## 3 Results
### Meteorology
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Biome Type**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Comparison**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**R\({}^{2}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean (SD)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Bias**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**RMSE (\%)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**n**} \\  & & & & **(gC\(\mathbf{\text{--}}^{2}\)-y\(\mathbf{\text{--}}^{1}\))** & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{ENF} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.87 ** & 894 (335) vs. 1400 (708) & \(-\)506 & 46 & \multirow{6}{*}{20} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.92 ** & 883 (318) vs. 1400 (708) & \(-\)517 & 47 & \\  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.89 ** & 953 (394) vs. 1400 (708) & \(-\)447 & 41 & \\  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.91 ** & 942 (383) vs. 1400 (708) & \(-\)458 & 41 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{EBF} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.50 ** & 132 (300) vs. 1826 (974) & \(-\)514 & 51 & \multirow{6}{*}{23} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.50 ** & 1211 (288) vs. 1826 (974) & \(-\)615 & 54 & \\  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.91 ** & 1604 (285) vs. 1826 (974) & \(-\)222 & 21 & \\  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.92 ** & 1437 (711) vs. 1826 (974) & \(-\)389 & 28 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{DRF} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.55 ** & 1038 (157) vs. 1773 (192) & \(-\)735 & 42 & \multirow{6}{*}{24} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.34 ** & 875 (93) vs. 1773 (192) & \(-\)898 & 51 & \\  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.56 ** & 1243 (206) vs. 1773 (192) & \(-\)530 & 31 & \\  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.41 ** & 1037 (127) vs. 1773 (192) & \(-\)736 & 42 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{MF} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.48 ** & 1006 (108) vs. 1509 (444) & \(-\)503 & 41 & \multirow{6}{*}{26} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.43 ** & 782 (87) vs. 1509 (444) & \(-\)727 & 54 & \\  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.61 ** & 1098 (95) vs. 1509 (444) & \(-\)411 & 36 & \\  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.51 ** & 848 (71) vs. 1509 (444) & \(-\)661 & 51 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{GRA} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.75 ** & 652 (276) vs. 869 (721) & \(-\)217 & 61 & \multirow{6}{*}{23} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.83 ** & 629 (202) vs. 869 (721) & \(-\)240 & 67 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.95 ** & 696 (532) vs. 869 (721) & \(-\)173 & 33 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.96 ** & 651 (476) vs. 869 (721) & \(-\)218 & 40 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{CRO} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.66 ** & 938 (150) vs. 1363 (327) & \(-\)425 & 39 & \multirow{6}{*}{25} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.08 & 847 (161) vs. 1363 (327) & \(-\)516 & 44 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.15 ** & 1135 (129) vs. 1363 (327) & \(-\)228 & 27 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.14 ** & 1012 (146) vs. 1363 (327) & \(-\)351 & 34 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{All} & MOD\_GMAO vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.62 ** & 976 (299) vs. 1460 (676) & \(-\)484 & 47 & \multirow{6}{*}{141} \\  & MOD\_Tower vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.56 ** & 869 (266) vs. 1460 (676) & \(-\)591 & 53 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & GMAO\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.79 ** & 1126 (509) vs. 1460 (676) & \(-\)334 & 32 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & Tower\_GLASS vs. Flux\_Tower & 0.76 ** & 987 (445) vs. 1460 (676) & \(-\)473 & 41 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
Significance levels: * \(p\) < 0.05, **_p_ < 0.01.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Biome-based comparison of the annual GPP derived from the site estimates with those derived from the MODIS algorithms (MOD_GMAO GPP, MOD_Tower GPP, GMAO_GLASS GPP and Tower_GLASS GPP).ENF: evergreen needleleaf forests; EBF: evergreen broadleaf forests; DBF: deciduous broadleaf forests; MF: mixed forests; GRA: grasslands; CRO: croplands.