Water vapour flux, expressed as evapotranspiration (ET), is critical for understanding the earth climate system and the complex heat–water exchange mechanisms between the land surface and the atmosphere in the high-altitude Tibetan Plateau (TP) region. However, the performance of ET products over the TP has not been adequately assessed, and there is still considerable uncertainty in the magnitude and spatial variability in the water vapour released from the TP into the atmosphere. In this study, we evaluated 22 ET products in the TP against in situ observations and basin-scale water balance estimations. This study also evaluated the spatiotemporal variability of the total vapour flux and of its components to clarify the vapour flux magnitude and variability in the TP. The results showed that the remote sensing high-resolution global ET data from ETMonitor and PMLV2 had a high accuracy, with overall better accuracy than other global and regional ET data with fine spatial resolution (∼ 1 km), when comparing with in situ observations. When compared with water balance estimates of ET at the basin scale, ETMonitor and PMLV2 at finer spatial resolution and GLEAM and TerraClimate at coarse spatial resolution showed good agreement. Different products showed different patterns of spatiotemporal variability, with large differences in the central to western TP. The multi-year and multi-product mean ET in the TP was 333.1 mm yr−1, with a standard deviation of 38.3 mm yr−1. The ET components (i.e. plant transpiration, soil evaporation, canopy rainfall interception evaporation, open-water evaporation, and snow/ice sublimation) available from some products were also compared, and the contribution of these components to total ET varied considerably, even in cases where the total ET from different products was similar. Soil evaporation accounts for most of the total ET in the TP, followed by plant transpiration and canopy rainfall interception evaporation, while the contributions from open-water evaporation and snow/ice sublimation cannot be negligible.@en

Satellite remote sensing (SRS) provides huge potential for tracking progress towards conservation targets and goals, but SRS products need to be tailored towards the requirements of ecological users and policymakers. In this viewpoint article, we propose to advance SRS products with a terrestrial biodiversity focus for tracking the goals and targets of the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework (GBF). Of 371 GBF biodiversity indicators, we identified 58 unique indicators for tracking the state of terrestrial biodiversity, spanning 2 goals and 8 targets. Thirty-six shared enough information to analyse their underlying workflows and spatial information products. We used the concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBV) to connect spatial information products to different dimensions of biodiversity (e.g. species populations, species traits, and ecosystem structure), and then counted EBV usage across GBF goals and targets. Combined with published scores on feasibility, accuracy, and immaturity of SRS products, we identified a priority list of terrestrial SRS products representing opportunities for scientific development in the next decade. From this list, we suggest two key directions for advancing SRS products and workflows in the GBF context using current instruments and technologies. First, existing terrestrial ecosystem distributions and live cover fraction SRS products (of above-ground biomass, ecosystem fragmentation, ecosystem structural variance, fraction of vegetation cover, plant area index profile, and land cover) need to be refined using a co-design approach to achieve harmonized ecosystem taxonomies, reference states and improved thematic detail. Second, new SRS products related to plant physiology and primary productivity (e.g. leaf area index, chlorophyll content & flux, foliar N/P/K content, and carbon cycle) need to be developed to better estimate plant functional traits, especially with deep learning techniques, radiative transfer models and multi-sensor frameworks. Advancements along these two routes could greatly improve the tracking of GBF target 2 (‘improve connectivity of priority terrestrial ecosystems), target 3 (‘ensure management of protected areas’), target 6 (‘control the introduction and impact of invasive alien species’), target 8 (‘minimize impact of climate change on biodiversity’), target 10 (‘increase sustainable productivity of agricultural and forested ecosystems’) and target 12 (‘increase public urban green/blue spaces’). Such improvements can have secondary benefits for other EBVs, e.g. as predictor variables for modelling species distributions and population abundances (i.e. data that are required in several GBF indicators). We hope that our viewpoint stimulates the advancement of biodiversity monitoring from space and a stronger collaboration among ecologists, SRS scientists and policy experts.

@en