Bayesian multimodel inference of soil microbial respiration models: Theory, application and future prospective

Abstract:

Models in biogeoscience involve uncertainties in observation data, model inputs, model structure, model processes and modeling scenarios. To accommodate for different sources of uncertainty, multimodal analysis such as model combination, model selection, model elimination or model discrimination are becoming more popular. To illustrate theoretical and practical challenges of multimodal analysis, we use an example about microbial soil respiration modeling. Global soil respiration releases more than ten times more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than all anthropogenic emissions. Thus, improving our understanding of microbial soil respiration is essential for improving climate change models. This study focuses on a poorly understood phenomena, which is the soil microbial respiration pulses in response to episodic rainfall pulses (the “Birch effect”). We hypothesize that the “Birch effect” is generated by the following three mechanisms. To test our hypothesis, we developed and assessed five evolving microbial-enzyme models against field measurements from a semiarid Savannah that is characterized by pulsed precipitation. These five model evolve step-wise such that the first model includes none of these three mechanism, while the fifth model includes the three mechanisms. The basic component of Bayesian multimodal analysis is the estimation of marginal likelihood to rank the candidate models based on their overall likelihood with respect to observation data. The first part of the study focuses on using this Bayesian scheme to discriminate between these five candidate models. The second part discusses some theoretical and practical challenges, which are mainly the effect of likelihood function selection and the marginal likelihood estimation methods on both model ranking and Bayesian model averaging. The study shows that making valid inference from scientific data is not a trivial task, since we are not only uncertain about the candidate scientific models, but also about the statistical methods that are used to discriminate between these models.