Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Ouimette, Andrew

Publications and source records attributed to Ouimette, Andrew.

Network of networks: Time series clustering of AmeriFlux sites

Environmental observation networks, such as AmeriFlux, are foundational for monitoring ecosystem response to climate change, management practices, and natural disturbances; however, their effectiveness depends on their representativeness for the regions or continents. We proposed an empirical, time series approach to quantify the similarity of ecosystem fluxes across AmeriFlux sites. We extracted the diel and seasonal characteristics (i.e., amplitudes, phases) from carbon dioxide, water vapor, energy, and momentum fluxes, which reflect the effects of climate, plant phenology, and ecophysiology on the observations, and explored the potential aggregations of AmeriFlux sites through hierarchical clustering. While net radiation and temperature showed latitudinal clustering as expected, flux variables revealed a more uneven clustering with many small (number of sites < 5), unique groups and a few large (> 100) to intermediate (15–70) groups, highlighting the significant ecological regulations of ecosystem fluxes. Many identified unique groups were from under-sampled ecoregions and biome types of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), with distinct flux dynamics compared to the rest of the network. At the finer spatial scale, local topography, disturbance, management, edaphic, and hydrological regimes further enlarge the difference in flux dynamics within the groups. Nonetheless, our clustering approach is a data-driven method to interpret the AmeriFlux network, informing future cross-site syntheses, upscaling, and model-data benchmarking research. Finally, we highlighted the unique and underrepresented sites in the AmeriFlux network, which were found mainly in Hawaii and Latin America, mountains, and at under-sampled IGBP types (e.g., urban, open water), motivating the incorporation of new/unregistered sites from these groups.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-Ho1 Howland Forest (main tower)

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ho1 Howland Forest (main tower). This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ho1 Howland Forest (main tower) produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Closed conifer forest, minimal disturbance. References: Fernandez et al. (1993), Canadian Journal of Soil Science 73 317-328. Hollinger et al. (1999), Global Change Biology 5: 891-902. Savage KE, Davidson EA (2001), Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15 337-350. Scott et al. (2004), Environmental Management, Vol. 33, Supplement 1, pp. S9-S22. Hollinger et al. (2004), Global Change Biology 10: 1689-1706.

Ouimette, Andrew↗

Phenology of Photosynthesis in Winter‐Dormant Temperate and Boreal Forests: Long‐Term Observations From Flux Towers and Quantitative Evaluation of Phenology Models

Abstract We examined the seasonality of photosynthesis in 46 evergreen needleleaf (evergreen needleleaf forests (ENF)) and deciduous broadleaf (deciduous broadleaf forests (DBF)) forests across North America and Eurasia. We quantified the onset and end (Start GPP and End GPP ) of photosynthesis in spring and autumn based on the response of net ecosystem exchange of CO 2 to sunlight. To test the hypothesis that snowmelt is required for photosynthesis to begin, these were compared with end of snowmelt derived from soil temperature. ENF forests achieved 10% of summer photosynthetic capacity ∼3 weeks before end of snowmelt, while DBF forests achieved that capacity ∼4 weeks afterward. DBF forests increased photosynthetic capacity in spring faster (1.95% d −1 ) than ENF (1.10% d −1 ), and their active season length (End GPP –Start GPP ) was ∼50 days shorter. We hypothesized that warming has influenced timing of the photosynthesis season. We found minimal evidence for long‐term change in Start GPP , End GPP , or air temperature, but their interannual anomalies were significantly correlated. Warmer weather was associated with earlier Start GPP (1.3–2.5 days °C −1 ) or later End GPP (1.5–1.8 days °C −1 , depending on forest type and month). Finally, we tested whether existing phenological models could predict Start GPP and End GPP . For ENF forests, air temperature‐ and daylength‐based models provided best predictions for Start GPP , while a chilling‐degree‐day model was best for End GPP . The root mean square errors (RMSE) between predicted and observed Start GPP and End GPP were 11.7 and 11.3 days, respectively. For DBF forests, temperature‐ and daylength‐based models yielded the best results (RMSE 6.3 and 10.5 days).

Environmental Sciences & Ecology↗

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-Ced Cedar Bridge

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ced Cedar Bridge. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ced Cedar Bridge produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Wildfires and prescribed fires are a common occurrence in the NJ Pinelands. Prior to a 1995 nonstand replacing wildfire, the stand was last burned in the very large wildfire in 1963. Plow lines were installed for fire control in December of 2007, followed by a prescribed burns in 2008 and 2013, conducted by the New Jersey Forest Fire Service. Pine looper defoliated the stand in 1998, and Gypsy moth defoliated the understory and deciduos oaks in 2007. Pitch Pines are largely unaffected by defoliation by Gypsy moth.

Skowronski, Nicholas S.↗

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-Ho2 Howland Forest (west tower)

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ho2 Howland Forest (west tower). This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ho2 Howland Forest (west tower) produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Closed conifer forest, minimal disturbance. References: Fernandez et al. (1993), Canadian Journal of Soil Science 73 317-328. Hollinger et al. (1999), Global Change Biology 5: 891-902. Savage KE, Davidson EA (2001), Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15 337-350. Scott et al. (2004), Environmental Management, Vol. 33, Supplement 1, pp. S9-S22. Hollinger et al. (2004), Global Change Biology 10: 1689-1706.

Ouimette, Andrew↗