Improving remote sensing-based net primary production estimation in the grazed land with defoliation formulation model
Journal of Mountain Science, ISSN: 1672-6316, Vol: 16, Issue: 2, Page: 323-336
2019
- 7Citations
- 22Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- Captures22
- Readers22
- 22
Article Description
Remote sensing (RS) technologies provide robust techniques for quantifying net primary productivity (NPP) which is a key component of ecosystem production management. Applying RS, the confounding effects of carbon consumed by livestock grazing were neglected by previous studies, which created uncertainties and underestimation of NPP for the grazed lands. The grasslands in Xinjiang were selected as a case study to improve the RS based NPP estimation. A defoliation formulation model (DFM) based on RS is developed to evaluate the extent of underestimated NPP between 1982 and 2011. The estimates were then used to examine the spatiotemporal patterns of the calculated NPP. Results show that average annual underestimated NPP was 55.74 gC·m yr over the time period understudied, accounting for 29.06% of the total NPP for the Xinjiang grasslands. The spatial distribution of underestimated NPP is related to both grazing intensity and time. Data for the Xinjiang grasslands show that the average annual NPP was 179.41 gC·m yr , the annual NPP with an increasing trend was observed at a rate of 1.04 gC·m yr between 1982 and 2011. The spatial distribution of NPP reveals distinct variations from high to low encompassing the geolocations of the Tianshan Mountains, northern and southern Xinjiang Province and corresponding with mid-mountain meadow, typical grassland, desert grassland, alpine meadow, and saline meadow grassland types. This study contributes to improving RS-based NPP estimations for grazed land and provides a more accurate data to support the scientific management of fragile grassland ecosystems in Xinjiang.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85061494061&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2.pdf; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2/fulltext.html; http://sciencechina.cn/gw.jsp?action=cited_outline.jsp&type=1&id=6434855&internal_id=6434855&from=elsevier; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11629-018-5200-2
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know