Articles | Volume 11, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2009-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2009-2018
Model description paper
 | 
04 Jun 2018
Model description paper |  | 04 Jun 2018

Soil Methanotrophy Model (MeMo v1.0): a process-based model to quantify global uptake of atmospheric methane by soil

Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Sandra Arndt, Anita L. Ganesan, Guillermo Murray-Tortarolo, and Edward R. C. Hornibrook

Related authors

The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017
Marielle Saunois, Ann R. Stavert, Ben Poulter, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Peter A. Raymond, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Sander Houweling, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Ciais, Vivek K. Arora, David Bastviken, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake, Gordon Brailsford, Lori Bruhwiler, Kimberly M. Carlson, Mark Carrol, Simona Castaldi, Naveen Chandra, Cyril Crevoisier, Patrick M. Crill, Kristofer Covey, Charles L. Curry, Giuseppe Etiope, Christian Frankenberg, Nicola Gedney, Michaela I. Hegglin, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Gustaf Hugelius, Misa Ishizawa, Akihiko Ito, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Katherine M. Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ray L. Langenfelds, Goulven G. Laruelle, Licheng Liu, Toshinobu Machida, Shamil Maksyutov, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe McNorton, Paul A. Miller, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Vaishali Naik, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Simon O'Doherty, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Glen P. Peters, Catherine Prigent, Ronald Prinn, Michel Ramonet, Pierre Regnier, William J. Riley, Judith A. Rosentreter, Arjo Segers, Isobel J. Simpson, Hao Shi, Steven J. Smith, L. Paul Steele, Brett F. Thornton, Hanqin Tian, Yasunori Tohjima, Francesco N. Tubiello, Aki Tsuruta, Nicolas Viovy, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Thomas S. Weber, Michiel van Weele, Guido R. van der Werf, Ray F. Weiss, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch, Yi Yin, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Yuanhong Zhao, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1561–1623, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020, 2020
Short summary
The carbon cycle in Mexico: past, present and future of C stocks and fluxes
G. Murray-Tortarolo, P. Friedlingstein, S. Sitch, V. J. Jaramillo, F. Murguía-Flores, A. Anav, Y. Liu, A. Arneth, A. Arvanitis, A. Harper, A. Jain, E. Kato, C. Koven, B. Poulter, B. D. Stocker, A. Wiltshire, S. Zaehle, and N. Zeng
Biogeosciences, 13, 223–238, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-223-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-223-2016, 2016
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeosciences
Implementing the iCORAL (version 1.0) coral reef CaCO3 production module in the iLOVECLIM climate model
Nathaelle Bouttes, Lester Kwiatkowski, Manon Berger, Victor Brovkin, and Guy Munhoven
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6513–6528, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6513-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6513-2024, 2024
Short summary
Assimilation of carbonyl sulfide (COS) fluxes within the adjoint-based data assimilation system – Nanjing University Carbon Assimilation System (NUCAS v1.0)
Huajie Zhu, Mousong Wu, Fei Jiang, Michael Vossbeck, Thomas Kaminski, Xiuli Xing, Jun Wang, Weimin Ju, and Jing M. Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6337–6363, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6337-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6337-2024, 2024
Short summary
Quantifying the role of ozone-caused damage to vegetation in the Earth system: a new parameterization scheme for photosynthetic and stomatal responses
Fang Li, Zhimin Zhou, Samuel Levis, Stephen Sitch, Felicity Hayes, Zhaozhong Feng, Peter B. Reich, Zhiyi Zhao, and Yanqing Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6173–6193, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6173-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Radiocarbon analysis reveals underestimation of soil organic carbon persistence in new-generation soil models
Alexander S. Brunmayr, Frank Hagedorn, Margaux Moreno Duborgel, Luisa I. Minich, and Heather D. Graven
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5961–5985, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5961-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5961-2024, 2024
Short summary
Exploring the potential of history matching for land surface model calibration
Nina Raoult, Simon Beylat, James M. Salter, Frédéric Hourdin, Vladislav Bastrikov, Catherine Ottlé, and Philippe Peylin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5779–5801, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5779-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5779-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Adamsen, A. P. S. and King, G. M.: Methane Consumption in Temperate and Subarctic Forest Soils: Rates, Vertical Zonation, and Responses to Water and Nitrogen, Appl. Environ, Microbiol., 59, 485–490, 1993. 
Allan, W., Struthers, H., and Lowe, D. C.: Methane carbon isotope effects caused by atomic chlorine in the marine boundary layer: Global model results compared with Southern Hemisphere measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D04306, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007369, 2007. 
Arndt, S., Jørgensen, B. B., LaRowe, D. E., Middelburg, J. J., Pancost, R. D., and Regnier, P.: Quantifying the degradation of organic matter in marine sediments: A review and synthesis, Earth-Sci. Rev., 123, 53–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2013.02.008, 2013. 
Aronson, E. L. and Helliker, B. R.: Methane flux in non-wetland soils in response to nitrogen addition: a meta-analysis, Ecology, 91, 3242–3251, https://doi.org/10.1890/09-2185.1, 2010. 
Bodelier, P. L. E. and Laanbroek, H. J.: Nitrogen as a regulatory factor of methane oxidation in soils and sediments, FEMS Microbiol. Ecol., 47, 265–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6496(03)00304-0, 2004. 
Download

The requested paper has a corresponding corrigendum published. Please read the corrigendum first before downloading the article.

Short summary
Soil bacteria known as methanotrophs are the only biological sink for atmospheric methane (CH4). Their activity depends on climatic and edaphic conditions, thus varies spatially and temporarily. Based on this, we developed a model (MeMo v1.0) to assess the global CH4 consumption by soils. The global CH4 uptake was 33.5 Tg CH4 yr-1 for 1990–2009, with an increasing trend of 0.1 Tg CH4 yr-2. The regional analysis proved that warm and semiarid regions represent the most efficient CH4 sink.