Articles | Volume 14, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3361-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3361-2021
Development and technical paper
 | 
04 Jun 2021
Development and technical paper |  | 04 Jun 2021

Addressing biases in Arctic–boreal carbon cycling in the Community Land Model Version 5

Leah Birch, Christopher R. Schwalm, Sue Natali, Danica Lombardozzi, Gretchen Keppel-Aleks, Jennifer Watts, Xin Lin, Donatella Zona, Walter Oechel, Torsten Sachs, Thomas Andrew Black, and Brendan M. Rogers

Related authors

Improving the representation of major Indian crops in the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5) using site-scale crop data
K. Narender Reddy, Somnath Baidya Roy, Sam S. Rabin, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma, Ruchira Biswas, and Devavat Chiru Naik
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1431,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1431, 2024
Short summary
Divergent biophysical responses of western United States forests to wildfire driven by eco-climatic gradients
Surendra Shrestha, Christopher A. Williams, Brendan M. Rogers, John Rogan, and Dominik Kulakowski
Biogeosciences, 21, 2207–2226, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2207-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2207-2024, 2024
Short summary
WetCH4: A Machine Learning-based Upscaling of Methane Fluxes of Northern Wetlands during 2016–2022
Qing Ying, Benjamin Poulter, Jennifer D. Watts, Kyle A. Arndt, Anna-Maria Virkkala, Lori Bruhwiler, Youmi Oh, Brendan M. Rogers, Susan M. Natali, Hilary Sullivan, Luke D. Schiferl, Clayton Elder, Olli Peltola, Annett Bartsch, Amanda Armstrong, Ankur R. Desai, Eugénie Euskirchen, Mathias Göckede, Bernhard Lehner, Mats B. Nilsson, Matthias Peichl, Oliver Sonnentag, Eeva-Stiina Tuittila, Torsten Sachs, Aram Kalhori, Masahito Ueyama, and Zhen Zhang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-84,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-84, 2024
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Environmental drivers and remote sensing proxies of post-fire thaw depth in Eastern Siberian larch forests
Lucas Ribeiro Diaz, Clement J. F. Delcourt, Moritz Langer, Michael M. Loranty, Brendan M. Rogers, Rebecca C. Scholten, Tatiana A. Shestakova, Anna C. Talucci, Jorien E. Vonk, Sonam Wangchuk, and Sander Veraverbeke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-469,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-469, 2024
Short summary
Resolving heterogeneous fluxes from tundra halves the growing season carbon budget
Sarah M. Ludwig, Luke Schiferl, Jacqueline Hung, Susan M. Natali, and Roisin Commane
Biogeosciences, 21, 1301–1321, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1301-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1301-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeosciences
Dynamic ecosystem assembly and escaping the “fire trap” in the tropics: insights from FATES_15.0.0
Jacquelyn K. Shuman, Rosie A. Fisher, Charles Koven, Ryan Knox, Lara Kueppers, and Chonggang Xu
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4643–4671, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4643-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4643-2024, 2024
Short summary
In silico calculation of soil pH by SCEPTER v1.0
Yoshiki Kanzaki, Isabella Chiaravalloti, Shuang Zhang, Noah J. Planavsky, and Christopher T. Reinhard
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4515–4532, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4515-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4515-2024, 2024
Short summary
Simple process-led algorithms for simulating habitats (SPLASH v.2.0): robust calculations of water and energy fluxes
David Sandoval, Iain Colin Prentice, and Rodolfo L. B. Nóbrega
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4229–4309, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4229-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4229-2024, 2024
Short summary
A global behavioural model of human fire use and management: WHAM! v1.0
Oliver Perkins, Matthew Kasoar, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Cathy Smith, Jay Mistry, and James D. A. Millington
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3993–4016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3993-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3993-2024, 2024
Short summary
Terrestrial Ecosystem Model in R (TEMIR) version 1.0: simulating ecophysiological responses of vegetation to atmospheric chemical and meteorological changes
Amos P. K. Tai, David H. Y. Yung, and Timothy Lam
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3733–3764, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3733-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3733-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Alexander, H. D. and Mack, M. C.: A canopy shift in interior Alaskan boreal forests: consequences for above-and belowground carbon and nitrogen pools during post-fire succession, Ecosystems, 19, 98–114, 2016. a
Ali, A. A., Xu, C., Rogers, A., Fisher, R. A., Wullschleger, S. D., Massoud, E. C., Vrugt, J. A., Muss, J. D., McDowell, N. G., Fisher, J. B., Reich, P. B., and Wilson, C. J.: A global scale mechanistic model of photosynthetic capacity (LUNA V1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 587–606, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-587-2016, 2016. a, b
Amiro, B.: FLUXNET2015 CA-SF1 Saskatchewan-Western Boreal, forest burned in 1977, Tech. rep., FluxNet, University of Manitoba, 2016. a
Archer, S. and Tieszen, L.: Effects of simulated grazing on foliage and root production and biomass allocation in an arctic tundra sedge (Eriophorum vaginatum), Oecologia, 58, 92–102, 1983. a
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: A parameterization of leaf phenology for the terrestrial ecosystem component of climate models, Glob. Change Biol., 11, 39–59, 2005. a, b, c, d
Download
Short summary
The high-latitude landscape or Arctic–boreal zone has been warming rapidly, impacting the carbon balance both regionally and globally. Given the possible global effects of climate change, it is important to have accurate climate model simulations. We assess the simulation of the Arctic–boreal carbon cycle in the Community Land Model (CLM 5.0). We find biases in both the timing and magnitude photosynthesis. We then use observational data to improve the simulation of the carbon cycle.