ise at r2

泥炭地のシミュレーションと気候変動－生態学と物理学の接点

伊勢武史海洋研究開発機構

自己紹介

徳島県の田舎の出身田んぼの動植物が好き釣りが好き

無目的な二十歳ごろ魚市場で働いたり

自己紹介

思い立ってアメリカ留学ワイオミング州

自己紹介

Western Wyoming Community Collegeいろいろ専攻してみる特に環境関連

University of Wyoming生態学にはまる体が弱い！じゃあ数学で

自己紹介 Harvard University

生態系モデリング物理・統計などもグローバルな視点で

自己紹介海洋研究開発機構

地球シミュレータ気候モデルに陸域生態系プロセスを組み込む！

気候シミュレーションに　もぐりこんだ生態学者

来年から（たぶん）　パーマネントの准教授

双方向のフィードバック

環境

生態系

気候土壌

などなど

炭素循環アルベドなどなど

生理生態的個体群的群集的生態系的

酸素とオゾン 2-way

interactions

大気

生態系

Fig

. 7.3

Carbon cycle

Atmosphere

6.4 GtC/yr120 GtC/yr

Vegetation drives global C cycle

双方向のフィードバック

環境

生態系

気候土壌

などなど

炭素循環アルベドなどなど

生理生態的個体群的群集的生態系的

Positive feedback?

Negative feedback?

Increase in litter

Ecosystem feedbacks to climate

positivefeedback

negativefeedback

Darktree canopy

Whitesnow/ice

Darktree canopy

Whitesnow/ice

Ecosystem feedback to climate

albedo

ケーススタディ

泥炭地の炭素循環と気候変動

Ise, T., A.L. Dunn, S.W. Wofsy, and P.R. Moorcorft. In revision. High temperature sensitivity of peat decomposition due to physical-biogeochemical feedback. Nature Geoscience.

Ise and Moorcroft (2006)Global Soil Data Task (2000)0

10

20

30

> 40 [kgC/m2]

土壌炭素•1500 GtC (2x in the atmosphere)•up to 30% in northern peatlands

なぜ泥炭地を研究？

光合成と呼吸

大気

生態系

植物

土壌有機物など

土壌微生物など土壌微生物など土壌微生物など

光合成と呼吸

大気

泥炭地では・・・

植物

土壌有機物など

B1

A1B

A2

冷帯と気候変動

泥炭地の炭素循環BogFen

Bog Disconnected from

regional hydrology

terrestrialization paludification

Forested bog, northern Manitoba

htt

p:/

/gsc

.nrc

an

.gc.

ca/la

nd

sca

pe

s/

(Anderson, Foster, & Motzkin 2003)

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/n_resource/wetlands/wetlands9_organic.htm

Mature spruce bog

泥炭地の SOC

humic layer

bedrock

fibrous layerhumic layer

fibrous layer

years

Young spruce bog

litter & moss

Peat column gains height

Rise in water table

mineral soil

bedrock

mineral soil

Mature spruce bogHow to model water table?

humic layer

fibrous layer

humic layer

fibrous layer

years

Young spruce bog

watertabledepth

watertabledepth

Hypothesis:Constant from surface(Clymo 1984)

humic layer

fibrous layerwatertabledepth

bedrock

mineral soil

bedrock

mineral soil

Strong positive feedback(paludification)

Mature spruce bog

humic layer

fibrous layer

humic layer

fibrous layer

years

Young spruce bog

watertable

height

Constant from bedrock

Strong negative feedback

watertable

height

bedrock

mineral soil

bedrock

mineral soil

Null hypothesis

How to model water table?

null?

?

fibrous layer

Mature spruce bog

humic layer

humic layer

fibrous layer

years

Young spruce bog

Which hypothesis ?

Somewhere in between

Needs for mechanisticsimulation! water balance

soil properties

bedrock

mineral soil

bedrock

mineral soil

How to model water table?

ED2

• Process-based land-surface model

• Fast timescale fluxes carbon water energy

Tatm

Tcanopy

Tsurface

Tsoil_1

Tsoil_i

Tsoil_n

eatm

ecanopy

esurface

esoil_1

esoil_i

esoil_n

CO2

CO2

CO2

CO2

Rin Rout

Input data update in 30 minutes meteorological variables

(SW, LW, air temperature, precipitation, humidity, wind speed/direction, and [CO2])

ED1: Moorcroft et al. 2001. Ecological Monographs 71:557-585.ED2: Medvigy et al. 2006. Ph.D Thesis. Harvard University.

Fibrous

Two peat types Fibrous Humic

Simulation of SOC

Real-time conversion to peat depth

Simple, but powerful Reproduce feedbacks

Humic

fluctuatesaccording towater balance

Biogeochemical model

bedrock

mineral soil

metmetmetmet CrIdt

dC

strstrstrstr CrIdt

dC

humhumstrstrmhum CrCrhdt

dC

MdTdkr ii

Fibrous

Humic

-10 0 10 20 30

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

soil temperature [ oC]

Td

(a)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00

.00

.20

.40

.60

.81

.0

volumetric water content

Md

(b)

-10 0 10 20 30

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

soil temperature [ oC]

Td

(a)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

volumetric water content

Md

(b)

Decompositiontemperaturedependence

moisturedependence

Frolking et al. 2002

bedrock

mineral soilT

dM

d

Biogeochemical model

2 simulations

Fibrous

Humic

Dynamic peat depth model

strmetfib CCC

fibfib

fibfib DF

CZ

humhum

humhum DF

CZ

Static model (mineral soil model)

0 500 1000 1500 2000

22

24

26

28

30

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]

z = 32cmz = 28cmz = 24cm

Equilibrium SOC: self-regulatory Equilibrium SOC: sensitive to initialization

bedrock

mineral soil

Results

0 500 1000 1500 2000

22

24

26

28

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]

Dynamic ModelStatic Model

positivefeedback

negativefeedback

1000 1020 1040

28

.42

8.7

29

.0

Results

0 500 1000 1500 2000

22

24

26

28

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]


positivefeedback

negativefeedback

1000 1020 1040

28

.42

8.7

29

.0

0 500 1000 1500 2000

22

24

26

28

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]


positivefeedback

negativefeedback

Results

hydrology

peat depth insulation

0 500 1000 1500 2000

22

24

26

28

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]


positivefeedback

negativefeedback

0 500 1000 1500 2000

0.3

65

0.3

70

0.3

75

0.3

80

0.3

85

year

fra

ctio

n b

elo

w w

ate

r ta

ble


0 500 1000 1500 2000

0.2

80

.30

0.3

20

.34

year

pe

at d

ep

th [m

]


frac

tion

belo

w w

ater

tabl

e

year

year

Comparison: BOREAS NOBS, 2003(Dunn, Barford, Wofsy, Goulden, & Daube 2007)Results

Julian day

wa

ter

tab

le d

ep

th [m

]100 150 200 250

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

observationsimulation

100 150 200 250

-50

51

01

52

0

Julian day

soil

tem

pe

ratu

re [

o C]

observationsimulation

wat

er ta

ble

dept

h [m

]so

il te

mpe

ratu

re [°

C]

Julian day

Climate change:equilibrium

40% loss

Extrapolate overnorthern peatlands,

72-182 PgC34-87 ppm

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]


15

20

25

30

0 500 1000 1500 2000

undercurrentclimate

under4

oC rise

year

soil

orga

nic

carb

on [k

gC m

-2]

HadCM3 SRES A2 at 2099 + 4.3 °C + 42.1 mm

~10% loss

Extrapolate overnorthern peatlands,

18-46 PgC9-22 ppm

Climate change:transient

1950 2000 2050 2100

26

27

28

29

year

soil

org

an

ic c

arb

on

[kg

C m

2]

undercurrentclimate

underHadCM3SRES A2


year

soil

orga

nic

carb

on [k

gC m

-2]

Bog：まとめ

泥炭地の形成・保持・崩壊には正・負のフィードバックが関わっている

気候と泥炭地のフィードバックは、これまでに考えられていたより双方向ともに重要

泥炭地の炭素循環BogFen

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/n_resource/wetlands/wetlands9_organic.htm

Fen Affected by regional

hydrology

Forested bog and fenland, northern Manitoba

http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/landscapes/

メタンGlobal mean radiative forcing

Wetlands:72% of natural source(Prather et al. 1995)

Production Oxidation Transport

Diffusion Bubbles (ebullition) Plant vascular system

メタンのプロセス

Diffusion

Ebullition

fibrous, aerobic

fibrous, anaerobic

humic, anaerobic

Diffusion

Ebullition

Production

Production

Oxidation

Production

Oxidation

Oxidation

Vasculartransport

rooting depth

fibrous, aerobic

humic, anaerobic

humic, aerobic

High water table Low water table

Walter & Heimann (2000)

fibrous

humic

mineral

Fen：観測との比較

ornl.daac.gov

1994: simulation vs. observation

0 100 200 300

-30

-20

-10

01

02

0

Julian date

so

il te

mp

era

ture

[

o C]

observed(95% CI)simulation

0 100 200 300

-15

0-1

00

-50

05

01

00

Julian date

wa

ter

tab

le [m

m]

observed(95% CI)simulation

0 100 200 300

0.0

00

.05

0.1

00

.15

Julian date

CH

4 e

mis

sio

n [m

ol m

2 s

1] observed

(95% CI)simulation

Fen:気候変動

Long-term simulation for equilibrium

4°C rise at year 2000

Changes in C storage and CH4

Establishment of a new equilibrium

今世紀中は・・・

Transient simulation in this century

HadCM3 anomalies after year 2004

Interannual variability and “dry” periods

Loss of metabolic C in dry periods (Dunn, Barford, Wofsy, Goulden, & Daube 2007)

HadCM3 SRES A2 at 2099 + 4.3 °C + 42.1 mm

yearw

ate

r ta

ble

de

pth

[m]

1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

-0.2

currentclimate

climatechange

1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

year

pro

po

rtio

na

l ch

an

ge

humicstructuralmetabolic

メタンも地下水位に敏感

Fenは乾燥した年に特に炭素を出す

温帯と冷帯の境を越えると、一気に崩壊するかも？

Fen：まとめ

泥炭地の未来 ?

boreal

temperate 4°C rise:Can cross the threshold?

Global Soil Data Task (2000)New et al. (2000)

piecewise 90-percentilequantile regression

泥炭地の未来 ?

http://maps.google.com

http://dustydavis.com/

http://www.canada.com

Prince Albert(MAT 0.7°C)

Bismarck, ND(MAT 5.6°C)

海洋研究開発機構での研究

sSEIB大気と、

ＣＯ２や水のやり取り成長・繁殖・競争・遷移

土壌に炭素蓄積

土壌炭素の分解

排出量

差し引きして大気中に残る部分

陸域海洋

[PgC

yr-

1]

ソース

シン

ク

実験結果：植物の効果は？ギガトン／年

純一次生産量NPP (月ごと )

Global total: 44.2 PgC/yr

純一次生産量NPP (年平均 )

植物バイオマス

温暖化前温暖化後

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

-50

05

0

x - 180

y[6

4:1

]

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

-50

05

0

x - 180

y[6

4:1

]

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

kgC/m2

土壌の炭素

温暖化前温暖化後

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

-50

05

0

x - 180

y[6

4:1

]

0

16

32

48

64

80

96

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

-50

05

0

x - 180

y[6

4:1

]

0

16

32

48

64

80

96

kgC/m2

現在のプロジェクト

土地利用の変化自然植生二次植生農地牧草地市街地

(Hurttらのデータ )

この部分終わりです。ご質問？

ise at r2

Education