Sie sind auf Seite 1von 19

Drought Impacts on

Primary Production in
Southern California
Julia LaFond, North Carolina State University
With Thanks to Dr. Dar Roberts & David Miller
University of California, Santa Barbara

Background
Extended drought for the past few
years
Negative impacts on plant health
Stress inhibits primary production;
could affect the terrestrial carbon
cycle
Potential differential effect on
ecosystems
Pictures taken from http://geog.ucsb.edu/ideas/Locations.html

Project Goals
Assess how the drought has affected
primary production in Southern
California
Establish patterns of temporal
variation in production and related
variables
Extrapolate spatial changes in
production for different ecosystems

Temporal Analysis
Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) from
MODIS
Vegetation indices (NDVI, LAI) from MODIS
Surface temperature from field sites, land
surface temperature (LST) from MODIS
All MODIS data 1 km resolution
Sites: Sedgwick Airstrip (SED), Coal Oil
Point Preserve (COP), Painted Cave (PACA),
Mission Canyon (MCA)

Temporal GPP Trends


Monthly GPP sums peak in spring
(February May)
Lowest in winter (November
January)
Yearly total GPP decreasing since
2012
Drop less pronounced at SED and
COP
Most evident at PACA and MCA

Yearly Total GPP (kg C/m2/year)


2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
SED
GPP (kg C/m2/year)

PACA

MCA
COP

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
2011

2012

2013

2014
Year

2015

2016

0.3

Monthly Total GPP (kg C/m2/month)

0.25

0.2

PACA
MCA
0.15

SED
COP

0.1

0.05

2011
0

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

GPP and Temperature


GPP clusters at optimal temperatures
Monthly total GPP highest at monthly
average temperatures ranging from
285 290 K (12 17 C).
8 day GPP clusters at nighttime LST
of 285 K (12 C) and daytime LST of
295 300 K (22 - 27 C)

SED

GPP (kg C/m2/8 days

MCA

12

12

10

10

GPP (kg C/m2/8 days)

0
280

290

300

310

320

0
285 290 295 300 305 310 315

330

Temperature (K)

Temperature (K)

PACA
GPP (kg C/m2/8 days)

COP

12

12

10

10

GPP (kg C/m2/8 days)

0
280 285 290 295 300 305 310 315

Temperature (K)

50 100 150 200 250 300 350


Temperature (K)

Soil Moisture and GPP


Soil moisture decreases slightly
May remain high due to lower uptake
by plants
No clear relationship with GPP
PACA data unavailable; COP sensor
at different depth

COP
0.2
0.15
GPP (kg C/m2/month)

0.1
0.05
0
0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

SED

Soil Moisture (m3/m3)

0.25
0.2
0.15
GPP (kg C/m2/month)

MCA

0.05
0

0.25

0.2

0.1
0.05
0
0.15

0.05

0.1

0.15

Soil Moisture (m3/m3)

0.15
GPP (kg C/m2/month)

0.1

0.2

0.25

Soil Moisture (m3/m3)

0.3

0.35

0.2

0.25

COP Monthly Average Soil Moisture (m3/m3)


0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1

2012

2011

2013

2014

2015

2016

SED Monthly Average Soil Moisture (m3/m3)


0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

MCA Monthly Average Soil Moisture (m3/m3)


0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Spatial Analysis
Landsat data from 2011, 2013, 2015;
30 m resolution
Classification based on different
plant functional types (PFT):
grassland, trees, shrubs
GPP via light use efficiency (LUE)
model
Photosynthetically active radiation
(PAR) based on COP field data

2011

2013

Red = Annual
Herbaceous/Grass (AH)
Green = Evergreen Broadleaf
Tree (EBT)
Blue = Evergreen Broadleaf
Shrub (EBS)
Apparent grassland expansion
is an artifact of decreasing
brightness

2015

Clockwise from top left: GPP in 2011,


GPP in 2013, GPP in 2015.
GPP has decreased overall since
2011, most notably toward the
interior. It has remained high along
the coasts.

Red = 2011 GPP, green = 2013 GPP, blue

Conclusions
The drought has caused overall GPP
declines, but varies by site
Related climate factors such as
temperature and soil moisture
contribute
Coastal GPP has been least affected
Spatial reductions in GPP indicate
decreased health of trees and shrubs

Acknowledgements

Dr. Dar Roberts


David Miller
Dr. Jessie Sagona
Dr. Emily Schaller
Tanner Thompson
Mariah Heck
NSERC

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen