR-ISA Fo, Istituto per i Sistemi Agricoli e Forestali del
Mediterraneo, Portici, 24–25, 2002.Nave, L. E., Gough, C. M., Maurer, K. D., Bohrer, G., Hardiman, B. S., Moine,
J. L., Munoz, A. B., Nadelhoffer, K. J., Sparks, J. P., Strahm, B. D., Vogel,
C. S., and Curtis, P. S.: Disturbance and the Resilience of Coupled Carbon
and Nitrogen Cycling in a North Temperate Forest, J. Geophys.
Res.-Biogeo., 116, 10.1029/2011JG001758, 2011.Nelson, J. A., Pérez-Priego, O., Zhou, S., Poyatos, R., Zhang, Y., Blanken,
P. D., Gimeno, T. E., Wohlfahrt, G., Desai, A. R., Gioli, B., Limousin,
J.-M., Bonal, D., Paul-Limoges, E., Scott, R. L., Varlagin, A., Fuchs, K.,
Montagnani, L., Wolf, S., Delpierre, N., Berveiller, D., Gharun, M.,
Belelli Marchesini, L., Gianelle, D., Šigut, L., Mammarella, I., Siebicke,
L., Andrew Black, T., Knohl, A., Hörtnagl, L., Magliulo, V., Besnard, S.,
Weber, U., Carvalhais, N., Migliavacca, M., Reichstein, M., and Jung, M.:
Ecosystem transpiration and evaporation: Insights from three water flux
partitioning methods across FLUXNET sites, Glob. Change Biol., 00,
10.1111/gcb.15314,
2020.NOAA: National Centers for Environmental Information, State of the
Climate: National Climate Report for Annual 2014, published online
January 2015, available at:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/201413 (last access: 12 January 2021), 2015.Papagiannopoulou, C., Miralles, D. G., Dorigo, W. A., Verhoest, N. E. C.,
Depoorter, M., and Waegeman, W.: Vegetation anomalies caused by antecedent
precipitation in most of the world, Environ. Res. Lett., 12,
074016, 10.1088/1748-9326/aa7145, http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/12/i=7/a=074016 (last access: 12 January 2021),
2017.Papale, D., Reichstein, M., Aubinet, M., Canfora, E., Bernhofer, C., Kutsch, W., Longdoz, B., Rambal, S., Valentini, R., Vesala, T., and Yakir, D.: Towards a standardized processing of Net Ecosystem Exchange measured with eddy covariance technique: algorithms and uncertainty estimation, Biogeosciences, 3, 571–583, 10.5194/bg-3-571-2006, 2006.
Pastorello, G., Trotta, C., Canfora, E., et al.: The
FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance
data, Sci. Data, 7, 1–27, 2020.
Pearson, K.: On Lines and Planes of Closest Fit to Systems of Points in Space,
Philos. Mag., 2, 559–572, 1901.Pilegaard, K., Ibrom, A., Courtney, M. S., Hummelshøj, P., and Jensen,
N. O.: Increasing Net CO2 Uptake by a Danish Beech Forest during the
Period from 1996 to 2009, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151, 934–946,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.02.013, 2011.Potter, B. E., Teclaw, R. M., and Zasada, J. C.: The Impact of Forest Structure
on Near-Ground Temperatures during Two Years of Contrasting Temperature
Extremes, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 106, 331–336,
10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00220-3, 2001.Potts, D. L., Barron-Gafford, G. A., and Scott, R. L.: Ecosystem hydrologic and
metabolic flashiness are shaped by plant community traits and precipitation,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 279, 107674,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107674,
2019.Prescher, A.-K., Grünwald, T., and Bernhofer, C.: Land Use Regulates Carbon
Budgets in Eastern Germany: From NEE to NBP, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 150, 1016–1025, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.03.008,
2010a.Prescher, A.-K., Grünwald, T., and Bernhofer, C.: Land Use Regulates Carbon
Budgets in Eastern Germany: From NEE to NBP, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 150, 1016–1025, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.03.008,
2010b.Pryor, S. C., Barthelmie, R. J., and Jensen, B.: Nitrogen Dry Deposition at an
AmeriFlux Site in a Hardwood Forest in the Midwest, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 26, 691–694, 10.1029/1999GL900066, 1999.Rambal, S., Joffre, R., Ourcival, J. M., Cavender-Bares, J., and Rocheteau, A.:
The Growth Respiration Component in Eddy CO2 Flux from a Quercus Ilex
Mediterranean Forest, Glob. Change Biol., 10, 1460–1469,
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00819.x, 2004.Rayment, M. B. and Jarvis, P. G.: Seasonal Gas Exchange of Black Spruce Using
an Automatic Branch Bag System, Can. J. Forest Res., 29,
1528–1538, 10.1139/x99-130, 1999a.Rayment, M. B. and Jarvis, P. G.: Seasonal Gas Exchange of Black Spruce Using
an Automatic Branch Bag System, Can. J. Forest Res., 29,
1528–1538, 10.1139/x99-130, 1999b.Reich, P. B., Walters, M. B., Ellsworth, D. S., Vose, J. M., Volin, J. C.,
Gresham, C., and Bowman, W. D.: Relationships of Leaf Dark Respiration to
Leaf Nitrogen, Specific Leaf Area and Leaf Life-Span: A Test across Biomes
and Functional Groups, Oecologia, 114, 471–482, 10.1007/s004420050471,
1998.Reichstein, M., Tenhunen, J. D., Roupsard, O., Ourcival, J.-m., Rambal, S.,
Miglietta, F., Peressotti, A., Pecchiari, M., Tirone, G., and Valentini, R.:
Severe drought effects on ecosystem CO2 and H2O fluxes at three Mediterranean
evergreen sites: revision of current hypotheses?, Glob. Change Biol., 8,
999–1017, 2002.Reichstein, M., Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Papale, D., Aubinet, M., Berbigier,
P., Bernhofer, C., Buchmann, N., Gilmanov, T., Granier, A., Grünwald, T.,
Havránková, K., Ilvesniemi, H., Janous, D., Knohl, A., Laurila, T., Lohila,
A., Loustau, D., Matteucci, G., Meyers, T., Miglietta, F., Ourcival, J.-M.,
Pumpanen, J., Rambal, S., Rotenberg, E., Sanz, M., Tenhunen, J., Seufert, G.,
Vaccari, F., Vesala, T., Yakir, D., and Valentini, R.: On the separation of
net ecosystem exchange into assimilation and ecosystem respiration: review
and improved algorithm, Glob. Change Biol., 11, 1424–1439,
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001002.x,
2005.
Reichstein, M., Bahn, M., Mahecha, M. D., Kattge, J., and Baldocchi, D. D.:
Linking plant and ecosystem functional biogeography, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 13697–13702, 2014.Rey, A., Pegoraro, E., Tedeschi, V., Parri, I. D., Jarvis, P. G., and
Valentini, R.: Annual Variation in Soil Respiration and Its Components in a
Coppice Oak Forest in Central Italy, Glob. Change Biol., 8, 851–866,
10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00521.x, 2002.
Reynolds, J. F., Kemp, P. R., Ogle, K., and Fernández, R. J.: Modifying the
‘pulse–reserve’paradigm for deserts of North America: precipitation
pulses, soil water, and plant responses, Oecologia, 141, 194–210, 2004.
Rodrigues, A., Pita, G., Mateus, J., Kurz-Besson, C., Casquilho, M., Cerasoli,
S., Gomes, A., and Pereira, J.: Eight years of continuous carbon fluxes
measurements in a Portuguese eucalypt stand under two main events: Drought
and felling, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151, 493–507, 2011.Rothstein, D. E., Zak, D. R., Pregitzer, K. S., and Curtis, P. S.: Kinetics of
Nitrogen Uptake by Populus Tremuloides in Relation to Atmospheric CO2
and Soil Nitrogen Availability, Tree Physiol., 20, 265–270,
10.1093/treephys/20.4.265, 2000.Ruddell, B. L. and Kumar, P.: Ecohydrologic process networks: 1.
Identification, Water Resources Research, 45, w03419,
10.1029/2008WR007279, 2009.Ruehr, N. K., Martin, J. G., and Law, B. E.: Effects of Water Availability on
Carbon and Water Exchange in a Young Ponderosa Pine Forest: Above- and
Belowground Responses, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 136–148,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.015, 2012a.Ruehr, N. K., Martin, J. G., and Law, B. E.: Effects of Water Availability on
Carbon and Water Exchange in a Young Ponderosa Pine Forest: Above- and
Belowground Responses, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 136–148,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.015, 2012b.Ruehr, N. K., Martin, J. G., and Law, B. E.: Effects of Water Availability on
Carbon and Water Exchange in a Young Ponderosa Pine Forest: Above- and
Belowground Responses, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 136–148,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.015, 2012c.Ruehr, N. K., Martin, J. G., and Law, B. E.: Effects of Water Availability on
Carbon and Water Exchange in a Young Ponderosa Pine Forest: Above- and
Belowground Responses, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 136–148,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.015, 2012d.Ruehr, N. K., Martin, J. G., and Law, B. E.: Effects of Water Availability on
Carbon and Water Exchange in a Young Ponderosa Pine Forest: Above- and
Belowground Responses, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 136–148,
10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.015, 2012e.Runge, J.: Causal network reconstruction from time series: From theoretical
assumptions to practical estimation, Chaos, 28, 075310, 10.1063/1.5025050, 2018.Runge, J., Bathiany, S., Bollt, E., et al.:
Inferring causation from time series in Earth system sciences, Nat.
Commun., 10, 2553, 10.1038/s41467-019-10105-3, 2019a.
Runge, J., Nowack, P., Kretschmer, M., Flaxman, S., and Sejdinovic, D.:
Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series
datasets, Sci. Adv., 5, 2019b.Sagerfors, J., Lindroth, A., Grelle, A., Klemedtsson, L., Weslien, P., and
Nilsson, M.: Annual CO2 exchange between a nutrient-poor, minerotrophic,
boreal mire and the atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, 10.1029/2006JG000306,
2008.Saleska, S. R., Miller, S. D., Matross, D. M., Goulden, M. L., Wofsy, S. C.,
da Rocha, H. R., de Camargo, P. B., Crill, P., Daube, B. C., de
Freitas, H. C., Hutyra, L., Keller, M., Kirchhoff, V., Menton, M., Munger,
J. W., Pyle, E. H., Rice, A. H., and Silva, H.: Carbon in Amazon Forests:
Unexpected Seasonal Fluxes and Disturbance-Induced Losses,
Science, 302, 1554–1557, 10.1126/science.1091165, 2003.Sanz, M., Carrara, A., Gimeno, C., Bucher, A., and Lopez, R.: Effects of a dry
and warm summer conditions on CO2 and energy fluxes from three Mediterranean
ecosystems, Geophys. Res. Abstract, 6, p. 3239, 2004.Schade, G. W., Goldstein, A. H., and Lamanna, M. S.: Are Monoterpene Emissions
Influenced by Humidity?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 2187–2190,
10.1029/1999GL900444.
Schuldt, B., Buras, A., Arend, M., Vitasse, Y., Beierkuhnlein, C., Damm, A.,
Gharun, M., Grams, T. E., Hauck, M., Hajek, P., Hartmann, H., Hiltbrunner,
E., Hoch, G., Holloway-Phillips, M., Körner, C., Larysch, E., Lübbe, T.,
Nelson, D. B., Rammig, A., Rigling, A., Rose, L., Ruehr, N. K., Schumann, K.,
Weiser, F., Werner, C., Wohlgemuth, T., Zang, C. S., and Kahmen, A.: A first
assessment of the impact of the extreme 2018 summer drought on Central
European forests, Basic Appl. Ecol., 45, 86–103,
2020.
Schwalm, C. R., Anderegg, W. R., Michalak, A. M., et al.: Global
patterns of drought recovery, Nature, 548, 202–205, 2017.Scott, R. L., Huxman, T. E., Cable, W. L., and Emmerich, W. E.: Partitioning of
Evapotranspiration and Its Relation to Carbon Dioxide Exchange in a
Chihuahuan Desert Shrubland, Hydrol. Process., 20, 3227–3243,
10.1002/hyp.6329, 2006.Scott, R. L., Cable, W. L., and Hultine, K. R.: The Ecohydrologic Significance
of Hydraulic Redistribution in a Semiarid Savanna, Water Resour. Res.,
44, 10.1029/2007WR006149, 2008.Shadaydeh, M., Denzler, J., Garcia, Y. G., and Mahecha, M.: Time-Frequency Causal Inference Uncovers Anomalous Events in Environmental Systems, in: Pattern Recognition. DAGM GCPR 2019, edited by: Fink, G., Frintrop, S., and Jiang, X., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Voll 11824, Springer, Cham., 10.1007/978-3-030-33676-9_35, 2019.Shaver, G. R., Street, L. E., Rastetter, E. B., Van Wijk, M. T., and Williams,
M.: Functional convergence in regulation of net CO2 flux in heterogeneous
tundra landscapes in Alaska and Sweden, J. Ecol., 95, 802–817,
10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01259.x,
2007.Sigut, L., Havrankova, K., Jocher, G., Pavelka, M., Janouš, D., Czerny, R.,
Stanik, K., and Trusina, J.: FLUXNET2015 CZ-BK2 Bily Kriz grassland,
10.18140/FLX/1440144, 2021.Sippel, S., Forkel, M., Rammig, A., Thonicke, K., Flach, M., Heimann, M., Otto,
F. E. L., Reichstein, M., and Mahecha, M. D.: Contrasting and interacting
changes in simulated spring and summer carbon cycle extremes in European
ecosystems, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 075006,
10.1088/1748-9326/aa7398, 2017.
Sippel, S., Reichstein, M., Ma, X., Mahecha, M. D., Lange, H., Flach, M., and
Frank, D.: Drought, heat, and the carbon cycle: a review, Curr. Clim.
Change Rep., 4, 266–286, 2018.Spirtes, P. and Glymour, C.: An Algorithm for Fast Recovery of Sparse Causal
Graphs, Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev., 9, 62–72,
10.1177/089443939100900106, 1991.
Suni, T., Rinne, J., Reissell, A., Altimir, N., Keronen, P., Rannik, U.,
Dal Maso, M., Kulmala, M., and Vesala, T.: Long-Term Measurements of Surface
Fluxes above a Scots Pine Forest in Hyytiala, Southern Finland,
1996–2001, Boreal Environ. Res., 8, 287–301, 2003.Székely, G. J., Rizzo, M. L., and Bakirov, N. K.: Measuring and testing
dependence by correlation of distances, Ann. Statist., 35, 2769–2794,
10.1214/009053607000000505, 2007.Tamrakar, R., Rayment, M. B., Moyano, F., Mund, M., and Knohl, A.: Implications
of structural diversity for seasonal and annual carbon dioxide fluxes in two
temperate deciduous forests, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 263, 465–476, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2018.08.027,
2018.Tang, J., Baldocchi, D. D., Qi, Y., and Xu, L.: Assessing Soil CO2 Efflux
Using Continuous Measurements of CO2 Profiles in Soils with Small
Solid-State Sensors, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 118, 207–220,
10.1016/S0168-1923(03)00112-6, 2003.
Tedeschi, V., Rey, A., Manca, G., Valentini, R., Jarvis, P. G., and Borghetti,
M.: Soil respiration in a Mediterranean oak forest at different developmental
stages after coppicing, Glob. Change Biol., 12, 110–121, 2006.
Thomas, S. C., Halpern, C. B., Falk, D. A., Liguori, D. A., and Austin, K. A.:
Plant diversity in managed forests: understory responses to thinning and
fertilization, Ecol. Appl., 9, 864–879, 1999a.
Thomas, S. C., Halpern, C. B., Falk, D. A., Liguori, D. A., and Austin, K. A.:
Plant diversity in managed forests: understory responses to thinning and
fertilization, Ecol. Appl., 9, 864–879, 1999b.
Thomas, S. C., Halpern, C. B., Falk, D. A., Liguori, D. A., and Austin, K. A.:
Plant diversity in managed forests: understory responses to thinning and
fertilization, Ecol. Appl., 9, 864–879, 1999c.Thum, T., Aalto, T., Laurila, T., Aurela, M., Kolari, P., and Hari, P.:
Parametrization of Two Photosynthesis Models at the Canopy Scale in a
Northern Boreal Scots Pine Forest, Tellus B, 59, 874–890,
10.1111/j.1600-0889.2007.00305.x, 2007.Valentini, R., Angelis, P. D., Matteucci, G., Monaco, R., Dore, S., and
Mucnozza, G. E. S.: Seasonal Net Carbon Dioxide Exchange of a Beech Forest
with the Atmosphere, Glob. Change Biol., 2, 199–207,
10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00072.x, 1996.
Valentini, R., Matteucci, G., Dolman, A., et al.: Respiration as
the main determinant of carbon balance in European forests, Nature, 404,
861–865, 2000.van der Molen, M. K., van Huissteden, J., Parmentier, F. J. W., Petrescu, A.
M. R., Dolman, A. J., Maximov, T. C., Kononov, A. V., Karsanaev, S. V., and
Suzdalov, D. A.: The Growing Season Greenhouse Gas Balance of a Continental
Tundra Site in the Indigirka Lowlands, NE Siberia, Biogeosciences, 4,
985–1003, 10.5194/bg-4-985-2007, 2007.Vitale, L., Di Tommasi, P., D'Urso, G., and Magliulo, V.: The Response of
Ecosystem Carbon Fluxes to LAI and Environmental Drivers in a Maize Crop
Grown in Two Contrasting Seasons, Int. J. Biometeorol.,
60, 411–420, 10.1007/s00484-015-1038-2, 2016.von Buttlar, J., Zscheischler, J., Rammig, A., Sippel, S., Reichstein, M.,
Knohl, A., Jung, M., Menzer, O., Arain, M. A., Buchmann, N., Cescatti, A.,
Gianelle, D., Kiely, G., Law, B. E., Magliulo, V., Margolis, H., McCaughey,
H., Merbold, L., Migliavacca, M., Montagnani, L., Oechel, W., Pavelka, M.,
Peichl, M., Rambal, S., Raschi, A., Scott, R. L., Vaccari, F. P., van Gorsel,
E., Varlagin, A., Wohlfahrt, G., and Mahecha, M. D.: Impacts of droughts and
extreme-temperature events on gross primary production and ecosystem
respiration: a systematic assessment across ecosystems and climate zones,
Biogeosciences, 15, 1293–1318, 10.5194/bg-15-1293-2018, 2018.Wagg, C., O'Brien, M. J., Vogel, A., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Eisenhauer, N.,
Schmid, B., and Weigelt, A.: Plant diversity maintains long-term ecosystem
productivity under frequent drought by increasing short-term variation,
Ecology, 98, 2952–2961, 10.1002/ecy.2003,
2017.Wales, S. B., Kreider, M. R., Atkins, J., Hulshof, C. M., Fahey, R. T., Nave,
L. E., Nadelhoffer, K. J., and Gough, C. M.: Stand age, disturbance history
and the temporal stability of forest production, Forest Ecol.
Manag., 460, 117865,
10.1016/j.foreco.2020.117865,
2020.Wang, C., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Gower, S. T.: Environmental Controls on
Carbon Dioxide Flux from Black Spruce Coarse Woody Debris, Oecologia, 132,
374–381, 10.1007/s00442-002-0987-4, 2002a.Wang, C., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Gower, S. T.: Environmental Controls on
Carbon Dioxide Flux from Black Spruce Coarse Woody Debris, Oecologia, 132,
374–381, 10.1007/s00442-002-0987-4, 2002b.Wang, C., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Gower, S. T.: Environmental Controls on
Carbon Dioxide Flux from Black Spruce Coarse Woody Debris, Oecologia, 132,
374–381, 10.1007/s00442-002-0987-4, 2002c.Westergaard-Nielsen, A., Lund, M., Hansen, B. U., and Tamstorf, M. P.: Camera
Derived Vegetation Greenness Index as Proxy for Gross Primary Production in a
Low Arctic Wetland Area, ISPRS J. Photogramm., 86, 89–99, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.09.006, 2013.Wofsy, S. C., Goulden, M. L., Munger, J. W., Fan, S.-M., Bakwin, P. S., Daube,
B. C., Bassow, S. L., and Bazzaz, F. A.: Net Exchange of CO2 in a
Mid-Latitude Forest, Science, 260, 1314–1317,
10.1126/science.260.5112.1314, 1993.Wohlfahrt, G., Hammerle, A., Haslwanter, A., Bahn, M., Tappeiner, U., and
Cernusca, A.: Seasonal and inter-annual variability of the net ecosystem CO2
exchange of a temperate mountain grassland: Effects of weather and
management, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, 2008.Xu, L., Baldocchi, D. D., and Tang, J.: How Soil Moisture, Rain Pulses, and
Growth Alter the Response of Ecosystem Respiration to Temperature, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 18, 10.1029/2004GB002281, 2004.Yi, C., Davis, K. J., Berger, B. W., and Bakwin, P. S.: Long-Term
Observations of the Dynamics of the Continental Planetary Boundary
Layer, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 1288–1299,
10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<1288:LTOOTD>2.0.CO;2, 2001.
Zeller, K. and Hehn, T.: Measurements of Upward Turbulent Ozone Fluxes above a
Subalpine Spruce-Fir Forest, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 841–844,
1996.Zeller, K. F. and Nikolov, N. T.: Quantifying Simultaneous Fluxes of Ozone,
Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapor above a Subalpine Forest Ecosystem,
Environ. Pollut., 107, 1–20, 10.1016/S0269-7491(99)00156-6,
2000.
Zielis, S., Etzold, S., Zweifel, R., Eugster, W., Haeni, M., and Buchmann, N.:
NEP of a Swiss Subalpine Forest Is Significantly Driven Not Only by
Current but Also by Previous Year's Weather, Biogeosciences, 11, 1627–1635,
10.5194/bg-11-1627-2014, 2014.
Zscheischler, J., Martius, O., Westra, S., et al.: A typology of compound weather and climate events, Nat.
Rev. Earth Environ., 1, 1–15, 2020.