* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Modeling the spatial-temporal dynamics of water use efficiency in
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Saskatchewan wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Modeling the spatial-temporal dynamics of water use efficiency in Yangtze River Basin using IBIS model ZHANG Zhen1, JIANG Hong1,2*,LIU Jinxun3,ZHU Qiuan4,WEI Xiaohua5,ZHOU Guomo2, LIU Shirong6,ZHANG Xiuying1 1 International Institute for Earth System Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093.China 2 State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Forest Science & Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Carbon Cycling in Forest Ecosystems and Carbon Sequestration, Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry University, Hangzhou,311300, Zhejiang,China ;3 Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT, Inc.), contractor to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, 47914 252nd St., Sioux Falls, SD 57198;4 Institute of Environmental Sciences, University of Quebec at Montreal, Case postale 8888, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montreal, QC, Canada H3C 3P8;5 Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of British Columbia (Okanagan), 3333 University Way, Kelowna, BC, Canada V1V 1V7; 6 Institute of Forest Ecology and Environment, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China. Abstract: Climate change alters regional water and carbon cycling, which has been a hot study point in the filed of climatology and ecology. As a traditionally “water-rich” region of China, Yangtze River Basin plays an important role in regional economic development and ecosystem productivity. However, the mechanism of the influence of climate change on water and carbon cycling has been received little attention. As a coupling indicator for carbon and water, the Water Use Efficiency (WUE) is widely used, which indicates the water consumption for carbon sequestration in watershed and regional scale. A lot of studies showed that climate change has significantly affected the water resource and production of the ecosystems in Yangtze River Basin during the period of 1956 to 2006, when great climate variations were occurred. To better understand the alternation pattern for the relationship between water and carbon cycling under climate change at regional scale, the WUE and the spatiotemporal variations patterns were simulated in the study area from 1956 to 2006 by using the Integrated Biosphere Simulator (IBIS). 1 Supported by the State Key Fundamental Science Funds of China(2010CB950702, 2010CB428503), The State High Technology Funds of China(2009AA122001&2009AA122005), The State Key International Cooperation Project(20073819), The State Key Basic Research Funds of China (2007FY110300-04&08), NSF-China Project (40671132). * Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] The results showed that the WUE spatial pattern had the annual and seasonal variations. In general, the average annual WUE value per square meter was about 0.58 g C/kgH2O in Yangtze River Basin. The high WUE levels were mainly distributed in the eastern area of Sichuan, western area of Jiangxi and Hunan, and the highest value reached 0.88 g C/kg H2O. The lowest WUE’s were mainly located in the western area of Sichuan and Qinghai with the lowest values reaching to 0.36 g C/kgH2O. The WUE in other regions mostly ranged from 0.5 to 0.6 g C/kgH2O. For the whole study area, the annual WUE slowly increased from 1956 to 2006. The WUE in the upper reaches of Yangtze River increased based on the simulated temporal trends, which mainly located in the western area of the Sichuan Basin; The WUE of the middle reaches of Yangtze River had increased slightly from 1987 to 1996, and then decreased from 1996 to 2006; the lower reaches of Yangtze River always had smaller WUE’s than the average from 1956 to 2006. The spatiotemporal variability of the WUE in the vegetation types was obvious in the Yangtze River Basin, and it was depended on the climate and soil conditions, and as well the disturbance in its distribution areas. The temporal variations of WUE among different vegetation types had similar trends but different in values. The forest type had higher WUE than any other vegetation types ranging from 0.65 to 0.8 g C/kg H2O. The WUE of shrubland ranged from 0.45 to 0.6 g C/kg H2O, The WUE of tundra was the lowest, indicating the differences in plant physiology. The consistence of the spatial pattern of WUE with the NPP indicated that the regional production of Yangtze River Basin increased based on the water resources prompted and vegetation restoration. We found the drought climate was one of critical factor that impacts the alteration of WUE in Yangtze River Basin in the simulation. Keywords: Yangtze River Basin; Water Use Efficiency (WUE); land surface model; IBIS; 1 Introduction The increased atmospheric CO2 concentration and nitrogen deposition and more-intense droughts have affected the carbon and water cycles in terrestrial ecosystems (IPCC [1]). In fact, the carbon and water interaction effect is strongly coupled under climate change (Yu [2]). Water Use Efficiency (WUE), as an important indicator of carbon and water coupling, is used to quantify the trade-off of carbon assimilation and water loss. It links the carbon cycle and the hydrological cycle. WUE has been a study hot spot in plant ecology, agriculture, and earth system science (Kuglitsch [3], Jassal [4], Vermeire [5], Li [6]). At different scale levels, WUE has different meanings because of the different complexity of physical and physiological processes involved. At leaf level, how to improve productivity efficiently (Peterson [7], Ren [8], Richards [9]) has been addressed. Some studies focused on the responses of WUE to environmental factors in semi-arid plant physiology, based on the traditional measurements of vegetation biomass and soil hydrological parameters (Brueck [10], O'connor [11]). These approaches have an obvious limitation since the continuous temporal and spatial results are unavailable (Hu [12]). Some new methods such as eddy covariance technique were developed for studying ecosystem carbon and water exchange at multiple timescales (Ponton [13]). Although these new approaches brought more improvements for studying WUE at ecosystem level, it was still difficult to get a regional and continual level results of WUE which could represent a larger scope than eddy covariance techniques (approximately 1 ha) (Beer [14]). Meanwhile, as a powerfully tools to extrapolate current and future information, ecosystem process-based model had the advantages to estimate spatial-temporal WUE continually at multiple scales. Especially at regional scale, terrestrial biosphere model has its advantages to evaluate the responses of WUE to climate change (Tian [15]). As a source of industrial power and irrigation for agriculture , Yangtze River -is the longest river in China, including China’s numerous plant types and ecosystems (Ke [16]). Under more extensive climate change and anthropogenic activities, the ecosystems in Yangtze River Basin will therefore undertake more complex environmental pressure. To better understand the influence of climate change on the water and carbon cycles of terrestrial ecosystems, it is important to evaluate the WUE in the Yangtze River Basin of China. In this study, a terrestrial ecosystem model called Integrated Biosphere Simulator (IBIS) has been used to simulate the carbon and water processes and calculate the spatial-temporal variations of WUE in Yangtze River Basin from 1956 to 2006. Spatial and statistical analysis methods are applied to analyze the characteristics of WUE in different plant functional types. 2 Material and Methods 2.1 Study area The study area includes the Yangtze River and its tributaries, ranging from E90˚30' to E122˚25', N24˚30' to N35˚45'. The river runs 1,800,000 kilometers from the glacier on the Tibetan Plateau eastwards across southwest, central and eastern China. Its average annual precipitation and evaportranspiration is 1067mm and 541mm, respectively. Because of the complexity of its climate and topographical conditions, the spatial pattern of annual precipitation and evaportranspiration is highly heterogeneous. Vegetation covers are mainly warm-temperate broadleaf evergreen forest, temperate conifer evergreen forest, and Tibet Plateau grassland. 2.2 Model description IBIS was designed to integrate a variety of terrestrial ecosystem process within a physically consistent framework. It included multiple components that represent land surface processes, canopy physiology, vegetation phenology and carbon cycling (Delire [17]). The model was proved to be well simulating the land surface processes at different scales (El Maayar [18], Zhu [19]). IBIS was based on a combination of plant functional types, which were defined from several important ecological characteristics (Foley [20]). A modified version of IBIS was developed to improve the original model in some aspects such as nitrogen deposition module (Liu [21]), sub-pixel processing that considered vegetation and non-vegetation fractionation on each land pixel was also included. The land surface module in IBIS was constructed on the basis of the land-surface-transfer scheme (LSX)(Pollard [22,Thompson [23]), which presented two canopy layers, three snow layers, and six soil layers. The total evaportranspiration in each grid unit was calculated from the sum of three water vapor flutes: evaporation from soil surface, evaporation from vegetation canopy surface, and canopy transpiration. The rates of evaportranspiration velocity depended on the canopy conductance. The calculation equations were described as follows: where the subscripts ‘u’, ‘s’, and ‘l’ denote upper-story leaves, upper-story stems, lower-story vegetation, , , and were fluxes of water vapor from a unit leaf/stem surface area including evaporation of intercepted water, dew formation and transpiration, LAIl and LAIu represented the upper and lower canopy index respectively. The algorithm of soil evaporation was using beta method(Mahfouf [24]): where was the evaporation from bare soil, for evaporation, was the wind speed at was the air density, was the drag coefficient (atmospheric reference level), was the moisture availability parameter, was the specific humidity at , was the saturated specific humidity which is given by surface temperature. The canopy physiology module included photosynthesis and stomatal conductance, which were based on a canopy photosynthesis mechanism model and a semi-mechanistic model of stomatal conductance (Farquhar [25], Farquhar [26]). The NPP calculation differed from each other in different plant functional types: where was gross canopy photosynthesis, Ra was the rate of gross plant respiration. For C3 plants: where JE was the light limited rate of photosynthesis, Jc was the Rubisco limited rate of photosynthesis. For C4 plants: where , was the intrinsic quantum efficiency for CO2 uptake in C4 plant (mol CO2 Ein-1), , and was the CO2 limited rate of photosynthesis at low-CO2 concentrations. The detailed descriptions were available in Foley et al. (1996) and Kucharik et al. (2000) (Foley, Prentice [20], Kucharik [27]). 2.3 water use efficiency WUE had different definitions at different spatial-temporal scales and research communities (Richards, Rebetzke [9], Steduto [28]). At leaf level the water consumption was considered as transpiration (T), while the water consumption was using evaportranspiration (ET) at ecosystem level. In this study, WUE was defined as the ratio of net primary production (NPP) to evaportranspiration (ET) since NPP could reflect annual net carbon fixation in ecosystem (Law [29], Hu [30]). 2.4 Data The input data to IBIS simulation included vegetation cover map, soil map, topography map and climate forcing data. The 1:1,000,000 soil map of China provided the fraction of sand, clay and silt for each soil layer. The 1:4,000,000 vegetation map of China was applied to 15 vegetation types for IBIS simulation (Zhu [31]). The meteorological data was collected from 751 ground stations, and then interpolated into 0.085 degree (~ 10 km) resolution for IBIS simulation. The interpolation method was adopted from ANNUSPIN software (Hutchinson [32], Hutchinson [33]). The atmosphere CO2 concentration data was referenced from IS92 scenario in IPCC. The modified version of IBIS required additional input data, which included vegetation cover fraction data, initial biomass map and soil carbon storage map. The vegetation cover fraction data was used to represent the area fraction of forest, shrub, grass and non-vegetation cover at each pixel. A global land cover map from ENVISAT satellite was selected for calculating the area fractions due to its high accuracy. Initial biomass was derived from the database of Olson’ research (Gibbs [34]). Atmospheric nitrogen deposition data was from the Earth Science Information Partner (ESIP) database of EOS-WEBSTER, which covered the early 1990s. A fifty-year period simulation for spin-up process, during which the soil carbon pools accumulated to nearly equilibrium in 1956, was included. Simulation results for the period from 1956 to 2006 were analyzed. 3 Results 3.1 Model evaluation To validate the simulation results, two comparison methods were applied to evaluate the performance of the carbon cycling and WUE: a) the comparison between the simulated NPP and inventory data which was surveyed from 424 sample sites across the Yangtze River Basin during 1970 to 1995 (Luo [35]); We selected 208 mature forest data (forest age > 50a) and then compared with simulated NPP. b) the comparison of WUE between simulated results and literature reports in the vegetation types The average NPP from IBIS and inventory data was respectively 0.5175 C·m-2·yr-1 and 0.5142 C·m-2·yr-1. The difference between both was approximately 1%. The average simulated NPP from 970-1995 was compared to its corresponding inventory data (Figure 1). These results showed that the simulated NPP was well fitted the observations. Despite slightly scattering of points were found in Fig. 1, the overall simulated results were in reasonable scopes because the scale gap which was likely to increase the difficulties in comparison, and the inventory NPP also had random errors or uncertainty because it was collected from plenty of research literature. Fig.1 Comparison of estimated and observed NPP in inventory data of forest Owing to the inadequate researches in the study area, results for WUE in different vegetation types, as reported in the literature, were summarized and then compared with the IBIS results without considering geographical distinction (Table1). The difference was reflected in comparisons between both sets of values and calculation algorithm. The average of simulated WUE’s for the major vegetation types was calculated from 1990 to 2000. WUE comparison showed differences between simulated and other study ranged from 0.1 to 0.3 g C/kgH2O due to the differences of the scale and study methods (Yu, Song [2], Kuglitsch, Reichstein [3]). The WUE values of forest in IBIS were slightly lower than those in Tian’s study (Tian, Chen [15]). On the other hand, the WUE values of tundra were higher than Law’s work (Law, Falge [29]). The averaged annual WUE values were in the reasonable range of different studies for China. Table 1 Comparison between simulated WUE and other literature on different vegetation types Ecosystem type Mean WUE IBIS vegetation type (g C/kgH2O)) IBIS Simulated Reference WUE temperate deciduous broadleaf forest 0.92 (NPP/ET) warm-temperate broadleaf forest 0.87(NPP/ET) [15] temperate evergreen conifer forest 0.97 (NPP/ET) temperate evergreen conifer forest 0.86(NPP/ET) [15] deciduous shrubland 0.49 (NPP/ET) dense shrubland 0.52(NPP/ET) [15] C3 and C4 grassland 0.61 (NPP/ET) grassland 0.55(NPP/ET) [15] cropland 0.61 (NPP/ET) open shrubland 0.59(NPP/ET) [15] boreal evergreen conifers 0.79 (GPP/ET) boreal evergreen forest 0.82(NPP/ET) [3] evergreen broadleaf forest 1.88 (GPP/ET) temperate evergreen forest 0.85(NPP/ET) [2] tundra 0.41 (GPP/ET) tundra 0.43(NPP/ET) [29] 3.2 Spatial distribution of averaged WUE From 1956 to 2006, the averaged annual NPP value in Yangtze River Basin was 0.518 C·m-2, averaged annual evaportranspiration was 855 mm, and averaged WUE was 0.58 g C/kgH2O. The spatial distribution of WUE in Yangtze River Basin showed significant spatial heterogeneity (Fig. 2). The WUE values was lower in Sichuan Basin and Tibet Plateau than in the other region, ranging from 0.2 to 0.5 g C/kgH2O. In contrast, WUE values in most of other areas ranged from 0.4 to 1.0 g C/kgH2O. The lowest value of WUE emerged in Qinghai Province and western Sichuan with 0.36 g C/kgH2O, while the highest WUE value were in southern Qingling and southeast of Sichuan Basin with 0.88 g C/kgH2O. By comparing the geographic distribution of WUE across Yangtze River Basin, an integrated spatial pattern was found that WUE was significantly lower in western Yangtze River Basin than that in the east regions due to the differences of vegetation covers, which responded differently to terrestrial and climate condition. Fig.2 Spatial pattern of the mean annual WUE in Yangtze River Basin during 1956-2006 3.3 Temporal variations of WUE In this study, changes in two environmental factors (climate and atmospheric CO2 concentration) were both combined in IBIS simulation. During the studied period, the averaged annual NPP of the terrestrial ecosystems in Yangtze River Basin ranged from 0.5124 C·m-2·yr-1 in 1956 to 0.5067 C·m-2·yr-1 in 2001 (Fig. 3a). It varied substantially across the year and showed a tendency to slightly increase from 1956 to 2006. ET had no obvious trends during the entire study period (Fig. 3b). WUE of the plants in the terrestrial ecosystems of Yangtze River Basin ranged from 0.57 g C/kgH2O in 1956 to 0.56 g C/kgH2O in 2006 (Fig. 3c). The highest WUE was about 0.63 g C/kgH2O in 2002, while the lowest WUE was about 0.54 g C/kgH2O in 1959. WUE had an increasing trend from 1956 to 2006 with a substantial inter-annual fluctuation, which implied that rising atmospheric CO2 concentration had positive effect on WUE. Meanwhile, NPP trend was similar to ET, and it showed the consistency with climate change. The overall response of WUE variations to environmental change had a delaying effect. This can be partly explained by the adaptation ability of plants. Fig.3 Annual NPP (kg m-2), ET(mm/year), WUE(gC/kgH2O) across the terrestrial ecosystems of the Yangtze River Basin during 1956-2006 3.4 Spatial and temporal variations in upper, middle, lower reach of Yangtze River Basin The spatial distribution of WUE in upper, middle and lower reaches of Yangtze River Basin had significant heterogeneity due to its topographical and atmospheric conditions. The averaged WUE anomalies of recent 30a (1977-2006) were selected to analyze the spatial variations of each reaches of Yangtze River Basin (Fig. 4). The mean WUE anomalies were calculated from the difference between 10a averaged WUE and the overall average level (mean value of the period of 1956 to 2006). The Figure showed that WUE at western Sichuan Basin was lower than common value with 0.03 to 0.08 g C/kgH2O, while WUE in Hengduan Mountain was slightly higher ranging from 0.01 to 0.1 g C/kgH2O, where forest cover fraction was also more dense. This distribution demonstrated that WUE has an uneven spatial pattern in upper reach of Yangtze River. The WUE in most of the area in middle reach was relatively continuous except part regions of Jiangxi Province. The lower reach of Yangtze River was similar with the middle one. As a high spatial anomalistic region, WUE of upper reach of Yangtze River had more dramatic variations during 1987 to 1996, while WUE in middle reach increased widely especially in Jiangxi Province, where mainly covered by temperate broadleaf and conifer forests. The lower reach had no significant variations during this period. From 1996 to 2006, WUE in middle and lower reaches decreased with a range from 0.04 to 0.06 g C/kgH2O. In contrast, WUE in western upper reach maintained rising. One explanation was in this semiarid region plants had more buffering abilities to climate change. Fig 4 Spatial Patterns of Yangtze River Basin Figure 5 demonstrates that the averaged WUE in each reaches had an increasing trend in Yangtze River Basin, which was consistent with the integrated trend. The amplitude of the averaged WUE in upper reach was lower than that in the other two reaches, ranging from 0.09 g C/kgH2O. The amplitude of mean WUE of lower reach was the highest with about 0.23 g C/kgH2O. Although the amplitude differences of each reaches were significantly, the area should be considered (about 100, 68, 13 km2). In addition, the major vegetation covers in upper reach were alpine meadow and tundra, the ratio of soil evaporation to total evaportranspiration was larger than other plant function types, so there was an underestimation for WUE in this region. Fig 5 Variations of Mean WUE at different reaches in Yangtze River Basin during 1956-2006 3.5 Interannual variations of WUE on different vegetation types The interannual variations of different vegetation types revealed that the WUE variation trends of each vegetation types were similar with the overall trend, and showed increasing from 1956 to 2006. Nevertheless, the magnitudes of WUE across vegetation types were different. The WUE of forests have higher values when compared with grassland and savanna. The WUE value of forest ranged from 0.65 to 0.8 g C/kgH2O, while the grassland, savanna and tundra was 0.45 to 0.6 g C/kgH2O, and 0.36 to 0.46 g C/kgH2O, respectively. This indicated the water utilities abilities were different among plant types. The WUE variations of Yangtze River Basin were clearly affected by precipitation and temperature. The variations among vegetation types were mainly dependant on its photosynthesis and water-use abilities, the effect of climate change on plant were also altered by regions, the highest averaged WUE of shrubland were 0.54 g C/kgH2O at 1993, while the lowest value was 0.46 g C/kgH2O found at 1962. In contrast, the lowest and highest value of mean WUE of grassland were respectively 0.45 g C/kgH2O and 0.63 g C/kgH2O . The mean WUE anomalies of warm temperate forest were higher than other forest types. In general, the grassland and warm temperate forest were sensitive to climate change. Fig.6 Annual variability of WUE across vegetation types in Yangtze River Basin. (VT1: tropical evergreen forest; VT2: tropical deciduous forest; VT3: temperate evergreen broadleaf forest; VT4: temperate evergreen conifer forest; VT6: boreal evergreen forest; VT9: savanna; VT10: grassland; VT11: dense shrubland; VT12: open shrubland; VT13: tundra) 3.6 Influence of droughts on WUE The spatial pattern of WUE was directly determined by the spatial-temporal variations of NPP and ET, once climate change happened such as drought would closely relate to temporal and spatial patterns of WUE. Several severe drought events were reported in recent years (2006) in Yangtze River Basin. The precipitation at most area of the Yangtze River Basin in 2006 was much lower than the mean values during 1956-2006 (Fig 7C.), while precipitation was higher than normal in the southeastern of Yangtze River Basin. Although precipitation was reduced throughout the most area of Yangtze River Basin, NPP in 2006 still increased in some areas where precipitation decreased (Fig 7B). This might imply that precipitation was not a dominant limiting factor to NPP in 2006 and vegetation in this region had a buffering capability to adjust to drought events. ET in 2006 decreased in middle of the region with a maximum reduction over 15%, while ET still increased in the rest study area ranging from 0 to 5%. By comparing the NPP with ET distribution, the WUE spatial variation was found to be similar to that of NPP, displaying a great decrease in some extreme drought areas. But WUE variation range was slightly lower than that of NPP; this indicated that NPP was an important limiting factor on WUE. The inner mechanisms of different vegetation response to changing atmospheric condition needed to be further studied. Fig.7 WUE (g C/kgH2O, A), NPP (kg m-2, B), Precipitation (mm, C), ET (mm, D) anomalies (relative to 1956-2006 mean) in 2006 in Yangtze River Basin. 4 Discussions and conclusions In this study, a land process model IBIS combining with remote sensing data as input were used to quantify the spatial temporal variations of WUE in Yangtze River Basin from 1956 to 2006. Then the water use efficiency among different vegetation covers was analyzed. The averaged annual WUE of the terrestrial ecosystems in Yangtze River Basin was 0.58 g C/kgH2O2, annual mean values of NPP and ET were 0.518 kg C m-2 and 855 mm, respectively. Although WUE decreased dramatically in 2006, the overall trend showed increase from 1956 to 2006. A study in southern U.S. showed similar results that the WUE totally increased about 25% from 1895 to 2007 (Tian, Chen [15]), which was in contrast to the WUE in Yangtze River Basin (increasing about 15%). This increased WUE also was found in some experiments around the world (Peñuelas [36], Andreu-Hayles [37]). These similar observations implied that WUE may be increased even through NPP varied substantially due to the elevated atmospheric CO2. Different plant types have diversely water use efficiencies (Ponton, Flanagan [13], Tian, Chen [15], Bruemmer [38]). In this study, we found that the WUE of different vegetation types showed a decreasing order in Yangtze River Basin: Warm Temperate Forest > Temperate Forest > Grassland > Shrubland >Tundra > Desert. These differences of WUE were determined by the photosynthesis mechanisms and climate conditions among these vegetation types. As Eddy covariance systems provided, the simultaneous observed water and carbon fluxes in each vegetation covers also found that ecosystem WUE of forest was higher than that of grassland at a field level (Law, Falge [29]). Meanwhile, when using the ratio of NPP and ET to calculate WUE, the overestimated ET should be considered in some ecosystems such as grassland and shrubland because of the larger bare area of these ecosystems. The ET in western of Yangtze River Basin consequently had more “non-veg” induced evaporation included, and thus underestimated WUE in these regions. However, estimating the actual ET for sparse vegetation was difficult, further improvements on these aspects could reduce such uncertainties. Elevated CO2 could increase plant productions and affect plant evaporation through regulating stoma conductance (Li, Erickson [6], Beer, Ciais [14], McCarthy [39]). From the long term trend results of NPP, it was concluded that the elevated CO2 had a positive effect on carbon uptake of terrestrial ecosystems. Figure 7 suggested that NPP was an important limiting factor on WUE, the CO2 fertilization effect on NPP would consequently affect WUE. Based on the observation data from FLUXNET, WUE had increased about 83% under elevated CO2 concentrations (+340 ppm), indicating that higher CO2 concentration was fit for WUE (Li, Erickson [6]). Precipitation distribution was influenced by global climate changes and this influence likely to be continue in future, with increased frequency and intensity of droughts and other extreme climate events (IPCC [40]). Drought-induced precipitation pattern changes impact WUE spatial distribution. Numerous studies suggested that WUE increased under moderate droughts but decreased or remained constant under extreme droughts (Baldocchi [41]). The droughts event in 2006 showed that WUE was merely decreased in some extreme droughts regions, while it remained constant or slightly increased in most of the drought regions. However, due to the inadequate studies on underlying mechanisms of ecosystem response to climate change, WUE under different climate scenarios needed to be further identified in future studies. A terrestrial processes model to simulate ecosystem carbon and water cycling at regional level, combining with remote sensing data as input, could do a good attempt to quantify the spatial temporal variations of WUE at long time periods. Meanwhile, eddy covariance systems provide a valuable method to study inner water and carbon cycles at field level. Certainly, combining eddy covariance techniques with terrestrial processes model to assess WUE at different scale, is an important work need to be further studied. References [1] IPCC, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J.T. HOUGHTON.., Editors. 2001: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. [2] Yu G R, Song X, Wang Q F. Water-use efficiency of forest ecosystems in eastern China and its relations to climatic variables, [3] New Phytologist, 2008, 177 (4): 927-937. Kuglitsch F, Reichstein M, Beer C. Characterisation of ecosystem water-use efficiency of European forests from eddy covariance measurements, Biogeosciences Discussions, 2008, 5: 4481-4519. [4] Jassal R, Black T, Spittlehouse D. Evapotranspiration and water use efficiency in different-aged Pacific Northwest Douglas-fir stands, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2009, 149 (6-7): 1168-1178. [5] Vermeire L, Heitschmidt R, Rinella M. Primary Productivity and Precipitation-Use Efficiency in Mixed-Grass Prairie: A Comparison of Northern and Southern US Sites, Rangeland Ecology & Management, 2009, 62 (3): 230-239. [6] Li J H, Erickson J E, Peresta G. Evapotranspiration and water use efficiency in a Chesapeake Bay wetland under carbon dioxide enrichment, Global Change Biology, 2010, 16 (1): 234-245. [7] Peterson G, Schlegel A, Tanaka D. Precipitation use efficiency as affected by cropping and tillage systems, [8] Journal of production agriculture (USA), 1996. Ren X, Chen X, Jia Z. Ridge and Furrow Method of Rainfall Concentration for Fertilizer Use Efficiency in Farmland under Semiarid Conditions, Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2009, 25 (6): 905-913. [9] Richards R, Rebetzke G, Condon A. Breeding opportunities for increasing the efficiency of water use and crop yield in temperate cereals, [10] Brueck H, Erdle K, Gao Y Z. Effects of N and water supply on water use-efficiency of a semiarid grassland in Inner Mongolia, [11] Plant and Soil, 2010, 328 (1-2): 495-505. O'connor T, Haines L, Snyman H. Influence of precipitation and species composition on phytomass of a semi-arid African grassland, [12] Crop Science, 2002, 42 (1): 111. Journal of Ecology, 2001, 89 (5): 850-860. Hu Z M, Yu G R. Ecosystem level water use efficiency: A review, Acta Ecologica Sinia. 2009, 29 (3): 1498-1507. [13] Ponton S, Flanagan L B, Alstad K P. Comparison of ecosystem water-use efficiency among Douglas-fir forest, aspen forest and grassland using eddy covariance and carbon isotope techniques, [14] Global Change Biology, 2006, 12 (2): 294-310. Beer C, Ciais P, Reichstein M. Temporal and among-site variability of inherent water use efficiency at the ecosystem level, [15] Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2009, 23: GB2018. Tian H Q, Chen G S, Liu M L. Model estimates of net primary productivity, evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency in the terrestrial ecosystems of the southern United States during 1895-2007, Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, 259 (7): 1311-1327. [16] Ke J H, Piao S L, Fang J Y. NPP and its spatio-temporal patterns in the yangtze river watershed, Acta Phytoecologica Sinica. 2003, 27 (006): 764-770. [17] Delire C, Foley J A, Thompson S. Evaluating the carbon cycle of a coupled atmosphere-biosphere model, [18] Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2003, 17 (1):1455-1467. El Maayar M, Price D T, Delire C. Validation of the Integrated Biosphere Simulator over Canadian deciduous and coniferous boreal forest stands, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 2001, 106 (D13): 14339-14355. [19] Zhu Q, Jiang H, Liu J. Evaluating the spatiotemporal variations of water budget across China over 1951¨C2006 using IBIS model, [20] Hydrological Processes, 2010, 24 (4): 429-445. Foley J A, Prentice I C, Ramankutty N. An integrated biosphere model of land surface processes, terrestrial carbon balance, and vegetation dynamics, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1996, 10 (4): 603-628. [21] Liu J X, Price D T, Chen J A, Nitrogen controls on ecosystem carbon sequestration: a model implementation and application to Saskatchewan, Canada, Ecological Modelling, 2005, 186 (2): 178-195. [22] Pollard D, Thompson S L. Use of a Land-Surface-Transfer Scheme (Lsx) in a Global Climate Model - the Response to Doubling Stomatal-Resistance, Global and Planetary Change, 1995, 10 (1-4): 129-161. [23] Thompson S L, Pollard D. A Global Climate Model (Genesis) with a Land-Surface Transfer Scheme (Lsx) .1. Present Climate Simulation, [24] Mahfouf J, Noilhan J. Comparative Study of Various Formulations of Evaporations from Bare Soil Using In Situ Data, [25] Journal of Applied Meteorology, 1991, 30: 1354-1365. Farquhar G D, Caemmerer S, Berry J A. A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species, [26] Journal of Climate, 1995, 8 (4): 732-761. Planta, 1980, 149 (1): 78-90. Farquhar G D, Sharkey T D. Stomatal Conductance and Photosynthesis, Plant Physiology, 1982, 33 (1): 317-345. Annual Review of [27] Kucharik C J, Foley J A, Delire C. Testing the performance of a Dynamic Global Ecosystem Model: Water balance, carbon balance, and vegetation structure, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2000, 14 (3): 795-825. [28] Steduto P, Albrizio R. Resource use efficiency of field-grown sunflower, sorghum, wheat and chickpea: II. Water use efficiency and comparison with radiation use efficiency, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2005, 130 (3-4): 269-281. [29] Law B E, Falge E, Gu L. Environmental controls over carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of terrestrial vegetation, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2002, 113 (1-4): 97-120. [30] Hu Z, Yu G, Fu Y. Effects of vegetation control on ecosystem water use efficiency within and among four grassland ecosystems in China, Global Change Biology, 2008, 14 (7): 1609-1619. [31] Zhu Q A. Evaluating the effects of climate change on spatio-temporal patterns of water balance and carbon budget of Chinese terrestrial ecosystems [D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University, 2009. [32] Hutchinson M F, Gessler P E. Splines - more than just a smooth interpolator, Geoderma, 1994, 62: 45-67. [33] Hutchinson M F. A summary of some surface fitting and contouring programs for noisy data., CSIRO Division of Mathematics and Statistics, Consulting Report ACT 84/6. Canberra, Australia., 1984. [34] Gibbs H, Olsen L, Boden T. Major World Ecosystem Complexes Ranked by Carbon in Live Vegetation: An Updated Database Using the GLC2000 Land Cover Product, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, USA, 2006. [35] Luo T X. Patterns of net primary productivity for Chinese major forest types and its mathematical models [D]. Beijing: the Chinese Academy of Science and State Planning Commission, 1996. [36] Peñuelas J, Canadell J G, Ogaya R. Increased water-use efficiency during the 20th century did not translate into enhanced tree growth, [37] Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2010: no-no. Andreu-Hayles L, Planells O, GutiÉRrez E. Long tree-ring chronologies reveal 20th century increases in water-use efficiency but no enhancement of tree growth at five Iberian pine forests, Global Change Biology, 2010: no-no. [38] Bruemmer C, Black T. Evapotranspiration and Water Use Efficiency of Canadian Forests and Wetlands. 2009, American Geophysical Union, 2000 Florida Ave., N. W. Washington DC 20009 USA. [39] McCarthy H R, Oren R, Johnsen K H. Re-assessment of plant carbon dynamics at the Duke free-air CO2 enrichment site: interactions of atmospheric [CO2] with nitrogen and water availability over stand development, [40] New Phytologist, 2010, 185 (2): 514-528. IPCC, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. SOLOMON.., Editors. 2007: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. [41] Baldocchi D, Measuring and modelling carbon dioxide and water vapour exchange over a temperate broad-leaved forest during the 1995 summer drought, 1997, 20 (9): 1108-1122. Plant Cell and Environment,