5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Assessment of the SMAP Level-4 Surface and Root-Zone Soil Moisture Product Using In Situ Measurements

      1 , 2 , 1 , 3 , 1 , 3 , 4 , 1 , 3 , 5 , 5 , 6 , 6 , 1 , 1 , 3 , 1 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 5 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 11 , 16 , 17 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 7 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 22 , 24 , 24 , 22
      Journal of Hydrometeorology
      American Meteorological Society
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes

          Understanding and predicting ecosystem functioning (e.g., carbon and water fluxes) and the role of soils in carbon storage requires an accurate assessment of plant rooting distributions. Here, in a comprehensive literature synthesis, we analyze rooting patterns for terrestrial biomes and compare distributions for various plant functional groups. We compiled a database of 250 root studies, subdividing suitable results into 11 biomes, and fitted the depth coefficient β to the data for each biome (Gale and Grigal 1987). β is a simple numerical index of rooting distribution based on the asymptotic equation Y=1-βd, where d = depth and Y = the proportion of roots from the surface to depth d. High values of β correspond to a greater proportion of roots with depth. Tundra, boreal forest, and temperate grasslands showed the shallowest rooting profiles (β=0.913, 0.943, and 0.943, respectively), with 80-90% of roots in the top 30 cm of soil; deserts and temperate coniferous forests showed the deepest profiles (β=0.975 and 0.976, respectively) and had only 50% of their roots in the upper 30 cm. Standing root biomass varied by over an order of magnitude across biomes, from approximately 0.2 to 5 kg m-2. Tropical evergreen forests had the highest root biomass (5 kg m-2), but other forest biomes and sclerophyllous shrublands were of similar magnitude. Root biomass for croplands, deserts, tundra and grasslands was below 1.5 kg m-2. Root/shoot (R/S) ratios were highest for tundra, grasslands, and cold deserts (ranging from 4 to 7); forest ecosystems and croplands had the lowest R/S ratios (approximately 0.1 to 0.5). Comparing data across biomes for plant functional groups, grasses had 44% of their roots in the top 10 cm of soil. (β=0.952), while shrubs had only 21% in the same depth increment (β=0.978). The rooting distribution of all temperate and tropical trees was β=0.970 with 26% of roots in the top 10 cm and 60% in the top 30 cm. Overall, the globally averaged root distribution for all ecosystems was β=0.966 (r 2=0.89) with approximately 30%, 50%, and 75% of roots in the top 10 cm, 20 cm, and 40 cm, respectively. We discuss the merits and possible shortcomings of our analysis in the context of root biomass and root functioning.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Development of a global land cover characteristics database and IGBP DISCover from 1 km AVHRR data

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The SMOS Mission: New Tool for Monitoring Key Elements ofthe Global Water Cycle

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Hydrometeorology
                J. Hydrometeor.
                American Meteorological Society
                1525-755X
                1525-7541
                October 2017
                October 2017
                : 18
                : 10
                : 2621-2645
                Affiliations
                [1 ] NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland
                [2 ] KU Leuven, Heverlee, Belgium
                [3 ] Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland
                [4 ] Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California
                [5 ] Hydrology and Remote Sensing Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, Maryland
                [6 ] University of Montana, Missoula, Montana
                [7 ] Department of Geography, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
                [8 ] CESBIO, University of Toulouse, CNES/CNRS/IRD/UPS, Toulouse, France
                [9 ] Southeast Watershed Research, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Tifton, Georgia
                [10 ] Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
                [11 ] University of Salamanca, Villamayor, Spain
                [12 ] Southwest Watershed Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Tucson, Arizona
                [13 ] Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [14 ] National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, West Lafayette, Indiana
                [15 ] University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
                [16 ] Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                [17 ] University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
                [18 ] Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble INP, IGE, Grenoble, France
                [19 ] National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Ames, Iowa
                [20 ] Northwest Watershed Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Boise, Idaho
                [21 ] Grazinglands Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, El Reno, Oklahoma
                [22 ] Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observations (ITC), University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
                [23 ] Comisión Nacional de Actividades Espaciales, Buenos Aires, Argentina
                [24 ] Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
                Article
                10.1175/JHM-D-17-0063.1
                08eb9961-81ef-4bd6-a593-6d5c7443bcd2
                © 2017

                http://www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article