Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Contemporary Carbon Dynamics in Terrestrial Ecosystems in the Southeastern Plains of the United States

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quantifying carbon dynamics over large areas is frequently hindered by the lack of consistent, high-quality, spatially explicit land use and land cover change databases and appropriate modeling techniques. In this paper, we present a generic approach to address some of these challenges. Land cover change information in the Southeastern Plains ecoregion was derived from Landsat data acquired in 1973, 1980, 1986, 1992, and 2000 within 11 randomly located 20-km × 20-km sample blocks. Carbon dynamics within each of the sample blocks was simulated using the General Ensemble Biogeochemical Modeling System (GEMS), capable of assimilating the variances and covariance of major input variables into simulations using an ensemble approach. Results indicate that urban and forest areas have been increasing, whereas agricultural land has been decreasing since 1973. Forest clear-cutting activity has intensified, more than doubling from 1973 to 2000. The Southeastern Plains has been acting as a carbon sink since 1973, with an average rate of 0.89 Mg C/ha/yr. Biomass, soil organic carbon (SOC), and harvested materials account for 56%, 34%, and 10% of the sink, respectively. However, the sink has declined continuously during the same period owing to forest aging in the northern part of the ecoregion and increased forest clear-cutting activities in the south. The relative contributions to the sink from SOC and harvested materials have increased, implying that these components deserve more study in the future. The methods developed here can be used to quantify the impacts of human management activities on the carbon cycle at landscape to global scales.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. F. Achard H. D. Eva H. Stibig P. Mayaux J. Gallego T. Richards J. Malingreau (2002) ArticleTitleDetermination of deforestation rates of the world’s humid tropical forests. Science 297 999–1002 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.1070656 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xmt1Cksbs%3D Occurrence Handle12169731

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Birdsey, R. A. 1992. Carbon storage and accumulation in the United States forest ecosystems. Rep. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-59, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Washington, DC. 51 pp.

  3. R. A. Birdsey L. S. Heath (1995) Carbon changes in U.S. forests. in L. A. Joyce (Eds) Productivity of America’s forest and climate change. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Report RM-271, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Fort Collins, Colorado Pages 56–70

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. A. Cairns S. Brown E. H. Helmer G. A. Baumgardner (1997) ArticleTitleRoot biomass allocation in the world’s upland forests. Oecologia 111 1–11 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004420050201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. W. Chen J. Chen J. Cihlar (2000) ArticleTitleAn integrated terrestrial ecosystem carbon-budget model based on changes in disturbance, climate, and atmospheric chemistry. Ecological Modelling 135 55–79 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00371-9 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXos1Shtrc%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. P. Ciais P. Peylin P. Bousquet (2000) ArticleTitleRegional biospheric carbon fluxes as inferred from atmospheric CO2 measurements. Ecological Applications 10 1574–1589

    Google Scholar 

  7. W. A. Cote A. F. Costanza J. P. Tonelli C. Lenocker R. J. Young K. B. Risse (2002) ArticleTitleA carbon balance method for paper and wood products. Environmental Pollution 116 s1–s6 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00240-8 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XhsFar Occurrence Handle11833897

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. S. Del Grosso A. Mosier G. Peterson D. Schimel D. Ojima W. Parton (2002) ArticleTitleSimulated effects of dryland cropping intensification on soil organic matter and greenhouse gas exchanges using the DAYCENT ecosystem model. Environmental Pollution 116 75–89 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00260-3 Occurrence Handle11817363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. M. D. Eve R. F. Follett M. Sperow K. Paustian (2002) ArticleTitleNational-scale estimation of changes in soil carbon stocks on agricultural lands. Environmental Pollution 116 431–438 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00220-2 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXovVertro%3D Occurrence Handle11822722

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. H. L. Gholz R. F. Fisher (1982) ArticleTitleOrganic matter production and distribution in slash pine (Pinus elliottii) plantations. Ecology 63 1827–1839

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. L. Gholz L. C. Hendry J. W. P. Cropper (1986) ArticleTitleOrganic matter dynamics of fine roots in plantations of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) in north Florida. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 16 529–538

    Google Scholar 

  12. L. S. Heath R. A. Birdsey D. W. Williams (2002) ArticleTitleMethodology for estimating soil carbon for the forest carbon budget model of the United States, 2001. Environmental Pollution 116 373–380 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00213-5 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXovVersb8%3D Occurrence Handle11822715

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. R. A. Houghton J. L. Hackler K. T. Lawrence (1999) ArticleTitleThe U.S. carbon budget: contributions from land-use change. Science 285 574–578 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.285.5427.574 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1MXltVSjsbw%3D Occurrence Handle10417385

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. G. C. Hurtt S. W. Pacala P. R. Moorcroft J. Caspersen E. Shevliakova R. A. Houghton I. B. Moore (2002) ArticleTitleProjecting the future of the U.S. carbon sink. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 99 1389–1394 Occurrence Handle10.1073/pnas.012249999 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xht1Cls7o%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. InstitutionalAuthorNameIPCC. (2001) Climate change 2001. scientific basis. Cambridge University Press Cambridge 944 pp

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. C. Jenkins R. A. Birdsey Y. Pan (2001) ArticleTitleBiomass and NPP estimation for the mid-Atlantic region (USA) using plot-level forest inventory data. Ecological Applications 11 1174–1193

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. W. Johnson D. E. Todd Jr. (1998) Effects of harvesting intensity on forest productivity and soil carbon storage in a mixed oak forest. in . . (Eds) Management of carbon sequestration in soil. CRC Press Boca Raton, Florida Pages 351–363

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. S. Kimball S. W. Running S. S. Saatchi (1999) ArticleTitleSensitivity of boreal forest regional water flux and net primary production simulations to sub-grid-scale land cover complexity. Journal of Geophysical Research D: Atmospheres 104 27

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kittel, T. G. F., and others. 1995. The VEMAP integrated database for modelling United States ecosystem/vegetation sensitivity to climate change. Journal of Biogeography 22:857–862.

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Liu W. A. Reiners M. Keller D. S. Schimel (1999) ArticleTitleModel simulation of changes in N2O and NO emissions with conversion of tropical rain forests to pastures in the Costa Rican Atlantic Zone. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 13 663–677 Occurrence Handle10.1029/1999GB900002 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1MXkslOru7k%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. T. R. Loveland T. L. Sohl S. V. Stehman A. L. Gallant K. L. Sayler D. E. Napton (2002) ArticleTitleA strategy for estimating the rates of recent United States land-cover changes. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 68 1091–1099

    Google Scholar 

  22. A. D. McGuire X. Xiangming J. Helfrich B. I. Moore C. J. Vorosmarty A. L. Schloss J. M. Melillo D. W. Kicklighter Y. Pan (1997) ArticleTitleEquilibrium responses of global net primary production and carbon storage to doubled atmospheric carbon dioxide: sensitivity to changes in vegetation nitrogen concentration. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 11 173–189 Occurrence Handle10.1029/97GB00059 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK2sXjslSmtb0%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. A. D. McGuire G. Esser J. Foler M. Heimann F. Joos J. Kaplan D. W. Kicklighter R. A. M. J. M. Meier I. Moore I. C. Prentice N. Ramankutty T. Reichenau A. Schloss H. Tian L. J. William U. Wittenberg S. Sitch J. S. Clein R. Dargaville (2001) ArticleTitleCarbon balance of the terrestrial biosphere in the twentieth century: Analyses of CO2, climate and land use effects with four process-based ecosytem models. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15 183–206 Occurrence Handle10.1029/2000GB001298 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXisVChtL4%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. R. S. Meldahl J. S. Kush J. N. Rayamaijhi R. M. Farrar Jr. (1998) Productivity of natural stands of longleaf pine in relation to competition and climatic factors.4 in R. A. Mickler S. Fox (Eds) The productivity and sustainability of southern forest ecosystems in a changing environment. Springer-Verlag New York Pages 231–25

    Google Scholar 

  25. Melillo, J. M., and others. 1995. Vegetation/ecosystem modeling and analysis project: comparing biogeography and biogeochemistry models in a continental-scale study of terrestrial ecosystem responses to climate change and CO2 doubling. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9:407–437.

    Google Scholar 

  26. M. Mencuccini J. Grace (1996) ArticleTitleHydraulic conductance, light interception, and needle nutrient concentration in Scots pine stands (Thetford, U.K.) and their relation with net primary production. Tree Physiology 16 459–469 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK28Xjt1Wru7w%3D Occurrence Handle14871714

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. J. A. Micales K. E. Skog (1997) ArticleTitleThe deposition of forest products in landfills. International Biodeteriation & Biodegradation 39 145–158

    Google Scholar 

  28. D. S. Ojima D. S. Schimel W. J. Parton C. E. Owensby (1994) ArticleTitleLong- and short-term effects of fire on nitrogen cycling in tallgrass prairie: a general model for soil organic matter dynamics: sensitivity to litter chemistry, texture and management. Biogeochemistry 24 67–84

    Google Scholar 

  29. C. D. Oliver (1981) ArticleTitleForest development in North America following major disturbances. Forest Ecology and Management 3 153–168 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0378-1127(80)90013-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. J. M. Omernik (1987) ArticleTitleEcoregions of the conterminous United States. Annnals—Association of American Geographers 77(1) 118–125

    Google Scholar 

  31. S. W. Pacala R. A. Houghton R. A. Birdsey L. Heath E. T. Sundquist R. F. Stallard P. Ciais P. Moorcroft J. P. Caspersen E. Shevliakova B. Moore G. Kohlmaier E. Holland H. Gloor M.F. Harmon S. M. Fan J. L. Sarmiento C. L. Goodale D. Schimel C. B. Field G. C. Hurtt D. Baker P. Peylin (2001) ArticleTitleConsistent land- and atmosphere-based U.S. carbon sink estimates. Science 292 2316–2320 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.1057320 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MzmtlWmsQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11423659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Y. Pan L. F. Pitelka K. Hibbard L. L. Pierce S. W. Running D. S. Ojima W. J. Parton D. S. Schimel J. Borchers R. Neilson H. H. Fisher T. G. F. Kittel N. A. Rossenbloom S. Fox A. Haxeltine I. C. Prentice S. Sitch A. Janetos R. McKeown R. Nemani T. Painter B. Rizzo T. Smith F. I. Woodward J. M. Melillo A. D. McGuire D. W. Kicklighter (1998) ArticleTitleModeled responses of terrestrial ecosystems to elevated atmospheric CO2: A comparison of simulations by the biogeochemistry models of the Vegetation/Ecosystem Modeling and Analysis Project (VEMAP). Oecologia 114 389–404 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004420050462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. W. J. Parton D. S. Schimel C. V. Cole D. S. Ojima (1987) ArticleTitleAnalysis of factors controlling soil organic matter levels in Great Plains grasslands. Soil Science Society of America Journal 00 1173–1179 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaL2sXmtlGnsbw%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. W. J. Parton D. S. Ojima D. S. Schimel (1994) ArticleTitleEnvironmental change in grasslands: assessment using models. Climatic Change 28 111–141 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK2MXis1Wjs70%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. K. I. Paul P. J. Polglase J. G. Nyakuengama P. K. Khanna (2002) ArticleTitleChange in soil carbon following afforestation. Forest Ecology and Management 168 241–257 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00740-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. L. L. Pierce S. W. Running (1995) ArticleTitleThe effects of aggregating sub-grid land surface variation on large-scale estimates of net primary production. Landscape Ecology 10 239–253

    Google Scholar 

  37. K. Pingoud A.-L. Perälä A. Pussinen (2001) ArticleTitleCarbon dynamics in wood products. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 6(2) 91–111 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1011353806845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. W. M. Post K. C. Kwon (2000) ArticleTitleSoil carbon sequestration and land-use change: Processes and potential. Global Change Biology 6 317–327 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00308.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Potter, C. S., and others. 1993. Terrestrial ecosystem production: a process model based on global satellite and surface data. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 7:811–841.

    Google Scholar 

  40. C. Potter A. Torregrosa J. Dungan M. Bobo J. Coughlan S. Klooster C. C. R. de V. B. Genovese (2001) ArticleTitleModeling seasonal and interannual variability in ecosytem carbon cycling for the Brazilian Amazon region. Journal of Geophysical Research D: Atmospheres 106 10423–10446 Occurrence Handle10.1029/2000JD900563 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXks1KktL8%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. J. W. Raich K. J. Nadelhoffer (1989) ArticleTitleBelowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems: global trends. Ecology 70 1346–1354

    Google Scholar 

  42. W. A. Reiners S. Liu K. G. Gerow M. Keller D. S. Schimel (2002) ArticleTitleHistorical and future land use effects on trace gas emissions using an ensemble modeling approach: Costa Rica’s Caribbean Lowlands as an example. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16(4) 1068

    Google Scholar 

  43. D. D. Richter D. Markewitz S. E. Trumbore C. G. Wells (1999) ArticleTitleRapid accumulation and turnover of soil carbon in a re-establishing forest. Nature 400 56–58 Occurrence Handle10.1038/21867 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1MXksFeisb0%3D

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. M. G. Ryan J. E .R. Hunt R. E. McMturtrie G. I. Agren J. D. Aber A. D. Friend E. B. Rastetter W. M. Pulliam R. J. Raison S. Linder (1996) Comparing models of ecosystem function for temperate conifer forests. I. Model description and validation in A. I. Breymeyer D. O. Hall J. M. Melillo G. I. Agren (Eds) Global Change: Effects on Coniferous Forests and Grasslands. John Wiley & Sons New York Pages 313–362

    Google Scholar 

  45. M. G. Ryan D. Binkley J. H. Fownes (1997) ArticleTitleAge-related decline in forest productivity: pattern and process. Advances in Ecological Research 27 213–262

    Google Scholar 

  46. D. S. Schimel T. G. F. Kittel W. J. Parton (1991) ArticleTitleTerrestrial biogeochemical cycles: global interactions with the atmosphere and hydrology. Tellus, Series A–B 43A–B 188–203

    Google Scholar 

  47. Schimel, D. S., and others. 1994. Climatic, edaphic, and biotic controls over storage and turnover of carbon in soils. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 8:279–293.

    Google Scholar 

  48. D. S. Schimel P. Ciasis P. Peylin B. H. Braswell M. J. Apps D. Baker A. Bondeau J. Canadell G. Churkina W. Cramer A. S. Denning C. B. Field P. Friedlingstein C. Goodale M. Heimann R. A. Houghton J. M. Melillo I. B. Moore D. Murdiyarso I. Noble S. W. Pacala I. C. Prentice M. R. Raupach P. J. Rayner R. J. Scholes W. L. Steffen C. Wirth J. I. House K. A. Hibbard P. Bousquet (2001) ArticleTitleRecent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems. Nature 414 169–172 Occurrence Handle10.1038/35102500 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXosFaisLo%3D Occurrence Handle11700548

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. K. E. Skog G. A. Nicholson (1998) ArticleTitleCarbon cycling through wood products: the role of wood and paper products in carbon sequestration. Forest Products Journal 48 75–83 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXlslWhsr4%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. D. P. Turner W. B. Cohen R. E. Kennedy (2000) ArticleTitleAlternative spatial resolutions and estimation of carbon flux over a managed forest landscape in western Oregon. Landscape Ecology 15 441–452 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1008116300063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. USDA. 1994. State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) Data Base: Data use information. Miscellaneous Publication Number 1492, 110 pp. Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center.

  52. P. Waisanen N. Bliss (2002) ArticleTitleChanges in population and agricultural land in conterminous United States counties, 1790 to 1997. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16 1137 Occurrence Handle10.1029/2001GB001843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. R. H. Waring S. W. Running (1998) Forest Ecosystems: Analysis at Multiple Scales. Academic Press San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  54. J. K. Winjum S. Brown B. Schlamadinger (1998) ArticleTitleForest harvests and wood products: sources and sinks of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Forest Science 44 272–284

    Google Scholar 

  55. R. J. Young C. Lenocker C. Row J. P. Tonelli W. A. Cotc (2000) ArticleTitleCarbon sequestration and paper: A carbon balance assessment. Journal of Forestry 98 38–43

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper benefits from comments made by Ge Sun and two anonymous reviewers. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support for this study that was provided by NASA Earth Science Enterprise (grant LUCC99-0022-0035), US Environmental Protection Agency (DW14938108-01-0), and US Geological Survey. Eric Sundquist from USGS at Woods Hole is thanked for his comments on tracking the dynamics of harvested materials. Liu’s work was partially performed under US Geological Survey contracts 1434-CR-97-CN-40274 and 03CRCN0001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuguang Liu.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Modification of CENTURY

Simulation of Net Primary Production as a Function of Forest Age

In the CENTURY model, NPP is not explicitly simulated as a function of forest age. Field measurements on forest growth indicate that C or biomass accumulations in young stands, particularly plantations, are highly related to forest age (Oliver 1981, Gholz and Fisher 1982, Mencuccini and Grace 1996). Biomass accumulation for plantations that are close to rotation age and for most natural mature forests will tend toward zero, with annual aboveground net primary production becoming almost entirely composed of litterfall and whole tree mortality (Ryan and others 1997).

Mencuccini and Grace (1996) studied a chronosequence of Scots pine plantations with age ranging from 7 to 59 years old. The leaf area index (LAI) reached a maximum at 20 years old when the canopy closure began. By age 40 the overstory LAI started to decrease, and LAI at age 59 was about half of that at age 20. Aboveground net primary production (ANPP) initially increased with canopy LAI, but decreased as the stands aged. Based on Meldahl and others (1998), excluding all the locations where forest ages differed by more than 5 years among plots, we found that ANPP and needle NPP decrease exponentially from about 20 to 110 years of age. The ANNP decreased at a rate faster than the needle NPP, suggesting that aboveground woody NPP was decreasing faster than the needle NPP. This pattern is general for most even-aged forests (Ryan and others 1997). The study of Meldahl and others also indicated that needle fall decreases exponentially with age from about 20 to 110 years old. The decline of fine litterfall during forest aging has been observed in other forest chronosequences as well (Waring and Running 1998). In this study, we assume that the gradual reduction of fine litterfall during aging observed at the Meldahl et al study sites applies to the forests in U.S. Southeastern Plains.

Simulation of Temporal Changes in Allocation

The fraction of carbon allocated to each tree component (i.e., leaves, branches, stems, and fine and coarse roots) changes as a forest grows (Gholz and others 1986, Waring and Running 1998, Ryan and others 1997, Meldahl and others 1998). Initially, trees tend to allocate more photosynthates to leaves or needles and fine roots to maximize the capture of solar energy and absorbance of soil nutrients. The fractions to leaves and fine roots decrease gradually with time as more and more photosynthates are allocated to woody tissues (e.g., branches, stems, and coarse roots). After reaching a maximum value, the allocation to woody tissues decreases gradually while at the same time the fractions to leaf and fine root increase gradually. Finally, the allocation fractions reach an equilibrium condition.

The original CENTURY used only two values to represent the change of allocation fraction to a specific tree component as a forest grows from young to mature. For example, allocation fraction to stems changed suddenly from 0.10 to 0.30 in the temperate mixed forest (i.e., TMPMX in CENTURY code) when a certain mature year was reached. Because most of the forests in the Southeastern Plains are relatively young and growing, it is necessary to modify the changes of allocation coefficients with curvilinear functions to better simulate the carbon accumulation in these dynamic forests. In this study, we replaced the stepwise two-value functions of CENTURY with regression equations derived from Meldahl and others (1998) to represent the dynamic changes of allocation coefficients in the forests.

Appendix 2: Data Assimilation

Initializing Forest Age and Biomass with FIA Data

The initial structure of forest age is critical for simulating carbon dynamics at the regional scale because many characteristics of forests, including standing biomass, NPP, and allocation pattern, are closely related to forest age. In this study, we assumed that the initial forest age structure within the sample blocks follows the statewide age structure characterized by the FIA databases. If the initial land cover of a site in 1973 was forest, then its initial age is randomly assigned according to the age structure of the forests of that state. Because the time (i.e., year) when the forest inventory data were collected might not be the same as the initial time of the model simulation, an offset time (i.e., the difference between the FIA inventory year and the starting year of the simulation) was added to adjust the age estimate. Once the initial age of the forest was estimated, the corresponding standing biomass was estimated based on the relationship between age and biomass as derived from FIA data.

Initializing Soil Texture, SOC, Bulk Density and Drainage with STATSGO Data

Once a soil component was determined, information regarding drainage condition, soil layers, soil texture, water holding capacity, bulk density, and soil organic matter content (converted to SOC using a factor of 0.58) were retrieved from the STATSGO attribute databases. For the variables with high (V1) and low (V2) values, the following procedure was used to assigned a value to minimize potential bias (Reiners and others 2002, Pierce and Running 1995):

where NORM is the standardized normal distribution. The above treatment assumes that the possible values of the soil characteristic follows a normal distribution with 95% of the values varying between V2 and V1. Considering the possible nonlinear impacts of texture fractions on biogeochemical cycles, a Monte Carlo approach was used to assign fractions of sand, silt, and clay in their corresponding possible ranges rather than using the mean fractions of the texture class specified in the USDA soil texture classification system.

Constructing Land Use History by Assimilating Remote Sensing, Census, and Inventory Data

It is necessary to disaggregate the agricultural land class into a combination of specific crop types for biogeochemical modeling because each type of crop has distinct biological characteristics and management practices, leading to differing impacts on carbon dynamics in vegetation and soils. Disaggregation of the agricultural land class was done stochastically based on crop composition statistics at the county level derived from USDA NRI agricultural census data (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/NRI/ ). The NRI database is a statistically based sample of land use and natural resource conditions and trends on US nonfederal lands. The inventory, covering about 0.8 million sample points across the country, was done once every five years.

Another task in generating LUCC sequences is to fill the gaps between consecutive land cover maps (i.e., the remotely sensed data). This was accomplished with crop rotation probabilities calculated from the NRI databases.

Our land cover change data was from the US Land Cover Trends (LCT) project (Loveland and others 2002). The LCT project was not specifically designed to capture all the forest harvesting activities. Optical reflectances at the clear-cut sites become indistinguishable from those of the surrounding mature forests 3 years after clear-cutting in the Southeastern Plains owing to fast recovery of understory and trees. The LCT data do not include selective harvesting activities. We derived the probability and intensity of selective cutting from FIA databases. The mean annual clear-cutting probability during a specific time period within a block was calculated using the LCT map by dividing the total mapped clear-cut area by 3 years. The probabilities of selective and clear-cutting were then used to stochastically schedule additional forest harvesting events that were not reflected in the LCT land cover maps. It was assumed in the model that a minimum age of 20 years was required for scheduling any harvesting activities in a forest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, S., Loveland, T. & Kurtz, R. Contemporary Carbon Dynamics in Terrestrial Ecosystems in the Southeastern Plains of the United States . Environmental Management 33 (Suppl 1), S442–S456 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-9152-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-9152-z

Keywords

Navigation