Using a Bayesian framework and global sensitivity analysis to identify strengths and weaknesses of two process-based models differing in representation of autotrophic respiration

  • Authors:

  • F. Minunno;M. Van Oijen;D. R. Cameron;S. Cerasoli;J. S. Pereira;M. Tomé

  • Affiliations:

  • Forest Research Center, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal;CEH-Edinburgh, Bush Estate Penicuik, EH26 0QB, UK;CEH-Edinburgh, Bush Estate Penicuik, EH26 0QB, UK;Forest Research Center, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal;Forest Research Center, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal;Forest Research Center, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

  • Venue:
  • Environmental Modelling & Software
  • Year:
  • 2013

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Process-based models are powerful tools for sustainable and adaptive forest management. Bayesian statistics and global sensitivity analysis allow to reduce uncertainties in parameters and outputs, and they provide better insight of model behaviour. In this work two versions of a process-based model that differed in the autotrophic respiration modelling were analysed. The original version (3PGN) was based on a constant ratio between net and gross primary production, while in a new version (3PGN^*) the autotrophic respiration was modelled as a function of temperature and biomass. A Bayesian framework, and a global sensitivity analysis (Morris method) were used to reduce parametric uncertainty, to highlight strengths and weaknesses of the models and to evaluate their performances. The Bayesian approach allowed also to identify the weaknesses and strengths of the dataset used for the analyses. The Morris method in combination with the Bayesian framework helped to identify key parameters and gave a deeper understanding of model behaviour. Both model versions reliably predicted average stand diameter at breast height, average stand height, stand volume and stem biomass. On the contrary, the models were not able to accurately predict net ecosystem production. Bayesian model comparison showed that 3PGN^*, with the new autotrophic respiration model, has a higher conditional probability of being correct than the original 3PGN model.