Articles | Volume 13, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2825-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2825-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
25 Jun 2020
Development and technical paper |
| 25 Jun 2020
| 25 Jun 2020
CLASSIC v1.0: the open-source community successor to the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) – Part 1: Model framework and site-level performance
Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, B.C., Canada
Vivek K. Arora
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, B.C., Canada
Eduard Wisernig-Cojoc
Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, B.C., Canada
Christian Seiler
Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, B.C., Canada
Matthew Fortier
Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, B.C., Canada
Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lina Teckentrup
Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, 20146 Hamburg, Germany
Related authors
Jade Skye, Joe R. Melton, Colin Goldblatt, Louis Saumier, Angela Gallego-Sala, Michelle Garneau, R. Scott Winton, Erick B. Bahati, Juan C. Benavides, Lee Fedorchuk, Gérard Imani, Carol Kagaba, Frank Kansiime, Mariusz Lamentowicz, Michel Mbasi, Daria Wochal, Sambor Czerwiński, Jacek Landowski, Joanna Landowska, Vincent Maire, Minna M. Väliranta, Matthew Warren, Lydia E. S. Cole, Marissa A. Davies, Erik A. Lilleskov, Jingjing Sun, and Yuwan Wang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Peatlands are large stores of carbon but are vulnerable to human activities and climate change. Comprehensive peatland data are vital to understand these ecosystems, but existing datasets are fragmented and contain errors. To address this, we created Peat-DBase — a standardized global database of peat depth measurements with > 200,000 measurements worldwide, showing average depths of 144 cm. Peat-DBase avoids overlapping data compilation efforts while identifying critical observational gaps.
Hanyu Liu, Felix R. Vogel, Misa Ishizawa, Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Doug E. J. Worthy, Leyang Feng, Anna L. Gagné-Landmann, Ao Chen, Ziting Huang, Dylan C. Gaeta, Joe R. Melton, Douglas Chan, Vineet Yadav, Deborah Huntzinger, and Scot M. Miller
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We find that the state-of-the-art process-based methane flux models have both lower flux magnitude and reduced inter-model uncertainty compared to a previous model inter-comparison from over a decade ago. Despite these improvements, methane flux estimates from process-based models are still likely too high compared to atmospheric observations. We also find that models with simpler parameterizations often result in better agreement with atmospheric observations in high-latitude North America.
Konstantin Gregor, Benjamin F. Meyer, Tillmann Gaida, Victor Justo Vasquez, Karina Bett-Williams, Matthew Forrest, João P. Darela-Filho, Sam Rabin, Marcos Longo, Joe R. Melton, Johan Nord, Peter Anthoni, Vladislav Bastrikov, Thomas Colligan, Christine Delire, Michael C. Dietze, George Hurtt, Akihiko Ito, Lasse T. Keetz, Jürgen Knauer, Johannes Köster, Tzu-Shun Lin, Lei Ma, Marie Minvielle, Stefan Olin, Sebastian Ostberg, Hao Shi, Reiner Schnur, Urs Schönenberger, Qing Sun, Peter E. Thornton, and Anja Rammig
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Geoscientific models are crucial for understanding Earth’s processes. However, they sometimes do not adhere to highest software quality standards, and scientific results are often hard to reproduce due to the complexity of the workflows. Here we gather the expertise of 20 modeling groups and software engineers to define best practices for making geoscientific models maintainable, usable, and reproducible. We conclude with an open-source example serving as a reference for modeling communities.
Marielle Saunois, Adrien Martinez, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, Peter A. Raymond, Pierre Regnier, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Bousquet, Philippe Ciais, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Xin Lan, George H. Allen, David Bastviken, David J. Beerling, Dmitry A. Belikov, Donald R. Blake, Simona Castaldi, Monica Crippa, Bridget R. Deemer, Fraser Dennison, Giuseppe Etiope, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Meredith A. Holgerson, Peter O. Hopcroft, Gustaf Hugelius, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Rajesh Janardanan, Matthew S. Johnson, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ronny Lauerwald, Tingting Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe R. Melton, Jens Mühle, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Shufen Pan, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Gerard Rocher-Ros, Judith A. Rosentreter, Motoki Sasakawa, Arjo Segers, Steven J. Smith, Emily H. Stanley, Joël Thanwerdas, Hanqin Tian, Aki Tsuruta, Francesco N. Tubiello, Thomas S. Weber, Guido R. van der Werf, Douglas E. J. Worthy, Yi Xi, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1873–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2). A consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists synthesise and update the budget of the sources and sinks of CH4. This edition benefits from important progress in estimating emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. For the 2010s decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated at 575 Tg CH4 yr-1, including ~65 % from anthropogenic sources.
Libo Wang, Lawrence Mudryk, Joe R. Melton, Colleen Mortimer, Jason Cole, Gesa Meyer, Paul Bartlett, and Mickaël Lalande
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1264, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1264, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows that an alternate snow cover fraction (SCF) parameterization significantly improves SCF simulated in the CLASSIC model in mountainous areas for all three choices of meteorological datasets. Annual mean bias, unbiased root mean squared area, and correlation improve by 75 %, 32 %, and 7 % when evaluated with MODIS SCF observations over the Northern Hemisphere. We also link relative biases in the meteorological forcing data to differences in simulated snow water equivalent and SCF.
Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Joe R. Melton, William J. Riley, George H. Allen, David J. Beerling, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Philippe Ciais, Nicola Gedney, Peter O. Hopcroft, Akihiko Ito, Robert B. Jackson, Atul K. Jain, Katherine Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Sara H. Knox, Tingting Li, Xin Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle McDonald, Gavin McNicol, Paul A. Miller, Jurek Müller, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Zhangcai Qin, Ryan M. Riggs, Marielle Saunois, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Xiaoming Xu, Yuanzhi Yao, Yi Xi, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Biogeosciences, 22, 305–321, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses global methane emissions from wetlands between 2000 and 2020 using multiple models. We found that wetland emissions increased by 6–7 Tg CH4 yr-1 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s. Rising temperatures primarily drove this increase, while changes in precipitation and CO2 levels also played roles. Our findings highlight the importance of wetlands in the global methane budget and the need for continuous monitoring to understand their impact on climate change.
Misa Ishizawa, Douglas Chan, Doug Worthy, Elton Chan, Felix Vogel, Joe R. Melton, and Vivek K. Arora
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10013–10038, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) emissions in Canada for 2007–2017 were estimated using Canada’s surface greenhouse gas measurements. The estimated emissions show no significant trend, but emission uncertainty was reduced as more measurement sites became available. Notably for climate change, we find the wetland CH4 emissions show a positive correlation with surface air temperature in summer. Canada’s measurement network could monitor future CH4 emission changes and compliance with climate change mitigation goals.
Salvatore R. Curasi, Joe R. Melton, Elyn R. Humphreys, Txomin Hermosilla, and Michael A. Wulder
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2683–2704, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Canadian forests are responding to fire, harvest, and climate change. Models need to quantify these processes and their carbon and energy cycling impacts. We develop a scheme that, based on satellite records, represents fire, harvest, and the sparsely vegetated areas that these processes generate. We evaluate model performance and demonstrate the impacts of disturbance on carbon and energy cycling. This work has implications for land surface modeling and assessing Canada’s terrestrial C cycle.
Bo Qu, Alexandre Roy, Joe R. Melton, Jennifer L. Baltzer, Youngryel Ryu, Matteo Detto, and Oliver Sonnentag
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, 2023
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Accurately simulating photosynthesis and evapotranspiration challenges terrestrial biosphere models across North America’s boreal biome, in part due to uncertain representation of the maximum rate of photosynthetic carboxylation (Vcmax). This study used forest stand scale observations in an optimization framework to improve Vcmax values for representative vegetation types. Several stand characteristics well explained spatial Vcmax variability and were useful to improve boreal forest modelling.
Joe R. Melton, Ed Chan, Koreen Millard, Matthew Fortier, R. Scott Winton, Javier M. Martín-López, Hinsby Cadillo-Quiroz, Darren Kidd, and Louis V. Verchot
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4709–4738, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Peat-ML is a high-resolution global peatland extent map generated using machine learning techniques. Peatlands are important in the global carbon and water cycles, but their extent is poorly known. We generated Peat-ML using drivers of peatland formation including climate, soil, geomorphology, and vegetation data, and we train the model with regional peatland maps. Our accuracy estimation approaches suggest Peat-ML is of similar or higher quality than other available peatland mapping products.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Rob B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Laurent Bopp, Thi Tuyet Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Kim I. Currie, Bertrand Decharme, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Wiley Evans, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Thomas Gasser, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Atul Jain, Steve D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Junjie Liu, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Clemens Schwingshackl, Roland Séférian, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2021 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Andrew J. Pitman, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Anthony P. Walker, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 5639–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Australian continent is included in global assessments of the carbon cycle such as the global carbon budget, yet the performance of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) over Australia has rarely been evaluated. We assessed simulations by an ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models over Australia and highlighted a number of key areas that lead to model divergence on both short (inter-annual) and long (decadal) timescales.
Claude-Michel Nzotungicimpaye, Kirsten Zickfeld, Andrew H. MacDougall, Joe R. Melton, Claire C. Treat, Michael Eby, and Lance F. W. Lesack
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6215–6240, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we describe a new wetland methane model (WETMETH) developed for use in Earth system models. WETMETH consists of simple formulations to represent methane production and oxidation in wetlands. We also present an evaluation of the model performance as embedded in the University of Victoria Earth System Climate Model (UVic ESCM). WETMETH is capable of reproducing mean annual methane emissions consistent with present-day estimates from the regional to the global scale.
Gesa Meyer, Elyn R. Humphreys, Joe R. Melton, Alex J. Cannon, and Peter M. Lafleur
Biogeosciences, 18, 3263–3283, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Shrub and sedge plant functional types (PFTs) were incorporated in the land surface component of the Canadian Earth System Model to improve representation of Arctic tundra ecosystems. Evaluated against 14 years of non-winter measurements, the magnitude and seasonality of carbon dioxide and energy fluxes at a Canadian dwarf-shrub tundra site were better captured by the shrub PFTs than by previously used grass and tree PFTs. Model simulations showed the tundra site to be an annual net CO2 source.
Wolfgang A. Obermeier, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Tammas Loughran, Kerstin Hartung, Ana Bastos, Felix Havermann, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Daniel S. Goll, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Benjamin Poulter, Stephen Sitch, Michael O. Sullivan, Hanqin Tian, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Soenke Zaehle, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 635–670, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first spatio-temporally explicit comparison of different model-derived fluxes from land use and land cover changes (fLULCCs) by using the TRENDY v8 dynamic global vegetation models used in the 2019 global carbon budget. We find huge regional fLULCC differences resulting from environmental assumptions, simulated periods, and the timing of land use and land cover changes, and we argue for a method consistent across time and space and for carefully choosing the accounting period.
Zichong Chen, Junjie Liu, Daven K. Henze, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Kelley C. Wells, Stephen Sitch, Pierre Friedlingstein, Emilie Joetzjer, Vladislav Bastrikov, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Benjamin Poulter, Hanqin Tian, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Scot M. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6663–6680, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) satellite observes atmospheric CO2 globally. We use a multiple regression and inverse model to quantify the relationships between OCO-2 and environmental drivers within individual years for 2015–2018 and within seven global biomes. Our results point to limitations of current space-based observations for inferring environmental relationships but also indicate the potential to inform key relationships that are very uncertain in process-based models.
Christian Seiler, Joe R. Melton, Vivek K. Arora, and Libo Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2371–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates how well the CLASSIC land surface model reproduces the energy, water, and carbon cycle when compared against a wide range of global observations. Special attention is paid to how uncertainties in the data used to drive and evaluate the model affect model skill. Our results show the importance of incorporating uncertainties when evaluating land surface models and that failing to do so may potentially misguide future model development.
Jade Skye, Joe R. Melton, Colin Goldblatt, Louis Saumier, Angela Gallego-Sala, Michelle Garneau, R. Scott Winton, Erick B. Bahati, Juan C. Benavides, Lee Fedorchuk, Gérard Imani, Carol Kagaba, Frank Kansiime, Mariusz Lamentowicz, Michel Mbasi, Daria Wochal, Sambor Czerwiński, Jacek Landowski, Joanna Landowska, Vincent Maire, Minna M. Väliranta, Matthew Warren, Lydia E. S. Cole, Marissa A. Davies, Erik A. Lilleskov, Jingjing Sun, and Yuwan Wang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Peatlands are large stores of carbon but are vulnerable to human activities and climate change. Comprehensive peatland data are vital to understand these ecosystems, but existing datasets are fragmented and contain errors. To address this, we created Peat-DBase — a standardized global database of peat depth measurements with > 200,000 measurements worldwide, showing average depths of 144 cm. Peat-DBase avoids overlapping data compilation efforts while identifying critical observational gaps.
Nathan P. Gillett, Isla R. Simpson, Gabi Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Dann Mitchell, Aurélien Ribes, Hideo Shiogama, Dáithí Stone, Claudia Tebaldi, Piotr Wolski, Wenxia Zhang, and Vivek K. Arora
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4399–4416, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model simulations of the response to human and natural influences together, natural climate influences alone and greenhouse gases alone are key to quantifying human influence on the climate. The last set of such coordinated simulations underpinned key findings in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Here we propose a new set of such simulations to be used in the next generation of attribution studies and to underpin the next IPCC report.
Hanyu Liu, Felix R. Vogel, Misa Ishizawa, Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Doug E. J. Worthy, Leyang Feng, Anna L. Gagné-Landmann, Ao Chen, Ziting Huang, Dylan C. Gaeta, Joe R. Melton, Douglas Chan, Vineet Yadav, Deborah Huntzinger, and Scot M. Miller
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We find that the state-of-the-art process-based methane flux models have both lower flux magnitude and reduced inter-model uncertainty compared to a previous model inter-comparison from over a decade ago. Despite these improvements, methane flux estimates from process-based models are still likely too high compared to atmospheric observations. We also find that models with simpler parameterizations often result in better agreement with atmospheric observations in high-latitude North America.
Konstantin Gregor, Benjamin F. Meyer, Tillmann Gaida, Victor Justo Vasquez, Karina Bett-Williams, Matthew Forrest, João P. Darela-Filho, Sam Rabin, Marcos Longo, Joe R. Melton, Johan Nord, Peter Anthoni, Vladislav Bastrikov, Thomas Colligan, Christine Delire, Michael C. Dietze, George Hurtt, Akihiko Ito, Lasse T. Keetz, Jürgen Knauer, Johannes Köster, Tzu-Shun Lin, Lei Ma, Marie Minvielle, Stefan Olin, Sebastian Ostberg, Hao Shi, Reiner Schnur, Urs Schönenberger, Qing Sun, Peter E. Thornton, and Anja Rammig
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Geoscientific models are crucial for understanding Earth’s processes. However, they sometimes do not adhere to highest software quality standards, and scientific results are often hard to reproduce due to the complexity of the workflows. Here we gather the expertise of 20 modeling groups and software engineers to define best practices for making geoscientific models maintainable, usable, and reproducible. We conclude with an open-source example serving as a reference for modeling communities.
Marielle Saunois, Adrien Martinez, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, Peter A. Raymond, Pierre Regnier, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Bousquet, Philippe Ciais, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Xin Lan, George H. Allen, David Bastviken, David J. Beerling, Dmitry A. Belikov, Donald R. Blake, Simona Castaldi, Monica Crippa, Bridget R. Deemer, Fraser Dennison, Giuseppe Etiope, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Meredith A. Holgerson, Peter O. Hopcroft, Gustaf Hugelius, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Rajesh Janardanan, Matthew S. Johnson, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ronny Lauerwald, Tingting Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe R. Melton, Jens Mühle, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Shufen Pan, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Gerard Rocher-Ros, Judith A. Rosentreter, Motoki Sasakawa, Arjo Segers, Steven J. Smith, Emily H. Stanley, Joël Thanwerdas, Hanqin Tian, Aki Tsuruta, Francesco N. Tubiello, Thomas S. Weber, Guido R. van der Werf, Douglas E. J. Worthy, Yi Xi, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1873–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2). A consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists synthesise and update the budget of the sources and sinks of CH4. This edition benefits from important progress in estimating emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. For the 2010s decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated at 575 Tg CH4 yr-1, including ~65 % from anthropogenic sources.
Libo Wang, Lawrence Mudryk, Joe R. Melton, Colleen Mortimer, Jason Cole, Gesa Meyer, Paul Bartlett, and Mickaël Lalande
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1264, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1264, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows that an alternate snow cover fraction (SCF) parameterization significantly improves SCF simulated in the CLASSIC model in mountainous areas for all three choices of meteorological datasets. Annual mean bias, unbiased root mean squared area, and correlation improve by 75 %, 32 %, and 7 % when evaluated with MODIS SCF observations over the Northern Hemisphere. We also link relative biases in the meteorological forcing data to differences in simulated snow water equivalent and SCF.
Tomohiro Hajima, Michio Kawamiya, Akihiko Ito, Kaoru Tachiiri, Chris D. Jones, Vivek Arora, Victor Brovkin, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Elena Shevliakova
Biogeosciences, 22, 1447–1473, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyzes atmospheric CO2 concentrations and global carbon budgets simulated by multiple Earth system models, using several types of simulations (CO2 concentration- and emission-driven experiments). We successfully identified problems with regard to the global carbon budget in each model. We also found urgent issues with regard to land use change CO2 emissions that should be solved in the latest generation of models.
Nikolina Mileva, Julia Pongratz, Vivek K. Arora, Akihiko Ito, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Sonali S. McDermid, Paul A. Miller, Daniele Peano, Roland Séférian, Yanwu Zhang, and Wolfgang Buermann
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-979, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-979, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Despite forests being so important for mitigating climate change, there are still uncertainties about how much the changes in forest cover contribute to the cooling/warming of the climate. Climate models and real-world observations often disagree about the magnitude and even the direction of these changes. We constrain climate models scenarios of widespread deforestation with satellite and in-situ data and show that models still have difficulties representing the movement of heat and water.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda R. Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul K. Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Xin Lan, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 965–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and datasets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Vivek K. Arora, Aranildo Lima, and Rajesh Shrestha
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 291–312, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a Canada-wide assessment of climate change impacts on the hydro-climatology of the region's major river basins. We find that precipitation, runoff, and temperature are all expected to increase over Canada in the future. The northerly Mackenzie and Yukon rivers are relatively less affected by climate change compared to the southerly Fraser and Columbia rivers, which are located in the milder northwestern Pacific region.
Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Joe R. Melton, William J. Riley, George H. Allen, David J. Beerling, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Philippe Ciais, Nicola Gedney, Peter O. Hopcroft, Akihiko Ito, Robert B. Jackson, Atul K. Jain, Katherine Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Sara H. Knox, Tingting Li, Xin Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle McDonald, Gavin McNicol, Paul A. Miller, Jurek Müller, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Zhangcai Qin, Ryan M. Riggs, Marielle Saunois, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Xiaoming Xu, Yuanzhi Yao, Yi Xi, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Biogeosciences, 22, 305–321, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses global methane emissions from wetlands between 2000 and 2020 using multiple models. We found that wetland emissions increased by 6–7 Tg CH4 yr-1 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s. Rising temperatures primarily drove this increase, while changes in precipitation and CO2 levels also played roles. Our findings highlight the importance of wetlands in the global methane budget and the need for continuous monitoring to understand their impact on climate change.
Cynthia Whaley, Montana Etten-Bohm, Courtney Schumacher, Ayodeji Akingunola, Vivek Arora, Jason Cole, Michael Lazare, David Plummer, Knut von Salzen, and Barbara Winter
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7141–7155, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes how lightning was added as a process in the Canadian Earth System Model in order to interactively respond to climate changes. As lightning is an important cause of global wildfires, this new model development allows for more realistic projections of how wildfires may change in the future, responding to a changing climate.
Misa Ishizawa, Douglas Chan, Doug Worthy, Elton Chan, Felix Vogel, Joe R. Melton, and Vivek K. Arora
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10013–10038, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) emissions in Canada for 2007–2017 were estimated using Canada’s surface greenhouse gas measurements. The estimated emissions show no significant trend, but emission uncertainty was reduced as more measurement sites became available. Notably for climate change, we find the wetland CH4 emissions show a positive correlation with surface air temperature in summer. Canada’s measurement network could monitor future CH4 emission changes and compliance with climate change mitigation goals.
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, and Libo Wang
Biogeosciences, 21, 3339–3371, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial biosphere models can either prescribe the geographical distribution of biomes or simulate them dynamically, capturing climate-change-driven biome shifts. We isolate and examine the differences between these different land cover implementations. We find that the simulated terrestrial carbon sink at the end of the 21st century is twice as large in simulations with dynamic land cover than in simulations with prescribed land cover due to important range shifts in the Arctic and Amazon.
Salvatore R. Curasi, Joe R. Melton, Elyn R. Humphreys, Txomin Hermosilla, and Michael A. Wulder
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2683–2704, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Canadian forests are responding to fire, harvest, and climate change. Models need to quantify these processes and their carbon and energy cycling impacts. We develop a scheme that, based on satellite records, represents fire, harvest, and the sparsely vegetated areas that these processes generate. We evaluate model performance and demonstrate the impacts of disturbance on carbon and energy cycling. This work has implications for land surface modeling and assessing Canada’s terrestrial C cycle.
Ali Asaadi, Jörg Schwinger, Hanna Lee, Jerry Tjiputra, Vivek Arora, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Tomohiro Hajima, Yeray Santana-Falcón, and Chris D. Jones
Biogeosciences, 21, 411–435, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon cycle feedback metrics are employed to assess phases of positive and negative CO2 emissions. When emissions become negative, we find that the model disagreement in feedback metrics increases more strongly than expected from the assumption that the uncertainties accumulate linearly with time. The geographical patterns of such metrics over land highlight that differences in response between tropical/subtropical and temperate/boreal ecosystems are a major source of model disagreement.
Michael Sigmond, James Anstey, Vivek Arora, Ruth Digby, Nathan Gillett, Viatcheslav Kharin, William Merryfield, Catherine Reader, John Scinocca, Neil Swart, John Virgin, Carsten Abraham, Jason Cole, Nicolas Lambert, Woo-Sung Lee, Yongxiao Liang, Elizaveta Malinina, Landon Rieger, Knut von Salzen, Christian Seiler, Clint Seinen, Andrew Shao, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Libo Wang, and Duo Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6553–6591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new activity which aims to organize the analysis of biases in the Canadian Earth System model (CanESM) in a systematic manner. Results of this “Analysis for Development” (A4D) activity includes a new CanESM version, CanESM5.1, which features substantial improvements regarding the simulation of dust and stratospheric temperatures, a second CanESM5.1 variant with reduced climate sensitivity, and insights into potential avenues to reduce various other model biases.
Jason Neil Steven Cole, Knut von Salzen, Jiangnan Li, John Scinocca, David Plummer, Vivek Arora, Norman McFarlane, Michael Lazare, Murray MacKay, and Diana Verseghy
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5427–5448, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Canadian Atmospheric Model version 5 (CanAM5) is used to simulate on a global scale the climate of Earth's atmosphere, land, and lakes. We document changes to the physics in CanAM5 since the last major version of the model (CanAM4) and evaluate the climate simulated relative to observations and CanAM4. The climate simulated by CanAM5 is similar to CanAM4, but there are improvements, including better simulation of temperature and precipitation over the Amazon and better simulation of cloud.
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Almut Arneth, Stefanie Falk, Atul K. Jain, Fortunat Joos, Daniel Kennedy, Jürgen Knauer, Stephen Sitch, Michael O'Sullivan, Naiqing Pan, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Nicolas Vuichard, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 767–795, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Nitrogen (N) is an essential limiting nutrient to terrestrial carbon (C) sequestration. We evaluate N cycling in an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models. We find that variability in N processes across models is large. Models tended to overestimate C storage per unit N in vegetation and soil, which could have consequences for projecting the future terrestrial C sink. However, N cycling measurements are highly uncertain, and more are necessary to guide the development of N cycling in models.
Bo Qu, Alexandre Roy, Joe R. Melton, Jennifer L. Baltzer, Youngryel Ryu, Matteo Detto, and Oliver Sonnentag
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, 2023
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Accurately simulating photosynthesis and evapotranspiration challenges terrestrial biosphere models across North America’s boreal biome, in part due to uncertain representation of the maximum rate of photosynthetic carboxylation (Vcmax). This study used forest stand scale observations in an optimization framework to improve Vcmax values for representative vegetation types. Several stand characteristics well explained spatial Vcmax variability and were useful to improve boreal forest modelling.
Libo Wang, Vivek K. Arora, Paul Bartlett, Ed Chan, and Salvatore R. Curasi
Biogeosciences, 20, 2265–2282, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Plant functional types (PFTs) are groups of plant species used to represent vegetation distribution in land surface models. There are large uncertainties associated with existing methods for mapping land cover datasets to PFTs. This study demonstrates how fine-resolution tree cover fraction and land cover datasets can be used to inform the PFT mapping process and reduce the uncertainties. The proposed largely objective method makes it easier to implement new land cover products in models.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Gab Abramowitz, Andrew J. Pitman, Anna M. Ukkola, Sanaa Hobeichi, Bastien François, and Benjamin Smith
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 549–576, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-549-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-549-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Studies analyzing the impact of the future climate on ecosystems employ climate projections simulated by global circulation models. These climate projections display biases that translate into significant uncertainty in projections of the future carbon cycle. Here, we test different methods to constrain the uncertainty in simulations of the carbon cycle over Australia. We find that all methods reduce the bias in the steady-state carbon variables but that temporal properties do not improve.
Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Libo Wang, and Sian Kou-Giesbrecht
Biogeosciences, 20, 1313–1355, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The behaviour of natural systems is now very often represented through mathematical models. These models represent our understanding of how nature works. Of course, nature does not care about our understanding. Since our understanding is not perfect, evaluating models is challenging, and there are uncertainties. This paper illustrates this uncertainty for land models and argues that evaluating models in light of the uncertainty in various components provides useful information.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Luke Gregor, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Ramdane Alkama, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Lucas Gloege, Giacomo Grassi, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Annika Jersild, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Keith Lindsay, Junjie Liu, Zhu Liu, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Matthew J. McGrath, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Naiqing Pan, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Carmen Rodriguez, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Jamie D. Shutler, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Xiangjun Tian, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Chris Whitehead, Anna Willstrand Wranne, Rebecca Wright, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2022 describes the datasets and methodology used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, the land ecosystems, and the ocean. These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Joe R. Melton, Ed Chan, Koreen Millard, Matthew Fortier, R. Scott Winton, Javier M. Martín-López, Hinsby Cadillo-Quiroz, Darren Kidd, and Louis V. Verchot
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4709–4738, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Peat-ML is a high-resolution global peatland extent map generated using machine learning techniques. Peatlands are important in the global carbon and water cycles, but their extent is poorly known. We generated Peat-ML using drivers of peatland formation including climate, soil, geomorphology, and vegetation data, and we train the model with regional peatland maps. Our accuracy estimation approaches suggest Peat-ML is of similar or higher quality than other available peatland mapping products.
Charles D. Koven, Vivek K. Arora, Patricia Cadule, Rosie A. Fisher, Chris D. Jones, David M. Lawrence, Jared Lewis, Keith Lindsay, Sabine Mathesius, Malte Meinshausen, Michael Mills, Zebedee Nicholls, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Neil C. Swart, William R. Wieder, and Kirsten Zickfeld
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 885–909, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We explore the long-term dynamics of Earth's climate and carbon cycles under a pair of contrasting scenarios to the year 2300 using six models that include both climate and carbon cycle dynamics. One scenario assumes very high emissions, while the second assumes a peak in emissions, followed by rapid declines to net negative emissions. We show that the models generally agree that warming is roughly proportional to carbon emissions but that many other aspects of the model projections differ.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Rob B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Laurent Bopp, Thi Tuyet Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Kim I. Currie, Bertrand Decharme, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Wiley Evans, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Thomas Gasser, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Atul Jain, Steve D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Junjie Liu, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Clemens Schwingshackl, Roland Séférian, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2021 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, William J. Merryfield, George J. Boer, Viatsheslav V. Kharin, Woo-Sung Lee, Christian Seiler, and James R. Christian
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6863–6891, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6863-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6863-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
CanESM5 decadal predictions that started from observed climate states represent the observed evolution of upper-ocean temperatures, surface climate, and the carbon cycle better than ones not started from observed climate states for several years into the forecast. This is due both to better representations of climate internal variability and to corrections of the model response to external forcing including changes in GHG emissions and aerosols.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Andrew J. Pitman, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Anthony P. Walker, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 5639–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Australian continent is included in global assessments of the carbon cycle such as the global carbon budget, yet the performance of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) over Australia has rarely been evaluated. We assessed simulations by an ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models over Australia and highlighted a number of key areas that lead to model divergence on both short (inter-annual) and long (decadal) timescales.
Claude-Michel Nzotungicimpaye, Kirsten Zickfeld, Andrew H. MacDougall, Joe R. Melton, Claire C. Treat, Michael Eby, and Lance F. W. Lesack
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6215–6240, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we describe a new wetland methane model (WETMETH) developed for use in Earth system models. WETMETH consists of simple formulations to represent methane production and oxidation in wetlands. We also present an evaluation of the model performance as embedded in the University of Victoria Earth System Climate Model (UVic ESCM). WETMETH is capable of reproducing mean annual methane emissions consistent with present-day estimates from the regional to the global scale.
Alexander J. Winkler, Ranga B. Myneni, Alexis Hannart, Stephen Sitch, Vanessa Haverd, Danica Lombardozzi, Vivek K. Arora, Julia Pongratz, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Daniel S. Goll, Etsushi Kato, Hanqin Tian, Almut Arneth, Pierre Friedlingstein, Atul K. Jain, Sönke Zaehle, and Victor Brovkin
Biogeosciences, 18, 4985–5010, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-4985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-4985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations since the early 1980s show that Earth's greening trend is slowing down and that browning clusters have been emerging, especially in the last 2 decades. A collection of model simulations in conjunction with causal theory points at climatic changes as a key driver of vegetation changes in natural ecosystems. Most models underestimate the observed vegetation browning, especially in tropical rainforests, which could be due to an excessive CO2 fertilization effect in models.
Gesa Meyer, Elyn R. Humphreys, Joe R. Melton, Alex J. Cannon, and Peter M. Lafleur
Biogeosciences, 18, 3263–3283, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Shrub and sedge plant functional types (PFTs) were incorporated in the land surface component of the Canadian Earth System Model to improve representation of Arctic tundra ecosystems. Evaluated against 14 years of non-winter measurements, the magnitude and seasonality of carbon dioxide and energy fluxes at a Canadian dwarf-shrub tundra site were better captured by the shrub PFTs than by previously used grass and tree PFTs. Model simulations showed the tundra site to be an annual net CO2 source.
Wolfgang A. Obermeier, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Tammas Loughran, Kerstin Hartung, Ana Bastos, Felix Havermann, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Daniel S. Goll, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Benjamin Poulter, Stephen Sitch, Michael O. Sullivan, Hanqin Tian, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Soenke Zaehle, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 635–670, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first spatio-temporally explicit comparison of different model-derived fluxes from land use and land cover changes (fLULCCs) by using the TRENDY v8 dynamic global vegetation models used in the 2019 global carbon budget. We find huge regional fLULCC differences resulting from environmental assumptions, simulated periods, and the timing of land use and land cover changes, and we argue for a method consistent across time and space and for carefully choosing the accounting period.
Zichong Chen, Junjie Liu, Daven K. Henze, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Kelley C. Wells, Stephen Sitch, Pierre Friedlingstein, Emilie Joetzjer, Vladislav Bastrikov, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Benjamin Poulter, Hanqin Tian, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Scot M. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6663–6680, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) satellite observes atmospheric CO2 globally. We use a multiple regression and inverse model to quantify the relationships between OCO-2 and environmental drivers within individual years for 2015–2018 and within seven global biomes. Our results point to limitations of current space-based observations for inferring environmental relationships but also indicate the potential to inform key relationships that are very uncertain in process-based models.
Christian Seiler, Joe R. Melton, Vivek K. Arora, and Libo Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2371–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates how well the CLASSIC land surface model reproduces the energy, water, and carbon cycle when compared against a wide range of global observations. Special attention is paid to how uncertainties in the data used to drive and evaluate the model affect model skill. Our results show the importance of incorporating uncertainties when evaluating land surface models and that failing to do so may potentially misguide future model development.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Andrew J. Pitman, and Benjamin Smith
Biogeosciences, 18, 2181–2203, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2181-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2181-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) describes changes in the sea surface temperature patterns of the Pacific Ocean. This influences the global weather, impacting vegetation on land. There are two types of El Niño: central Pacific (CP) and eastern Pacific (EP). In this study, we explored the long-term impacts on the carbon balance on land linked to the two El Niño types. Using a dynamic vegetation model, we simulated what would happen if only either CP or EP El Niño events had occurred.
Ali Asaadi and Vivek K. Arora
Biogeosciences, 18, 669–706, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-669-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-669-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
More than a quarter of the current anthropogenic CO2 emissions are taken up by land, reducing the atmospheric CO2 growth rate. This is because of the CO2 fertilization effect which benefits 80 % of global vegetation. However, if nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients cannot keep up with increasing atmospheric CO2, the magnitude of this terrestrial ecosystem service may reduce in future. This paper implements nitrogen constraints on photosynthesis in a model to understand the mechanisms involved.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone Alin, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Alice Benoit-Cattin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Selma Bultan, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Wiley Evans, Liesbeth Florentie, Piers M. Forster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Ian Harris, Kerstin Hartung, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Vassilis Kitidis, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Adam J. P. Smith, Adrienne J. Sutton, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Guido van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2020 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Lena R. Boysen, Victor Brovkin, Julia Pongratz, David M. Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Nicolas Vuichard, Philippe Peylin, Spencer Liddicoat, Tomohiro Hajima, Yanwu Zhang, Matthias Rocher, Christine Delire, Roland Séférian, Vivek K. Arora, Lars Nieradzik, Peter Anthoni, Wim Thiery, Marysa M. Laguë, Deborah Lawrence, and Min-Hui Lo
Biogeosciences, 17, 5615–5638, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5615-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5615-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We find a biogeophysically induced global cooling with strong carbon losses in a 20 million square kilometre idealized deforestation experiment performed by nine CMIP6 Earth system models. It takes many decades for the temperature signal to emerge, with non-local effects playing an important role. Despite a consistent experimental setup, models diverge substantially in their climate responses. This study offers unprecedented insights for understanding land use change effects in CMIP6 models.
Cited articles
Abraham, N. L., Archibald, A. T., Cresswell, P., Cusworth, S., Dalvi, M., Matthews, D., Wardle, S., and Whitehouse, S.: Using a virtual machine environment for developing, testing, and training for the UM-UKCA composition-climate model, using Unified Model version 10.9 and above, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3647–3657, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3647-2018, 2018. a
Abramowitz, G.: Towards a public, standardized, diagnostic benchmarking system for land surface models, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 819–827, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-819-2012, 2012. a
Arango, C., Dernat, R., and Sanabria, J.: Performance Evaluation of
Container-based Virtualization for High Performance Computing Environments, Revista UIS Ingenierías, 18, 31–42, https://doi.org/10.18273/revuin.v18n4-2019003, 2017. a
Arora, V.: Land surface modelling in general circulation models: A hydrological
perspective, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Melbourne, 1997. a
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: A Representation of Variable Root Distribution in
Dynamic Vegetation Models, Earth Interact., 7, 1–19,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1087-3562(2003)007<0001:AROVRD>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a, b
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: A parameterization of leaf phenology for the
terrestrial ecosystem component of climate models, Global Chang. Biol., 11,
39–59, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00890.x, 2005a. a, b, c
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: Fire as an interactive component of dynamic
vegetation models, J. Geophys. Res., 110, G02008,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JG000042, 2005b. a
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: Simulating Competition and Coexistence between
Plant Functional Types in a Dynamic Vegetation Model, Earth Interact., 10,
1–30, https://doi.org/10.1175/EI170.1, 2006. a
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: Uncertainties in the 20th century carbon budget
associated with land use change, Global Chang. Biol., 16, 3327–3348,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02202.x, 2010. a
Arora, V. K. and Melton, J. R.: Reduction in global area burned and wildfire
emissions since 1930s enhances carbon uptake by land, Nat. Commun., 9, 1326,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03838-0, 2018. a, b
Arora, V. K., Chiew, F. H. S., and Grayson, R. B.: A river flow routing scheme
for general circulation models, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 14347–14357,
https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900200, 1999. a
Arora, V. K., Scinocca, J. F., Boer, G. J., Christian, J. R., Denman, K. L.,
Flato, G. M., Kharin, V. V., Lee, W. G., and Merryfield, W. J.: Carbon
emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration
pathways of greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L05805,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046270, 2011. a
Arora, V. K., Melton, J. R., and Plummer, D.: An assessment of natural methane fluxes simulated by the CLASS-CTEM model, Biogeosciences, 15, 4683–4709, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-4683-2018, 2018. a, b
Asaadi, A., Arora, V. K., Melton, J. R., and Bartlett, P.: An improved parameterization of leaf area index (LAI) seasonality in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) and Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) modelling framework, Biogeosciences, 15, 6885–6907, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-6885-2018, 2018. a
Bailey, W. G., Saunders, I. R., Bowers, J. D., and Verseghy, D. L.: Application
of the Canadian land surface scheme to a full canopy crop during a drying
cycle, Atmos.-Ocean, 38, 57–80, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2000.9649640,
2000. a
Bartlett, P. A., MacKay, M. D., and Verseghy, D. L.: Modified snow algorithms
in the Canadian land surface scheme: Model runs and sensitivity analysis at
three boreal forest stands, Atmos.-Ocean, 44, 207–222,
https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.440301, 2006. a
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011. a
Best, M. J., Abramowitz, G., Johnson, H. R., Pitman, A. J., Balsamo, G., Boone,
A., Cuntz, M., Decharme, B., Dirmeyer, P. A., Dong, J., Ek, M., Guo, Z.,
Haverd, V., van den Hurk, B. J. J., Nearing, G. S., Pak, B., Peters-Lidard,
C., Santanello, J. A., Stevens, L., and Vuichard, N.: The Plumbing of Land
Surface Models: Benchmarking Model Performance, J. Hydrometeorol., 16,
1425–1442, 2015. a
Blyth, E., Gash, J., Lloyd, A., Pryor, M., Weedon, G. P., and Shuttleworth, J.:
Evaluating the JULES Land Surface Model Energy Fluxes Using FLUXNET Data,
J. Hydrometeorol., 11, 509–519, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jhm1183.1, 2010. a
Brown, R., Bartlett, P., MacKay, M., and Verseghy, D.: Evaluation of snow cover
in CLASS for SnowMIP, Atmos.-Ocean, 44, 223–238,
https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.440302, 2006. a
Clark, D. B., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Jones, C. D., Gedney, N., Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Harding, R. J., Huntingford, C., and Cox, P. M.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-701-2011, 2011. a
Collier, N., Hoffman, F. M., Lawrence, D. M., Keppel‐Aleks, G., Koven, C. D.,
Riley, W. J., Mu, M., and Randerson, J. T.: The International Land Model
Benchmarking (ILAMB) System: Design, Theory, and Implementation, J. Adv.
Model. Earth Syst., 10, 2731–2754, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001354, 2018. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Cui, W. and Chui, T. F. M.: Temporal and spatial variations of energy balance
closure across FLUXNET research sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 271, 12–21,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.02.026, 2019. a
Curry, C. L.: Modeling the soil consumption of atmospheric methane at the
global scale, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 21, GB4012,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GB002818, 2007. a
Easterbrook, S. M.: Open code for open science?, Nat. Geosci., 7, 779–781,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2283, 2014. a, b, c
Finley, K., Barber, G., Lapowsky, I., WIRED Staff, Simonite, T., Vogelstein,
F., and Tiku, N.: The WIRED Guide to Open Source Software, Wired, 2019. a
Forkel, M., Andela, N., Harrison, S. P., Lasslop, G., van Marle, M., Chuvieco, E., Dorigo, W., Forrest, M., Hantson, S., Heil, A., Li, F., Melton, J., Sitch, S., Yue, C., and Arneth, A.: Emergent relationships with respect to burned area in global satellite observations and fire-enabled vegetation models, Biogeosciences, 16, 57–76, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-57-2019, 2019. a
Ganji, A., Sushama, L., Verseghy, D., and Harvey, R.: On improving cold region
hydrological processes in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme, Theor. Appl.
Climatol., 127, 45–59, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1618-4, 2015. a
Hacker, J. P., Exby, J., Gill, D., Jimenez, I., Maltzahn, C., See, T.,
Mullendore, G., and Fossell, K.: A Containerized Mesoscale Model and Analysis
Toolkit to Accelerate Classroom Learning, Collaborative Research, and
Uncertainty Quantification, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 1129–1138,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00255.1, 2016. a
Hantson, S., Arneth, A., Harrison, S. P., Kelley, D. I., Prentice, I. C., Rabin, S. S., Archibald, S., Mouillot, F., Arnold, S. R., Artaxo, P., Bachelet, D., Ciais, P., Forrest, M., Friedlingstein, P., Hickler, T., Kaplan, J. O., Kloster, S., Knorr, W., Lasslop, G., Li, F., Mangeon, S., Melton, J. R., Meyn, A., Sitch, S., Spessa, A., van der Werf, G. R., Voulgarakis, A., and Yue, C.: The status and challenge of global fire modelling, Biogeosciences, 13, 3359–3375, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-3359-2016, 2016. a
Haverd, V., Smith, B., Nieradzik, L., Briggs, P. R., Woodgate, W., Trudinger, C. M., Canadell, J. G., and Cuntz, M.: A new version of the CABLE land surface model (Subversion revision r4601) incorporating land use and land cover change, woody vegetation demography, and a novel optimisation-based approach to plant coordination of photosynthesis, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2995–3026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2995-2018, 2018. a
Henderson-Sellers, A., Yang, Z.-L., and Dickinson, R. E.: The Project for
Intercomparison of Land-surface Parameterization Schemes, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 74, 1335–1350, 1993. a
Koster, R. D., Sud, Y. C., Guo, Z., Dirmeyer, P. A., Bonan, G., Oleson, K. W.,
Chan, E., Verseghy, D., Cox, P., Davies, H., Kowalczyk, E., Gordon, C. T.,
Kanae, S., Lawrence, D., Liu, P., Mocko, D., Lu, C.-H., Mitchell, K.,
Malyshev, S., McAvaney, B., Oki, T., Yamada, T., Pitman, A., Taylor, C. M.,
Vasic, R., and Xue, Y.: GLACE: The Global Land–Atmosphere Coupling
Experiment. Part I: Overview, J. Hydrometeorol., 7, 590–610, 2006. a
Kothavala, Z., Arain, M. A., Black, T. A., and Verseghy, D.: The simulation of
energy, water vapor and carbon dioxide fluxes over common crops by the
Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS), Agr. For. Meteorol., 133, 89–108,
2005. a
Kurtzer, G. M., Sochat, V., and Bauer, M. W.: Singularity: Scientific
containers for mobility of compute, PLoS One, 12, e0177459,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177459, 2017. a
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C.,
Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E.,
Lawrence, P. J., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Riley, W. J., Sacks, W. J.,
Shi, M., Vertenstein, M., Wieder, W. R., Xu, C., Ali, A. A., Badger, A. M.,
Bisht, G., Broeke, M., Brunke, M. A., Burns, S. P., Buzan, J., Clark, M.,
Craig, A., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Fisher, J. B., Flanner, M., Fox, A. M.,
Gentine, P., Hoffman, F., Keppel‐Aleks, G., Knox, R., Kumar, S., Lenaerts,
J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W. H., Lu, Y., Pandey, A., Pelletier, J. D.,
Perket, J., Randerson, J. T., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B. M., Slater, A.,
Subin, Z. M., Tang, J., Thomas, R. Q., Val Martin, M., and Zeng, X.: The
Community Land Model version 5: Description of new features, benchmarking,
and impact of forcing uncertainty, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 4245–4287, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001583, 2019. a
Le, E. and Paz, D.: Performance Analysis of Applications Using Singularity
Container on SDSC Comet, in: Proceedings of the Practice and Experience in
Advanced Research Computing 2017 on Sustainability, Success and Impact,
PEARC17, 66:1–66:4, ACM, New York, NY, USA,
https://doi.org/10.1145/3093338.3106737, 2017. a
Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Sitch, S., Korsbakken, J. I.,
Peters, G. P., Manning, A. C., Boden, T. A., Tans, P. P., Houghton, R. A.,
Keeling, R. F., Alin, S., Andrews, O. D., Anthoni, P., Barbero, L., Bopp, L.,
Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Ciais, P., Currie, K., Delire, C., Doney,
S. C., Friedlingstein, P., Gkritzalis, T., Harris, I., Hauck, J., Haverd, V.,
Hoppema, M., Klein Goldewijk, K., Jain, A. K., Kato, E., Körtzinger, A.,
Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Lombardozzi, D.,
Melton, J. R., Metzl, N., Millero, F., Monteiro, P. M. S., Munro, D. R.,
Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., O'Brien, K., Olsen, A., Omar, A. M., Ono,
T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rödenbeck, C., Salisbury, J., Schuster, U.,
Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Stocker, B. D., Sutton, A. J.,
Takahashi, T., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., van der
Werf, G. R., Viovy, N., Walker, A. P., Wiltshire, A. J., and Zaehle, S.:
Global Carbon Budget 2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, 2016. a
Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Hauck, J., Pongratz, J., Pickers, P. A., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., Canadell, J. G., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Barbero, L., Bastos, A., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Ciais, P., Doney, S. C., Gkritzalis, T., Goll, D. S., Harris, I., Haverd, V., Hoffman, F. M., Hoppema, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Johannessen, T., Jones, C. D., Kato, E., Keeling, R. F., Goldewijk, K. K., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, Z., Lombardozzi, D., Metzl, N., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S., Neill, C., Olsen, A., Ono, T., Patra, P., Peregon, A., Peters, W., Peylin, P., Pfeil, B., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rocher, M., Rödenbeck, C., Schuster, U., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sutton, A., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F. N., van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., van der Werf, G. R., Viovy, N., Walker, A. P., Wiltshire, A. J., Wright, R., Zaehle, S., and Zheng, B.: Global Carbon Budget 2018, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 2141–2194, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, 2018a. a
Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Pongratz, J., Manning, A. C., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., Canadell, J. G., Jackson, R. B., Boden, T. A., Tans, P. P., Andrews, O. D., Arora, V. K., Bakker, D. C. E., Barbero, L., Becker, M., Betts, R. A., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Ciais, P., Cosca, C. E., Cross, J., Currie, K., Gasser, T., Harris, I., Hauck, J., Haverd, V., Houghton, R. A., Hunt, C. W., Hurtt, G., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Kato, E., Kautz, M., Keeling, R. F., Klein Goldewijk, K., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Lima, I., Lombardozzi, D., Metzl, N., Millero, F., Monteiro, P. M. S., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S., Nojiri, Y., Padin, X. A., Peregon, A., Pfeil, B., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Reimer, J., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Stocker, B. D., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F. N., van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., van der Werf, G. R., van Heuven, S., Viovy, N., Vuichard, N., Walker, A. P., Watson, A. J., Wiltshire, A. J., Zaehle, S., and Zhu, D.: Global Carbon Budget 2017, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 405–448, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018, 2018b. a
Melaas, E. K., Richardson, A. D., Friedl, M. A., Dragoni, D., Gough, C. M.,
Herbst, M., Montagnani, L., and Moors, E.: Using FLUXNET data to improve
models of springtime vegetation activity onset in forest ecosystems, Agr.
For. Meteorol., 171–172, 46–56, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.11.018, 2013. a
Melton, J. R. and Arora, V. K.: Sub-grid scale representation of vegetation in global land surface schemes: implications for estimation of the terrestrial carbon sink, Biogeosciences, 11, 1021–1036, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-1021-2014, 2014. a, b
Melton, J. R., Shrestha, R. K., and Arora, V. K.: The influence of soils on heterotrophic respiration exerts a strong control on net ecosystem productivity in seasonally dry Amazonian forests, Biogeosciences, 12, 1151–1168, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-1151-2015, 2015. a, b
Melton, J. R., Sospedra-Alfonso, R., and McCusker, K. E.: Tiling soil textures for terrestrial ecosystem modelling via clustering analysis: a case study with CLASS-CTEM (version 2.1), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2761–2783, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2761-2017, 2017. a
Melton, J. R., Arora, V., Wisernig-Cojoc, E., Seiler, C., Fortier, M., Chan,
E., and Teckentrup, L.: The Canadian Land Surface Scheme including
Biogeochemical Cycles, Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3522407, 2019a. a
Melton, J. R., Seiler, C., and Fortier, M.: Singularity software container for
the Canadian Land Surface Scheme including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC), Zenodo,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3525249, 2019b. a
Melton, J. R., Teckentrup, L., and Fortier, M.: Benchmarking data and outputs
for CLASSIC v. 1.0, Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3525336, 2019c. a
Melton, J. R., Verseghy, D. L., Sospedra-Alfonso, R., and Gruber, S.: Improving permafrost physics in the coupled Canadian Land Surface Scheme (v.3.6.2) and Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (v.2.1) (CLASS-CTEM), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4443–4467, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4443-2019, 2019d. a, b
Merbold, L., Ardö, J., Arneth, A., Scholes, R. J., Nouvellon, Y., de Grandcourt, A., Archibald, S., Bonnefond, J. M., Boulain, N., Brueggemann, N., Bruemmer, C., Cappelaere, B., Ceschia, E., El-Khidir, H. A. M., El-Tahir, B. A., Falk, U., Lloyd, J., Kergoat, L., Le Dantec, V., Mougin, E., Muchinda, M., Mukelabai, M. M., Ramier, D., Roupsard, O., Timouk, F., Veenendaal, E. M., and Kutsch, W. L.: Precipitation as driver of carbon fluxes in 11 African ecosystems, Biogeosciences, 6, 1027–1041, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-6-1027-2009, 2009. a
Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Mitchell, K. E., Chen, F., Ek, M. B., Barlage, M.,
Kumar, A., Manning, K., Niyogi, D., Rosero, E., Tewari, M., and Xia, Y.: The
community Noah land surface model with multiparameterization options
(Noah-MP): 1. Model description and evaluation with local-scale
measurements, J. Geophys., 116, D12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jd015139, 2011. a
Paquin, J.-P. and Sushama, L.: On the Arctic near-surface permafrost and
climate sensitivities to soil and snow model formulations in climate models,
Clim. Dynam., 44, 203–228, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2185-6, 2014. a
Pastorello, G., Papale, D., Chu, H., Trotta, C., Agarwal, D., Canfora, E.,
Baldocchi, D., and Torn, M.: A new data set to keep a sharper eye on land-air
exchanges, Eos Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, 98, 28–32, 2017. a
Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel,
O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J.,
Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., and Duchesnay, E.:
Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python, J. Mach. Learn.
Res., 12, 2825–2830, 2011. a
Peng, Y., Arora, V. K., Kurz, W. A., Hember, R. A., Hawkins, B. J., Fyfe, J. C., and Werner, A. T.: Climate and atmospheric drivers of historical terrestrial carbon uptake in the province of British Columbia, Canada, Biogeosciences, 11, 635–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-635-2014, 2014. a
Pietroniro, A., Fortin, V., Kouwen, N., Neal, C., Turcotte, R., Davison, B., Verseghy, D., Soulis, E. D., Caldwell, R., Evora, N., and Pellerin, P.: Development of the MESH modelling system for hydrological ensemble forecasting of the Laurentian Great Lakes at the regional scale, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 1279–1294, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1279-2007, 2007. a
Poulter, B., Bousquet, P., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Peregon, A., Saunois,
M., Arora, V. K., Beerling, D. J., Brovkin, V., Jones, C. D., Joos, F.,
Gedney, N., Ito, A., Kleinen, T., Koven, C. D., McDonald, K., Melton, J. R.,
Peng, C., Peng, S., Prigent, C., Schroeder, R., Riley, W. J., Saito, M.,
Spahni, R., Tian, H., Taylor, L., Viovy, N., Wilton, D., Wiltshire, A., Xu,
X., Zhang, B., Zhang, Z., and Zhu, Q.: Global wetland contribution to
2000–2012 atmospheric methane growth rate dynamics, Environ. Res. Lett.,
12, 094013, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa8391, 2017. a
Roy, A., Royer, A., Montpetit, B., Bartlett, P. A., and Langlois, A.: Snow specific surface area simulation using the one-layer snow model in the Canadian LAnd Surface Scheme (CLASS), The Cryosphere, 7, 961–975, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-961-2013, 2013. a
Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., Jiao, Y., Qian, M. W., Lazare, M., Solheim, L.,
Flato, G. M., Biner, S., Desgagne, M., and Dugas, B.: Coordinated Global and
Regional Climate Modeling*, J. Climate, 29, 17–35, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0161.1, 2016. a
Scott, R. L., Hamerlynck, E. P., Darrel Jenerette, G., Susan Moran, M., and
Barron-Gafford, G. A.: Carbon dioxide exchange in a semidesert grassland
through drought-induced vegetation change, J. Geophys. Res., 115, G3, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jg001348, 2010. a, b
Sedlák, P., Aubinet, M., Heinesch, B., Janouš, D., Pavelka, M.,
Potužníková, K., and Yernaux, M.: Night-time airflow in a forest canopy
near a mountain crest, Agr. For. Meteorol., 150, 736–744,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.01.014, 2010. a
Seiler, C.: amber: Automated Model Benchmarking Package for the Canadian Land
Surface Scheme, available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=amber (last access: 19 November 2019), r
package version 0.1.5, 2019. a
Seiler, C., Melton, J. R., Arora, V. K., and Wang, L.: CLASSIC v1.0: the open-source community successor to the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) – Part 2: Global benchmarking, in preparation, 2020. a
Shrestha, R. K., Arora, V. K., and Melton, J. R.: The sensitivity of simulated
competition between different plant functional types to sub-grid-scale
representation of vegetation in a land surface model, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeosci., 121, 2015JG003234, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JG003234, 2016. a, b
Stöckli, R., Lawrence, D. M., Niu, G.-Y., Oleson, K. W., Thornton, P. E.,
Yang, Z.-L., Bonan, G. B., Denning, A. S., and Running, S. W.: Use of
FLUXNET in the Community Land Model development, J. Geophys. Res., 113,
G01025, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000562, 2008. a
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N. S., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Hanna, S., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Sigmond, M., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., and Winter, B.: The Canadian Earth System Model version 5 (CanESM5.0.3), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4823–4873, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4823-2019, 2019. a, b
Verseghy, D. L.: CLASS – A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMs. I. Soil
model, Int. J. Climatol., 11, 111–133, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370110202, 1991. a
Verseghy, D. L.: The Canadian land surface scheme (CLASS): Its history and
future, Atmos.-Ocean, 38, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2000.9649637,
2000. a, b
Verseghy, D. L. and MacKay, M. D.: Offline implementation and evaluation of the
Canadian Small Lake Model with the Canadian Land Surface Scheme over western
Canada, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 1563–1582, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0272.1, 2017. a
Verseghy, D. L., McFarlane, N. A., and Lazare, M.: CLASS – A Canadian land
surface scheme for GCMs, II. Vegetation model and coupled runs, Int. J.
Climatol., 13, 347–370, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370130402, 1993. a
von Salzen, K., Scinocca, J. F., McFarlane, N. A., Li, J., Cole, J. N. S.,
Plummer, D., Verseghy, D., Reader, M. C., Ma, X., Lazare, M., and Solheim,
L.: The Canadian Fourth Generation Atmospheric Global Climate Model
(CanAM4). Part I: Representation of Physical Processes, Atmos.-Ocean,
51, 104–125, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2012.755610, 2013. a
Wilson, G., Aruliah, D. A., Brown, C. T., Chue Hong, N. P., Davis, M., Guy,
R. T., Haddock, S. H. D., Huff, K. D., Mitchell, I. M., Plumbley, M. D.,
Waugh, B., White, E. P., and Wilson, P.: Best practices for scientific
computing, PLoS Biol., 12, e1001745, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001745,
2014. a
Wilson, K., Goldstein, A., Falge, E., Aubinet, M., Baldocchi, D., Berbigier,
P., Bernhofer, C., Ceulemans, R., Dolman, H., Field, C., Grelle, A., Ibrom,
A., Law, B. E., Kowalski, A., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Monson, R., Oechel,
W., Tenhunen, J., Valentini, R., and Verma, S.: Energy balance closure at
FLUXNET sites, Agr. For. Meteorol., 113, 223–243,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0, 2002. a
Wu, Y., Verseghy, D. L., and Melton, J. R.: Integrating peatlands into the coupled Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) v3.6 and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) v2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2639–2663, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2639-2016, 2016. a, b, c
Short summary
We transitioned the CLASS-CTEM land surface model to an open-source community model format by modernizing the code base to make the model easier to use and understand, providing a complete software environment to run the model within, developing a benchmarking suite for model evaluation, and creating an infrastructure to support community involvement. The new model, the Canadian Land Surface Scheme including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC), is now available for the community to use and develop.
We transitioned the CLASS-CTEM land surface model to an open-source community model format by...
