单 位：
Research Center for Ecological Forecasting and Global Change, Northwest A & F University, Yangling, China;Institute of Forest Resource Information Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing, China;Ecological Modeling and Carbon Science, Department of Biology Science, University of Quebec at Montreal, Montreal, Canada; Research Center for Ecological Forecasting and Global Change, Northwest A & F University, Yangling, Chin;State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China;Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
摘 要：
Background: In recent decades the future of global forests has been a matter of increasing concern, particularly in relation to the threat of forest ecosystem responses under potential climate change. To the future predictions of these responses, the current forest biomass carbon storage (FCS) should first be clarified as much as possible, especially at national scales. However, few studies have introduced how to verify an FCS estimate by delimiting the reasonable ranges. This paper addresses an estimation of national FCS and its verification using two-step process to narrow the uncertainty. Our study focuses on a methodology for reducing the uncertainty resulted by converting from growing stock volume to above-and below-ground biomass (AB biomass), so as to eliminate the significant bias in national scale estimations. Methods: We recommend splitting the estimation into two parts, one part for stem and the other part for AB biomass to preclude possible significant bias. Our method estimates the stem biomass from volume and wood density (WD), and converts the AB biomass from stem biomass by using allometric relationships. Results: Based on the presented two-step process, the estimation of China's FCS is performed as an example to explicate how to infer the ranges of national FCS. The experimental results demonstrate a national FCS estimation within the reasonable ranges (relative errors: + 4.46% and -4.44%), e.g., 5.6-6.1 PgC for China's forest ecosystem at the beginning of the 2010s. These ranges are less than 0.52 PgC for confirming each FCS estimate of different periods during the last 40 years. In addition, our results suggest the upper-limits by specifying a highly impractical value of WD (0.7 t.m(-3)) on the national scale. As a control reference, this value decides what estimate is impossible to achieve for the FCS estimates. Conclusions: Presented methodological analysis highlights the possibility to determine a range that the true value could be located in. The two-step process will help to verify national FCS and also to reduce uncertainty in related studies. While the true value of national FCS is immeasurable, our work should motivate future studies that explore new estimations to approach the true value by narrowing the uncertainty in FCS estimations on national and global scales.
