Toward error analysis of large-scale forest carbon budgets
Toward error analysis of large-scale forest carbon budgets
复制标题
DOI：
10.1046/j.1365-2699.2000.00197.x
复制
发表时间：
2000-07
影响因子：
6.4
通讯作者：
D. Phillips;Sandra A. Brown;P. Schroeder;R. Birdsey
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Phillips;Sandra A. Brown;P. Schroeder;R. Birdsey
森林碳源和碳汇的量化是国家温室气体净排放清单的一个重要部分。已经构建了几个这样的森林碳预算，但很少有人努力分析误差来源以及这些误差如何传播，以确定预测碳通量的总体不确定性。我们进行了误差分析的树木体积和体积变化的估计确定的永久性样地为美国东南部的一个步骤，对美国农业部林务局建造的碳预算的错误进行评估。识别的错误组件包括：样地选择的抽样误差、树高和胸径的测量误差以及蓄积量的回归误差。大部分的传播错误的体积和体积变化估计是由于采样？输入错误。误差估计取决于面积的大小检查（单个国家的区域）和树木的生长和招聘平衡死亡率和收获的程度。近似区域95%置信区间为3 455 073 000？现存活立木3960.6万m3（1.1%）; 4210 000（39.7%）m3年-1，用于生长蓄积量变化。这些方法应该是有用的，在进一步分析的误差来源和总体不确定性的国家努力，以量化碳通量asso？与森林和土地覆盖动态有关。
Quantification of forest carbon sources and sinks is an important part of national inventories of net greenhouse gas emissions. Several such forest carbon budgets have been constructed, but little effort has been made to analyse the sources of error and how these errors propagate to determine the overall uncertainty of projected carbon fluxes. We performed an error analysis for estimates of tree volume and volume change determined by repeated measurements of permanent sample plots for the South-eastern United States as a step toward assessing errors in the carbon budget constructed by the USDA Forest Service. Error components recognized were: sampling error for sample plot selection; measurement error for tree height and diameter; and regression error for tree volume. Most of the propagated error in volume and volume change estimation was due to samp? ling error. Error estimates depended on the size of the area examined (single state to region) and the degree to which tree growth and recruitment balanced mortality and harvesting. Approximate regional 95% confidence intervals were 3 455 073 000 ?39 606 000 (1.1%) m3 for current growing-stock volume, and 10 616 000 ?4210 000 (39.7%) m3 years-1 for growing-stock volume change. These methods should be useful in further analysis of the sources of error and overall uncertainty in national efforts to quantify carbon fluxes asso? ciated with forests and land cover dynamics.