The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Site‐level evaluation of satellite‐based global terrestrial gross primary production and net primary production monitoring
Abstract
Operational monitoring of global terrestrial gross primary production (GPP) and net primary production (NPP) is now underway using imagery from the satellite‐borne Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensor. Evaluation of MODIS GPP and NPP products will require site‐level studies across a range of biomes, with close attention to numerous scaling issues that must be addressed to link ground measurements to the satellite‐based carbon flux estimates. Here, we report results of a study aimed at evaluating MODIS NPP/GPP products at six sites varying widely in climate, land use, and vegetation physiognomy. Comparisons were made for twenty‐five 1 km 2 cells at each site, with 8‐day averages for GPP and an annual value for NPP. The validation data layers were made with a combination of ground measurements, relatively high resolution satellite data (Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus at ∼30 m resolution), and process‐based modeling. There was strong seasonality in the MODIS GPP at all sites, and mean NPP ranged from 80 g C m−2 yr−1 at an arctic tundra site to 550 g C m−2 yr−1 at a temperate deciduous forest site. There was not a consistent over‐ or underprediction of NPP across sites relative to the validation estimates. The closest agreements in NPP and GPP were at the temperate deciduous forest, arctic tundra, and boreal forest sites. There was moderate underestimation in the MODIS products at the agricultural field site, and strong overestimation at the desert grassland and at the dry coniferous forest sites. Analyses of specific inputs to the MODIS NPP/GPP algorithm – notably the fraction of photosynthetically active radiation absorbed by the vegetation canopy, the maximum light use efficiency (LUE), and the climate data – revealed the causes of the over‐ and underestimates. Suggestions for algorithm improvement include selectively altering values for maximum LUE (based on observations at eddy covariance flux towers) and parameters regulating autotrophic respiration.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The McCree-de Wit-Penning de Vries-Thornley respiration paradigms: 30 years later.
Amthor, J. (2000) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1006/anbo.2000.1175 · Cited by 822 · cited 2×
“However, the upper range of a physiologically realistic NPP to GPP ratio extends only to about 0.65 based on known rates of maintenance and growth respiration (Amthor, 2000), and that rate is expected in a cropland situation where stress is minimal.”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Baldocchi, D. (2008) · Australian Journal of Botany · doi:10.1071/bt07151 · Cited by 1,123
Spatiotemporal patterns of terrestrial gross primary production: A review
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Beer, C., Ciais, P., Harper, A., Jones, C., Murray‐Tortarolo, G., Papale, D., Parazoo, N. C., Peylin, P., et al. (2015) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/2015rg000483 · Cited by 743
Self-citationMechanistic evidence for tracking the seasonality of photosynthesis with solar-induced fluorescence
Magney, T. S., Bowling, D. R., Logan, B. A., Grossmann, K., Stutz, J., Blanken, P. D., Burns, S. P., Cheng, R., Garcia, M. A., Kӧhler, P., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1900278116 · Cited by 435
Damm, A., Guanter, L., Paul-Limoges, E., van der Tol, C., Hueni, A., Buchmann, N., Eugster, W., Ammann, C., & Schaepman, M. E. (2015) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2015.06.004 · Cited by 368
DAMM, A., ELBERS, J., ERLER, A., GIOLI, B., HAMDI, K., HUTJES, R., KOSVANCOVA, M., MERONI, M., MIGLIETTA, F., MOERSCH, A., et al. (2010) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01908.x · Cited by 297
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, D. P., Ritts, W. D., Cohen, W. B., Maeirsperger, T. K., Gower, S. T., Kirschbaum, A. A., Running, S. W., Zhao, M., Wofsy, S. C., Dunn, A. L., Law, B. E., Campbell, J. L., Oechel, W. C., Kwon, H. J., Meyers, T. P., Small, E. E., Kurc, S. A., & Gamon, J. A.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-03-23
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 666-684
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2116520559
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 25.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Site‐level evaluation of satellite‐based global terrestrial gross primary production and net primary production monitoring. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.00936.x
- The paper
- Turner, D. P., Ritts, W. D., Cohen, W. B., Maeirsperger, T. K., Gower, S. T., Kirschbaum, A. A., Running, S. W., Zhao, M., Wofsy, S. C., Dunn, A. L., Law, B. E., Campbell, J. L., Oechel, W. C., Kwon, H. J., Meyers, T. P., Small, E. E., Kurc, S. A., & Gamon, J. A. (2005). Site‐level evaluation of satellite‐based global terrestrial gross primary production and net primary production monitoring. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.00936.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.