Articles | Volume 15, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1971-2022
© Author(s) 2022. 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-15-1971-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model evaluation paper
| 
09 Mar 2022
Model evaluation paper |
| 09 Mar 2022
| 09 Mar 2022
Global evaluation of the Ecosystem Demography model (ED v3.0)
Lei Ma
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
George Hurtt
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
Lesley Ott
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight
Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
Ritvik Sahajpal
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
Justin Fisk
Regrow Agriculture Inc., Durham, NH 03824, USA
Rachel Lamb
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
Department of Geography, National University of Singapore, 117570,
Singapore
Steve Flanagan
Wildland Fire Science, Tall Timbers Research Station and Land
Conservancy, Tallahassee, FL 32312, USA
Louise Chini
Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD 20770, USA
Abhishek Chatterjee
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA Goddard Space Flight
Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, MD 21046, USA
now at: NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91326, USA
Joseph Sullivan
Department of Plant Science & Landscape Architecture, University
of Maryland, College Park, MD 20770, USA
Related authors
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets 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 (1750–2023). 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.
Aolin Jia, Shunlin Liang, Dongdong Wang, Lei Ma, Zhihao Wang, and Shuo Xu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 869–895, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-869-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-869-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Satellites are now producing multiple global land surface temperature (LST) products; however, they suffer from data gaps caused by cloud cover, seriously restricting the applications, and few products provide gap-free global hourly LST. We produced global hourly, 5 km, all-sky LST data from 2011 to 2021 using geostationary and polar-orbiting satellite data. Based on the assessment, it has high accuracy and can be used to estimate evapotranspiration, drought, etc.
Louise Chini, George Hurtt, Ritvik Sahajpal, Steve Frolking, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Stephen Sitch, Raphael Ganzenmüller, Lei Ma, Lesley Ott, Julia Pongratz, and Benjamin Poulter
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4175–4189, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4175-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4175-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon emissions from land-use change are a large and uncertain component of the global carbon cycle. The Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) dataset was developed as an input to carbon and climate simulations and has been updated annually for the Global Carbon Budget (GCB) assessments. Here we discuss the methodology for producing these annual LUH2 updates and describe the 2019 version which used new cropland and grazing land data inputs for the globally important region of Brazil.
George C. Hurtt, Louise Chini, Ritvik Sahajpal, Steve Frolking, Benjamin L. Bodirsky, Katherine Calvin, Jonathan C. Doelman, Justin Fisk, Shinichiro Fujimori, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Tomoko Hasegawa, Peter Havlik, Andreas Heinimann, Florian Humpenöder, Johan Jungclaus, Jed O. Kaplan, Jennifer Kennedy, Tamás Krisztin, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Lei Ma, Ole Mertz, Julia Pongratz, Alexander Popp, Benjamin Poulter, Keywan Riahi, Elena Shevliakova, Elke Stehfest, Peter Thornton, Francesco N. Tubiello, Detlef P. van Vuuren, and Xin Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5425–5464, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
To estimate the effects of human land use activities on the carbon–climate system, a new set of global gridded land use forcing datasets was developed to link historical land use data to eight future scenarios in a standard format required by climate models. This new generation of land use harmonization (LUH2) includes updated inputs, higher spatial resolution, more detailed land use transitions, and the addition of important agricultural management layers; it will be used for CMIP6 simulations.
Lei Ma, George C. Hurtt, Louise P. Chini, Ritvik Sahajpal, Julia Pongratz, Steve Frolking, Elke Stehfest, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Donal O'Leary, and Jonathan C. Doelman
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3203–3220, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3203-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3203-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models require information on historical land cover change. We present transition rules to generate land cover change from newly developed land use dataset (Land-use Harmonization, LUH2). The resulting forest cover, vegetation carbon, and emissions from land use and land cover change are simulated and evaluated against remote sensing data and other studies. The rules can guide the incorporation of land-cover information within earth system models for CMIP6.
Nicole Jacobs, Christopher W. O'Dell, Thomas E. Taylor, Thomas L. Logan, Brendan Byrne, Matthäus Kiel, Rigel Kivi, Pauli Heikkinen, Aronne Merrelli, Vivienne H. Payne, and Abhishek Chatterjee
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1375–1401, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1375-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1375-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The accuracy of trace gas retrievals from spaceborne observations, like those from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2), are sensitive to the referenced digital elevation model (DEM). Therefore, we evaluate several global DEMs, used in versions 10 and 11 of the OCO-2 retrieval along with the Copernicus DEM. We explore the impacts of changing the DEM on biases in OCO-2-retrieved XCO2 and inferred CO2 fluxes. Our findings led to an update to OCO-2 v11.1 using the Copernicus DEM globally.
Yuanwei Qin, Xiangming Xiao, Hao Tang, Ralph Dubayah, Russell Doughty, Diyou Liu, Fang Liu, Yosio Shimabukuro, Egidio Arai, Xinxin Wang, and Berrien Moore III
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 321–336, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-321-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-321-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Forest definition has two major biophysical parameters, i.e., canopy height and canopy coverage. However, few studies have assessed forest cover maps in terms of these two parameters at a large scale. Here, we assessed the annual forest cover maps in the Brazilian Amazon using 1.1 million footprints of canopy height and canopy coverage. Over 93 % of our forest cover maps are consistent with the FAO forest definition, showing the high accuracy of these forest cover maps in the Brazilian Amazon.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets 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 (1750–2023). 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.
Jeongmin Yun, Junjie Liu, Brendan Byrne, Brad Weir, Lesley E. Ott, Kathryn McKain, Bianca Baier, and Luciana V. Gatti
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2258, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2258, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Multi-inverse modeling inter-comparison projects offer a chance to assess uncertainties in inversion estimates arising from various sources. This study proposes a method to quantify errors of regional terrestrial biosphere CO2 flux estimates from an inverse model ensemble by using airborne CO2 measurements. Our observation-based error estimates exceed the ensemble spread of flux estimates in regions with high anthropogenic emission regions, suggesting systematic biases in inversion estimates.
Xiaoran Zhu, Dong Chen, Maruko Kogure, Elizabeth Hoy, Logan Berner, Amy Breen, Abhishek Chatterjee, Scott Davidson, Gerald Frost, Teresa Hollingsworth, Go Iwahana, Randi Jandt, Anja Kade, Tatiana Loboda, Matt Macander, Michelle Mack, Charles Miller, Eric Miller, Susan Natali, Martha Raynolds, Adrian Rocha, Shiro Tsuyuzaki, Craig Tweedie, Donald Walker, Mathew Williams, Xin Xu, Yingtong Zhang, Nancy French, and Scott Goetz
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-222, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-222, 2023
Revised manuscript accepted for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The Arctic tundra is experiencing widespread physical and biological changes largely in response to warming. Yet scientific understanding of tundra ecology and change remains limited due to relatively limited accessibility and study compared to other terrestrial biomes. To support synthesis research and inform future studies, we created the Synthesized Alaskan Tundra Field Dataset (SATFiD), which pulls together field datasets and includes vegetation, active layer, and fire-related properties.
Thomas E. Taylor, Christopher W. O'Dell, David Baker, Carol Bruegge, Albert Chang, Lars Chapsky, Abhishek Chatterjee, Cecilia Cheng, Frédéric Chevallier, David Crisp, Lan Dang, Brian Drouin, Annmarie Eldering, Liang Feng, Brendan Fisher, Dejian Fu, Michael Gunson, Vance Haemmerle, Graziela R. Keller, Matthäus Kiel, Le Kuai, Thomas Kurosu, Alyn Lambert, Joshua Laughner, Richard Lee, Junjie Liu, Lucas Mandrake, Yuliya Marchetti, Gregory McGarragh, Aronne Merrelli, Robert R. Nelson, Greg Osterman, Fabiano Oyafuso, Paul I. Palmer, Vivienne H. Payne, Robert Rosenberg, Peter Somkuti, Gary Spiers, Cathy To, Brad Weir, Paul O. Wennberg, Shanshan Yu, and Jia Zong
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 3173–3209, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3173-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3173-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 and 3 (OCO-2 and OCO-3, respectively) provide complementary spatiotemporal coverage from a sun-synchronous and precession orbit, respectively. Estimates of total column carbon dioxide (XCO2) derived from the two sensors using the same retrieval algorithm show broad consistency over a 2.5-year overlapping time record. This suggests that data from the two satellites may be used together for scientific analysis.
Brendan Byrne, David F. Baker, Sourish Basu, Michael Bertolacci, Kevin W. Bowman, Dustin Carroll, Abhishek Chatterjee, Frédéric Chevallier, Philippe Ciais, Noel Cressie, David Crisp, Sean Crowell, Feng Deng, Zhu Deng, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Manvendra K. Dubey, Sha Feng, Omaira E. García, David W. T. Griffith, Benedikt Herkommer, Lei Hu, Andrew R. Jacobson, Rajesh Janardanan, Sujong Jeong, Matthew S. Johnson, Dylan B. A. Jones, Rigel Kivi, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Shamil Maksyutov, John B. Miller, Scot M. Miller, Isamu Morino, Justus Notholt, Tomohiro Oda, Christopher W. O'Dell, Young-Suk Oh, Hirofumi Ohyama, Prabir K. Patra, Hélène Peiro, Christof Petri, Sajeev Philip, David F. Pollard, Benjamin Poulter, Marine Remaud, Andrew Schuh, Mahesh K. Sha, Kei Shiomi, Kimberly Strong, Colm Sweeney, Yao Té, Hanqin Tian, Voltaire A. Velazco, Mihalis Vrekoussis, Thorsten Warneke, John R. Worden, Debra Wunch, Yuanzhi Yao, Jeongmin Yun, Andrew Zammit-Mangion, and Ning Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 963–1004, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-963-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-963-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Changes in the carbon stocks of terrestrial ecosystems result in emissions and removals of CO2. These can be driven by anthropogenic activities (e.g., deforestation), natural processes (e.g., fires) or in response to rising CO2 (e.g., CO2 fertilization). This paper describes a dataset of CO2 emissions and removals derived from atmospheric CO2 observations. This pilot dataset informs current capabilities and future developments towards top-down monitoring and verification systems.
Aolin Jia, Shunlin Liang, Dongdong Wang, Lei Ma, Zhihao Wang, and Shuo Xu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 869–895, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-869-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-869-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Satellites are now producing multiple global land surface temperature (LST) products; however, they suffer from data gaps caused by cloud cover, seriously restricting the applications, and few products provide gap-free global hourly LST. We produced global hourly, 5 km, all-sky LST data from 2011 to 2021 using geostationary and polar-orbiting satellite data. Based on the assessment, it has high accuracy and can be used to estimate evapotranspiration, drought, etc.
Andrew F. Feldman, Zhen Zhang, Yasuko Yoshida, Abhishek Chatterjee, and Benjamin Poulter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 1545–1563, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1545-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1545-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the conditions under which satellite-retrieved column carbon dioxide concentrations directly hold information about surface carbon dioxide fluxes, without the use of inversion models. We show that OCO-2 column carbon dioxide retrievals, available at 1–3 month latency, can be used to directly detect and roughly estimate extreme biospheric CO2 fluxes. As such, these OCO-2 retrievals have value for rapidly monitoring extreme conditions in the terrestrial biosphere.
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.
Brendan Byrne, Junjie Liu, Yonghong Yi, Abhishek Chatterjee, Sourish Basu, Rui Cheng, Russell Doughty, Frédéric Chevallier, Kevin W. Bowman, Nicholas C. Parazoo, David Crisp, Xing Li, Jingfeng Xiao, Stephen Sitch, Bertrand Guenet, Feng Deng, Matthew S. Johnson, Sajeev Philip, Patrick C. McGuire, and Charles E. Miller
Biogeosciences, 19, 4779–4799, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-4779-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-4779-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Plants draw CO2 from the atmosphere during the growing season, while respiration releases CO2 to the atmosphere throughout the year, driving seasonal variations in atmospheric CO2 that can be observed by satellites, such as the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2). Using OCO-2 XCO2 data and space-based constraints on plant growth, we show that permafrost-rich northeast Eurasia has a strong seasonal release of CO2 during the autumn, hinting at an unexpectedly large respiration signal from soils.
Daniel J. Jacob, Daniel J. Varon, Daniel H. Cusworth, Philip E. Dennison, Christian Frankenberg, Ritesh Gautam, Luis Guanter, John Kelley, Jason McKeever, Lesley E. Ott, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Qu, Andrew K. Thorpe, John R. Worden, and Riley M. Duren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9617–9646, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9617-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9617-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We review the capability of satellite observations of atmospheric methane to quantify methane emissions on all scales. We cover retrieval methods, precision requirements, inverse methods for inferring emissions, source detection thresholds, and observations of system completeness. We show that current instruments already enable quantification of regional and national emissions including contributions from large point sources. Coverage and resolution will increase significantly in coming years.
Colm Sweeney, Abhishek Chatterjee, Sonja Wolter, Kathryn McKain, Robert Bogue, Stephen Conley, Tim Newberger, Lei Hu, Lesley Ott, Benjamin Poulter, Luke Schiferl, Brad Weir, Zhen Zhang, and Charles E. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 6347–6364, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6347-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6347-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Arctic Carbon Atmospheric Profiles (Arctic-CAP) project demonstrates the utility of aircraft profiles for independent evaluation of model-derived emissions and uptake of atmospheric CO2, CH4, and CO from land and ocean. Comparison with the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) modeling system suggests that fluxes of CO2 are very consistent with observations, while those of CH4 have some regional and seasonal biases, and that CO comparison is complicated by transport errors.
M. Hosseini, I. Becker-Reshef, R. Sahajpal, P. Lafluf, G. Leale, E. Puricelli, S. Skakun, and H. McNairn
ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., V-3-2022, 405–410, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-V-3-2022-405-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-V-3-2022-405-2022, 2022
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.
Thomas E. Taylor, Christopher W. O'Dell, David Crisp, Akhiko Kuze, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, Paul O. Wennberg, Abhishek Chatterjee, Michael Gunson, Annmarie Eldering, Brendan Fisher, Matthäus Kiel, Robert R. Nelson, Aronne Merrelli, Greg Osterman, Frédéric Chevallier, Paul I. Palmer, Liang Feng, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Manvendra K. Dubey, Dietrich G. Feist, Omaira E. García, David W. T. Griffith, Frank Hase, Laura T. Iraci, Rigel Kivi, Cheng Liu, Martine De Mazière, Isamu Morino, Justus Notholt, Young-Suk Oh, Hirofumi Ohyama, David F. Pollard, Markus Rettinger, Matthias Schneider, Coleen M. Roehl, Mahesh Kumar Sha, Kei Shiomi, Kimberly Strong, Ralf Sussmann, Yao Té, Voltaire A. Velazco, Mihalis Vrekoussis, Thorsten Warneke, and Debra Wunch
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 325–360, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-325-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-325-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We provide an analysis of an 11-year record of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations derived using an optimal estimation retrieval algorithm on measurements made by the GOSAT satellite. The new product (version 9) shows improvement over the previous version (v7.3) as evaluated against independent estimates of CO2 from ground-based sensors and atmospheric inversion systems. We also compare the new GOSAT CO2 values to collocated estimates from NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2.
Louise Chini, George Hurtt, Ritvik Sahajpal, Steve Frolking, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Stephen Sitch, Raphael Ganzenmüller, Lei Ma, Lesley Ott, Julia Pongratz, and Benjamin Poulter
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4175–4189, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4175-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4175-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon emissions from land-use change are a large and uncertain component of the global carbon cycle. The Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) dataset was developed as an input to carbon and climate simulations and has been updated annually for the Global Carbon Budget (GCB) assessments. Here we discuss the methodology for producing these annual LUH2 updates and describe the 2019 version which used new cropland and grazing land data inputs for the globally important region of Brazil.
Kerstin Hartung, Ana Bastos, Louise Chini, Raphael Ganzenmüller, Felix Havermann, George C. Hurtt, Tammas Loughran, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Tobias Nützel, Wolfgang A. Obermeier, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 763–782, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-763-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-763-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we model the relative importance of several contributors to the land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) flux based on a LULCC dataset including uncertainty estimates. The uncertainty of LULCC is as relevant as applying wood harvest and gross transitions for the cumulative LULCC flux over the industrial period. However, LULCC uncertainty matters less than the other two factors for the LULCC flux in 2014; historical LULCC uncertainty is negligible for estimates of future scenarios.
Brad Weir, Lesley E. Ott, George J. Collatz, Stephan R. Kawa, Benjamin Poulter, Abhishek Chatterjee, Tomohiro Oda, and Steven Pawson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9609–9628, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9609-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9609-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present a collection of carbon surface fluxes, the Low-order Flux Inversion (LoFI), derived from satellite observations of the Earth's surface and calibrated to match long-term inventories and atmospheric and oceanic records. Simulations using LoFI reproduce background atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements with comparable skill to the leading surface flux products. Available both retrospectively and as a forecast, LoFI enables the study of the carbon cycle as it occurs.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
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.
George C. Hurtt, Louise Chini, Ritvik Sahajpal, Steve Frolking, Benjamin L. Bodirsky, Katherine Calvin, Jonathan C. Doelman, Justin Fisk, Shinichiro Fujimori, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Tomoko Hasegawa, Peter Havlik, Andreas Heinimann, Florian Humpenöder, Johan Jungclaus, Jed O. Kaplan, Jennifer Kennedy, Tamás Krisztin, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Lei Ma, Ole Mertz, Julia Pongratz, Alexander Popp, Benjamin Poulter, Keywan Riahi, Elena Shevliakova, Elke Stehfest, Peter Thornton, Francesco N. Tubiello, Detlef P. van Vuuren, and Xin Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5425–5464, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
To estimate the effects of human land use activities on the carbon–climate system, a new set of global gridded land use forcing datasets was developed to link historical land use data to eight future scenarios in a standard format required by climate models. This new generation of land use harmonization (LUH2) includes updated inputs, higher spatial resolution, more detailed land use transitions, and the addition of important agricultural management layers; it will be used for CMIP6 simulations.
Lei Ma, George C. Hurtt, Louise P. Chini, Ritvik Sahajpal, Julia Pongratz, Steve Frolking, Elke Stehfest, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Donal O'Leary, and Jonathan C. Doelman
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3203–3220, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3203-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3203-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models require information on historical land cover change. We present transition rules to generate land cover change from newly developed land use dataset (Land-use Harmonization, LUH2). The resulting forest cover, vegetation carbon, and emissions from land use and land cover change are simulated and evaluated against remote sensing data and other studies. The rules can guide the incorporation of land-cover information within earth system models for CMIP6.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Laurent Bopp, Erik Buitenhuis, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Kim I. Currie, Richard A. Feely, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Nicolas Gruber, Sören Gutekunst, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Jed O. Kaplan, Etsushi Kato, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Anna Peregon, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger, Naomi Smith, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1783–1838, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2019 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.
Sean Crowell, David Baker, Andrew Schuh, Sourish Basu, Andrew R. Jacobson, Frederic Chevallier, Junjie Liu, Feng Deng, Liang Feng, Kathryn McKain, Abhishek Chatterjee, John B. Miller, Britton B. Stephens, Annmarie Eldering, David Crisp, David Schimel, Ray Nassar, Christopher W. O'Dell, Tomohiro Oda, Colm Sweeney, Paul I. Palmer, and Dylan B. A. Jones
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9797–9831, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9797-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9797-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Space-based retrievals of carbon dioxide offer the potential to provide dense data in regions that are sparsely observed by the surface network. We find that flux estimates that are informed by the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) show different character from that inferred using surface measurements in tropical land regions, particularly in Africa, with a much larger total emission and larger amplitude seasonal cycle.
Paul I. Palmer, Emily L. Wilson, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Giuliano Liuzzi, Liang Feng, Anthony J. DiGregorio, Jianping Mao, Lesley Ott, and Bryan Duncan
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 2579–2594, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2579-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2579-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We describe the potential impact of a new, low-cost, portable ground instrument (the mini-LHR) that measures methane and carbon dioxide in the atmospheric column. This region is key in quantifying the global carbon budget but has geographical gaps in measurements left by ground-based networks and space-based observations. A deployment of 50 mini-LHRs would add new data products in the Amazon, the Arctic, and southern Asia and significantly improve knowledge of regional and global carbon budgets.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Judith Hauck, Julia Pongratz, Penelope A. Pickers, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Josep G. Canadell, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Scott C. Doney, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Forrest M. Hoffman, Mario Hoppema, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Truls Johannessen, Chris D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Are Olsen, Tsueno Ono, Prabir Patra, Anna Peregon, Wouter Peters, Philippe Peylin, Benjamin Pfeil, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Matthias Rocher, Christian Rödenbeck, Ute Schuster, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Adrienne Sutton, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Viovy, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Rebecca Wright, Sönke Zaehle, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 2141–2194, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2018 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.
HyeJin Kim, Isabel M. D. Rosa, Rob Alkemade, Paul Leadley, George Hurtt, Alexander Popp, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Daniele Baisero, Emma Caton, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer, Louise Chini, Adriana De Palma, Fulvio Di Fulvio, Moreno Di Marco, Felipe Espinoza, Simon Ferrier, Shinichiro Fujimori, Ricardo E. Gonzalez, Maya Gueguen, Carlos Guerra, Mike Harfoot, Thomas D. Harwood, Tomoko Hasegawa, Vanessa Haverd, Petr Havlík, Stefanie Hellweg, Samantha L. L. Hill, Akiko Hirata, Andrew J. Hoskins, Jan H. Janse, Walter Jetz, Justin A. Johnson, Andreas Krause, David Leclère, Ines S. Martins, Tetsuya Matsui, Cory Merow, Michael Obersteiner, Haruka Ohashi, Benjamin Poulter, Andy Purvis, Benjamin Quesada, Carlo Rondinini, Aafke M. Schipper, Richard Sharp, Kiyoshi Takahashi, Wilfried Thuiller, Nicolas Titeux, Piero Visconti, Christopher Ware, Florian Wolf, and Henrique M. Pereira
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4537–4562, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4537-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4537-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper lays out the protocol for the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Scenario-based Intercomparison of Models (BES-SIM) that projects the global impacts of land use and climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services over the coming decades, compared to the 20th century. BES-SIM uses harmonized scenarios and input data and a set of common output metrics at multiple scales, and identifies model uncertainties and research gaps.
Eunjee Lee, Fan-Wei Zeng, Randal D. Koster, Brad Weir, Lesley E. Ott, and Benjamin Poulter
Biogeosciences, 15, 5635–5652, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5635-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5635-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Land carbon fluxes are controlled in part by the responses of terrestrial ecosystems to atmospheric conditions near the Earth's surface. This study offers a comprehensive evaluation of the consequences of multiple facets of spatiotemporal variability in atmospheric CO2 for carbon cycle dynamics. Globally, consideration of the diurnal CO2 variability reduces the gross primary production and net land carbon uptake. The relative contributions of other variability vary regionally and seasonally.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Julia Pongratz, Andrew C. Manning, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Thomas A. Boden, Pieter P. Tans, Oliver D. Andrews, Vivek K. Arora, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Leticia Barbero, Meike Becker, Richard A. Betts, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Catherine E. Cosca, Jessica Cross, Kim Currie, Thomas Gasser, Ian Harris, Judith Hauck, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Christopher W. Hunt, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Markus Kautz, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Ivan Lima, Danica Lombardozzi, Nicolas Metzl, Frank Millero, Pedro M. S. Monteiro, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Yukihiro Nojiri, X. Antonio Padin, Anna Peregon, Benjamin Pfeil, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Janet Reimer, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Benjamin D. Stocker, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Steven van Heuven, Nicolas Viovy, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Watson, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Dan Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 405–448, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2017 describes data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. It is the 12th annual update and the 6th published in this journal.
Yannick Le Page, Douglas Morton, Corinne Hartin, Ben Bond-Lamberty, José Miguel Cardoso Pereira, George Hurtt, and Ghassem Asrar
Earth Syst. Dynam., 8, 1237–1246, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-1237-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-1237-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Fires damage large areas of eastern Amazon forests when ignitions from human activity coincide with droughts, while more humid central and western regions are less affected. Here, we use a fire model to estimate that fire activity could increase by an order of magnitude without climate mitigation. Our results show that avoiding further agricultural expansion can limit fire ignitions but that tackling climate change is essential to insulate the interior Amazon through the 21st century.
Katja Frieler, Stefan Lange, Franziska Piontek, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Jacob Schewe, Lila Warszawski, Fang Zhao, Louise Chini, Sebastien Denvil, Kerry Emanuel, Tobias Geiger, Kate Halladay, George Hurtt, Matthias Mengel, Daisuke Murakami, Sebastian Ostberg, Alexander Popp, Riccardo Riva, Miodrag Stevanovic, Tatsuo Suzuki, Jan Volkholz, Eleanor Burke, Philippe Ciais, Kristie Ebi, Tyler D. Eddy, Joshua Elliott, Eric Galbraith, Simon N. Gosling, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Jochen Hinkel, Christian Hof, Veronika Huber, Jonas Jägermeyr, Valentina Krysanova, Rafael Marcé, Hannes Müller Schmied, Ioanna Mouratiadou, Don Pierson, Derek P. Tittensor, Robert Vautard, Michelle van Vliet, Matthias F. Biber, Richard A. Betts, Benjamin Leon Bodirsky, Delphine Deryng, Steve Frolking, Chris D. Jones, Heike K. Lotze, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Ritvik Sahajpal, Kirsten Thonicke, Hanqin Tian, and Yoshiki Yamagata
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4321–4345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the simulation scenario design for the next phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP), which is designed to facilitate a contribution to the scientific basis for the IPCC Special Report on the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming. ISIMIP brings together over 80 climate-impact models, covering impacts on hydrology, biomes, forests, heat-related mortality, permafrost, tropical cyclones, fisheries, agiculture, energy, and coastal infrastructure.
Johann H. Jungclaus, Edouard Bard, Mélanie Baroni, Pascale Braconnot, Jian Cao, Louise P. Chini, Tania Egorova, Michael Evans, J. Fidel González-Rouco, Hugues Goosse, George C. Hurtt, Fortunat Joos, Jed O. Kaplan, Myriam Khodri, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Natalie Krivova, Allegra N. LeGrande, Stephan J. Lorenz, Jürg Luterbacher, Wenmin Man, Amanda C. Maycock, Malte Meinshausen, Anders Moberg, Raimund Muscheler, Christoph Nehrbass-Ahles, Bette I. Otto-Bliesner, Steven J. Phipps, Julia Pongratz, Eugene Rozanov, Gavin A. Schmidt, Hauke Schmidt, Werner Schmutz, Andrew Schurer, Alexander I. Shapiro, Michael Sigl, Jason E. Smerdon, Sami K. Solanki, Claudia Timmreck, Matthew Toohey, Ilya G. Usoskin, Sebastian Wagner, Chi-Ju Wu, Kok Leng Yeo, Davide Zanchettin, Qiong Zhang, and Eduardo Zorita
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4005–4033, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4005-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4005-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model simulations covering the last millennium provide context for the evolution of the modern climate and for the expected changes during the coming centuries. They can help identify plausible mechanisms underlying palaeoclimatic reconstructions. Here, we describe the forcing boundary conditions and the experimental protocol for simulations covering the pre-industrial millennium. We describe the PMIP4 past1000 simulations as contributions to CMIP6 and additional sensitivity experiments.
K. Emma Knowland, Ruth M. Doherty, Kevin I. Hodges, and Lesley E. Ott
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12421–12447, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12421-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12421-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
First study to our knowledge to quantify the influence extratropical cyclones have on the temporal variability of springtime surface ozone (O3) measured on the west coast of Europe when cyclones are nearby. We show passing cyclones have a discernible influence on surface O3 concentrations. In-depth findings from four case studies, using a combination of reanalyses and a modeled tracer, demonstrate there are several transport pathways before O3-rich air eventually reaches the surface.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Josep G. Canadell, Stephen Sitch, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Andrew C. Manning, Thomas A. Boden, Pieter P. Tans, Richard A. Houghton, Ralph F. Keeling, Simone Alin, Oliver D. Andrews, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Kim Currie, Christine Delire, Scott C. Doney, Pierre Friedlingstein, Thanos Gkritzalis, Ian Harris, Judith Hauck, Vanessa Haverd, Mario Hoppema, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, Frank Millero, Pedro M. S. Monteiro, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Kevin O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Christian Rödenbeck, Joe Salisbury, Ute Schuster, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Benjamin D. Stocker, Adrienne J. Sutton, Taro Takahashi, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Viovy, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 605–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2016 is the 11th annual update of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. This data synthesis brings together measurements, statistical information, and analyses of model results in order to provide an assessment of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties for years 1959 to 2015, with a projection for year 2016.
David M. Lawrence, George C. Hurtt, Almut Arneth, Victor Brovkin, Kate V. Calvin, Andrew D. Jones, Chris D. Jones, Peter J. Lawrence, Nathalie de Noblet-Ducoudré, Julia Pongratz, Sonia I. Seneviratne, and Elena Shevliakova
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2973–2998, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2973-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2973-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Human land-use activities have resulted in large changes to the Earth's surface, with resulting implications for climate. In the future, land-use activities are likely to expand and intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. The goal of LUMIP is to take the next steps in land-use change science, and enable, coordinate, and ultimately address the most important land-use science questions in more depth and sophistication than possible in a multi-model context to date.
H. Tang, S. Ganguly, G. Zhang, M. A. Hofton, R. F. Nelson, and R. Dubayah
Biogeosciences, 13, 239–252, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-239-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-239-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides a unique insight into vertical distribution of leaf area index across North American ecosystems using spaceborne lidar data. This data set of leaf area index and vertical foliage profile can help set up a baseline of canopy structure needed for evaluating climate and land use induced forest changes at continental scale in the future.
C. Le Quéré, R. Moriarty, R. M. Andrew, J. G. Canadell, S. Sitch, J. I. Korsbakken, P. Friedlingstein, G. P. Peters, R. J. Andres, T. A. Boden, R. A. Houghton, J. I. House, R. F. Keeling, P. Tans, A. Arneth, D. C. E. Bakker, L. Barbero, L. Bopp, J. Chang, F. Chevallier, L. P. Chini, P. Ciais, M. Fader, R. A. Feely, T. Gkritzalis, I. Harris, J. Hauck, T. Ilyina, A. K. Jain, E. Kato, V. Kitidis, K. Klein Goldewijk, C. Koven, P. Landschützer, S. K. Lauvset, N. Lefèvre, A. Lenton, I. D. Lima, N. Metzl, F. Millero, D. R. Munro, A. Murata, J. E. M. S. Nabel, S. Nakaoka, Y. Nojiri, K. O'Brien, A. Olsen, T. Ono, F. F. Pérez, B. Pfeil, D. Pierrot, B. Poulter, G. Rehder, C. Rödenbeck, S. Saito, U. Schuster, J. Schwinger, R. Séférian, T. Steinhoff, B. D. Stocker, A. J. Sutton, T. Takahashi, B. Tilbrook, I. T. van der Laan-Luijkx, G. R. van der Werf, S. van Heuven, D. Vandemark, N. Viovy, A. Wiltshire, S. Zaehle, and N. Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 349–396, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. We describe data sets and a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on a range of data and models and their interpretation by a broad scientific community.
W. D. Collins, A. P. Craig, J. E. Truesdale, A. V. Di Vittorio, A. D. Jones, B. Bond-Lamberty, K. V. Calvin, J. A. Edmonds, S. H. Kim, A. M. Thomson, P. Patel, Y. Zhou, J. Mao, X. Shi, P. E. Thornton, L. P. Chini, and G. C. Hurtt
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2203–2219, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2203-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2203-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The integrated Earth system model (iESM) has been developed as a
new tool for projecting the joint human-climate system. The
iESM is based upon coupling an integrated assessment model (IAM)
and an Earth system model (ESM) into a common modeling
infrastructure. By introducing heretofore-omitted
feedbacks between natural and societal drivers in iESM, we can improve
scientific understanding of the human-Earth system
dynamics.
E. L. McGrath-Spangler, A. Molod, L. E. Ott, and S. Pawson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 7269–7286, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7269-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7269-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
PBL processes are important for weather, climate, and tracer transport and concentration. In the GEOS-5 AGCM, the PBL depth is used in the calculation of turbulent mixing. This study analyzes the impact of using different PBL depth definitions in this calculation. Near surface wind speed differences modify Saharan dust on the order of 1e-4kg m-2. CO surface concentrations are modified by up to 20 ppb over biomass burning regions. Instantaneous CO2 differences are on the order of 10 ppm.
A. V. Di Vittorio, L. P. Chini, B. Bond-Lamberty, J. Mao, X. Shi, J. Truesdale, A. Craig, K. Calvin, A. Jones, W. D. Collins, J. Edmonds, G. C. Hurtt, P. Thornton, and A. Thomson
Biogeosciences, 11, 6435–6450, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014, 2014
Short summary
Short summary
Economic models provide scenarios of land use and greenhouse gas emissions to earth system models to project global change. We found, and partially addressed, inconsistencies in land cover between an economic and an earth system model that effectively alter a prescribed scenario, causing significant differences in projected terrestrial carbon and atmospheric CO2 between prescribed and altered scenarios. We outline a solution to this current problem in scenario-based global change projections.
C. Le Quéré, G. P. Peters, R. J. Andres, R. M. Andrew, T. A. Boden, P. Ciais, P. Friedlingstein, R. A. Houghton, G. Marland, R. Moriarty, S. Sitch, P. Tans, A. Arneth, A. Arvanitis, D. C. E. Bakker, L. Bopp, J. G. Canadell, L. P. Chini, S. C. Doney, A. Harper, I. Harris, J. I. House, A. K. Jain, S. D. Jones, E. Kato, R. F. Keeling, K. Klein Goldewijk, A. Körtzinger, C. Koven, N. Lefèvre, F. Maignan, A. Omar, T. Ono, G.-H. Park, B. Pfeil, B. Poulter, M. R. Raupach, P. Regnier, C. Rödenbeck, S. Saito, J. Schwinger, J. Segschneider, B. D. Stocker, T. Takahashi, B. Tilbrook, S. van Heuven, N. Viovy, R. Wanninkhof, A. Wiltshire, and S. Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 6, 235–263, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-6-235-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-6-235-2014, 2014
A. Chatterjee and A. M. Michalak
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 11643–11660, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11643-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11643-2013, 2013
A. Tangborn, L. L. Strow, B. Imbiriba, L. Ott, and S. Pawson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 4487–4500, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-4487-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-4487-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Biogeosciences
Dynamic ecosystem assembly and escaping the “fire trap” in the tropics: insights from FATES_15.0.0
In silico calculation of soil pH by SCEPTER v1.0
Simple process-led algorithms for simulating habitats (SPLASH v.2.0): robust calculations of water and energy fluxes
A global behavioural model of human fire use and management: WHAM! v1.0
Terrestrial Ecosystem Model in R (TEMIR) version 1.0: simulating ecophysiological responses of vegetation to atmospheric chemical and meteorological changes
biospheremetrics v1.0.2: an R package to calculate two complementary terrestrial biosphere integrity indicators – human colonization of the biosphere (BioCol) and risk of ecosystem destabilization (EcoRisk)
Modeling boreal forest soil dynamics with the microbially explicit soil model MIMICS+ (v1.0)
Optimal enzyme allocation leads to the constrained enzyme hypothesis: the Soil Enzyme Steady Allocation Model (SESAM; v3.1)
Implementing a dynamic representation of fire and harvest including subgrid-scale heterogeneity in the tile-based land surface model CLASSIC v1.45
Inferring the tree regeneration niche from inventory data using a dynamic forest model
Quantifying the role of ozone-caused damage to vegetation in the Earth system: A new parameterization scheme for photosynthetic and stomatal responses
Optimising CH4 simulations from the LPJ-GUESS model v4.1 using an adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm
The XSO framework (v0.1) and Phydra library (v0.1) for a flexible, reproducible, and integrated plankton community modeling environment in Python
Exploring the Potential of History Matching for Land Surface Model Calibration
AgriCarbon-EO v1.0.1: large-scale and high-resolution simulation of carbon fluxes by assimilation of Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 reflectances using a Bayesian approach
SAMM version 1.0: a numerical model for microbial- mediated soil aggregate formation
Using Deep Learning to integrate paleoclimate and global biogeochemistry over Phanerozoic time
A model of the within-population variability of budburst in forest trees
Computationally efficient parameter estimation for high-dimensional ocean biogeochemical models
Radiocarbon analysis reveals underestimation of soil organic carbon persistence in new-generation soil models
The community-centered freshwater biogeochemistry model unified RIVE v1.0: a unified version for water column
EAT v0.9.6: a 1D testbed for physical-biogeochemical data assimilation in natural waters
Observation-based sowing dates and cultivars significantly affect yield and irrigation for some crops in the Community Land Model (CLM5)
The statistical emulators of GGCMI phase 2: responses of year-to-year variation of crop yield to CO2, temperature, water, and nitrogen perturbations
A novel Eulerian model based on central moments to simulate age and reactivity continua interacting with mixing processes
AdaScape 1.0: a coupled modelling tool to investigate the links between tectonics, climate, and biodiversity
An along-track Biogeochemical Argo modelling framework: a case study of model improvements for the Nordic seas
Peatland-VU-NUCOM (PVN 1.0): using dynamic plant functional types to model peatland vegetation, CH4, and CO2 emissions
Quantification of hydraulic trait control on plant hydrodynamics and risk of hydraulic failure within a demographic structured vegetation model in a tropical forest (FATES–HYDRO V1.0)
SedTrace 1.0: a Julia-based framework for generating and running reactive-transport models of marine sediment diagenesis specializing in trace elements and isotopes
A high-resolution marine mercury model MITgcm-ECCO2-Hg with online biogeochemistry
Improving nitrogen cycling in a land surface model (CLM5) to quantify soil N2O, NO, and NH3 emissions from enhanced rock weathering with croplands
Assimilation of Carbonyl Sulfide (COS) fluxes within the adjoint-based data assimilation system–Nanjing University Carbon Assimilation System (NUCAS v1.0)
Ocean biogeochemistry in the coupled ocean–sea ice–biogeochemistry model FESOM2.1–REcoM3
Forcing the Global Fire Emissions Database burned-area dataset into the Community Land Model version 5.0: impacts on carbon and water fluxes at high latitudes
Modeling boreal forest’s mineral soil and peat C stock dynamics with Yasso07 model coupled with updated moisture modifier
Modeling of non-structural carbohydrate dynamics by the spatially explicit individual-based dynamic global vegetation model SEIB-DGVM (SEIB-DGVM-NSC version 1.0)
MEDFATE 2.9.3: a trait-enabled model to simulate Mediterranean forest function and dynamics at regional scales
Modelling the role of livestock grazing in C and N cycling in grasslands with LPJmL5.0-grazing
Implementation of trait-based ozone plant sensitivity in the Yale Interactive terrestrial Biosphere model v1.0 to assess global vegetation damage
The Permafrost and Organic LayEr module for Forest Models (POLE-FM) 1.0
CompLaB v1.0: a scalable pore-scale model for flow, biogeochemistry, microbial metabolism, and biofilm dynamics
Validation of a new spatially explicit process-based model (HETEROFOR) to simulate structurally and compositionally complex forest stands in eastern North America
Global agricultural ammonia emissions simulated with the ORCHIDEE land surface model
ForamEcoGEnIE 2.0: incorporating symbiosis and spine traits into a trait-based global planktic foraminiferal model
FABM-NflexPD 2.0: testing an instantaneous acclimation approach for modeling the implications of phytoplankton eco-physiology for the carbon and nutrient cycles
Evaluating the vegetation–atmosphere coupling strength of ORCHIDEE land surface model (v7266)
Non-Redfieldian carbon model for the Baltic Sea (ERGOM version 1.2) – implementation and budget estimates
Implementation of a new crop phenology and irrigation scheme in the ISBA land surface model using SURFEX_v8.1
Simulating long-term responses of soil organic matter turnover to substrate stoichiometry by abstracting fast and small-scale microbial processes: the Soil Enzyme Steady Allocation Model (SESAM; v3.0)
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
Short summary
We adapt a fire behavior and effects module for use in a size-structured vegetation demographic model to test how climate, fire regime, and fire-tolerance plant traits interact to determine the distribution of tropical forests and grasslands. Our model captures the connection between fire disturbance and plant fire-tolerance strategies in determining plant distribution and provides a useful tool for understanding the vulnerability of these areas under changing conditions across the tropics.
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
Short summary
Soil pH is one of the most commonly measured agronomical and biogeochemical indices, mostly reflecting exchangeable acidity. Explicit simulation of both porewater and bulk soil pH is thus crucial to the accurate evaluation of alkalinity required to counteract soil acidification and the resulting capture of anthropogenic carbon dioxide through the enhanced weathering technique. This has been enabled by the updated reactive–transport SCEPTER code and newly developed framework to simulate soil pH.
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
Short summary
Numerous estimates of water and energy balances depend on empirical equations requiring site-specific calibration, posing risks of "the right answers for the wrong reasons". We introduce novel first-principles formulations to calculate key quantities without requiring local calibration, matching predictions from complex land surface models.
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
Short summary
Wildfire is often presented in the media as a danger to human life. Yet globally, millions of people’s livelihoods depend on using fire as a tool. So, patterns of fire emerge from interactions between humans, land use, and climate. This complexity means scientists cannot yet reliably say how fire will be impacted by climate change. So, we developed a new model that represents globally how people use and manage fire. The model reveals the extent and diversity of how humans live with and use fire.
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
Short summary
We have developed the Terrestrial Ecosystem Model in R (TEMIR), which simulates plant carbon and pollutant uptake and predicts their response to varying atmospheric conditions. This model is designed to couple with an atmospheric chemistry model so that questions related to plant–atmosphere interactions, such as the effects of climate change, rising CO2, and ozone pollution on forest carbon uptake, can be addressed. The model has been well validated with both ground and satellite observations.
Fabian Stenzel, Johanna Braun, Jannes Breier, Karlheinz Erb, Dieter Gerten, Jens Heinke, Sarah Matej, Sebastian Ostberg, Sibyll Schaphoff, and Wolfgang Lucht
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3235–3258, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3235-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3235-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We provide an R package to compute two biosphere integrity metrics that can be applied to simulations of vegetation growth from the dynamic global vegetation model LPJmL. The pressure metric BioCol indicates that we humans modify and extract > 20 % of the potential preindustrial natural biomass production. The ecosystems state metric EcoRisk shows a high risk of ecosystem destabilization in many regions as a result of climate change and land, water, and fertilizer use.
Elin Ristorp Aas, Heleen A. de Wit, and Terje K. Berntsen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2929–2959, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2929-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2929-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
By including microbial processes in soil models, we learn how the soil system interacts with its environment and responds to climate change. We present a soil process model, MIMICS+, which is able to reproduce carbon stocks found in boreal forest soils better than a conventional land model. With the model we also find that when adding nitrogen, the relationship between soil microbes changes notably. Coupling the model to a vegetation model will allow for further study of these mechanisms.
Thomas Wutzler, Christian Reimers, Bernhard Ahrens, and Marion Schrumpf
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2705–2725, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2705-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2705-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Soil microbes provide a strong link for elemental fluxes in the earth system. The SESAM model applies an optimality assumption to model those linkages and their adaptation. We found that a previous heuristic description was a special case of a newly developed more rigorous description. The finding of new behaviour at low microbial biomass led us to formulate the constrained enzyme hypothesis. We now can better describe how microbially mediated linkages of elemental fluxes adapt across decades.
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.
Yannek Käber, Florian Hartig, and Harald Bugmann
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2727–2753, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2727-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2727-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Many forest models include detailed mechanisms of forest growth and mortality, but regeneration is often simplified. Testing and improving forest regeneration models is challenging. We address this issue by exploring how forest inventories from unmanaged European forests can be used to improve such models. We find that competition for light among trees is captured by the model, unknown model components can be informed by forest inventory data, and climatic effects are challenging to capture.
Fang Li, Zhimin Zhou, Samuel Levis, Stephen Sitch, Felicity Hayes, Zhaozhong Feng, Peter Reich, Zhiyi Zhao, and Yanqing Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-6, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-6, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
This study introduces a new scheme to simulate surface ozone damage to vegetation in regional and global process-based models. Based on 4210 data points from ozone experiments, it accurately reproduces statistically significant linear or nonlinear photosynthetic and stomatal response to ozone in observations for all vegetation types. It also enables models to implicitly capture the variability in plant ozone tolerance and the shift among species within a vegetation type.
Jalisha T. Kallingal, Johan Lindström, Paul A. Miller, Janne Rinne, Maarit Raivonen, and Marko Scholze
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2299–2324, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2299-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2299-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
By unlocking the mysteries of CH4 emissions from wetlands, our work improved the accuracy of the LPJ-GUESS vegetation model using Bayesian statistics. Via assimilation of long-term real data from a wetland, we significantly enhanced CH4 emission predictions. This advancement helps us better understand wetland contributions to atmospheric CH4, which are crucial for addressing climate change. Our method offers a promising tool for refining global climate models and guiding conservation efforts
Benjamin Post, Esteban Acevedo-Trejos, Andrew D. Barton, and Agostino Merico
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1175–1195, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1175-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1175-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Creating computational models of how phytoplankton grows in the ocean is a technical challenge. We developed a new tool set (Xarray-simlab-ODE) for building such models using the programming language Python. We demonstrate the tool set in a library of plankton models (Phydra). Our goal was to allow scientists to develop models quickly, while also allowing the model structures to be changed easily. This allows us to test many different structures of our models to find the most appropriate one.
Nina Raoult, Simon Beylat, James M. Salter, Frédéric Hourdin, Vladislav Bastrikov, Catherine Ottlé, and Philippe Peylin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2996, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2996, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We use computer models to predict how the land surface will respond to climate change. However, these complex models do not always simulate what we observe in real life, limiting their effectiveness. To improve their accuracy, we use sophisticated statistical and computational techniques. Here we test a technique called “History matching” against more common approaches. This method adapts well to these models, helping better understand how they work and therefore how to make them more realistic.
Taeken Wijmer, Ahmad Al Bitar, Ludovic Arnaud, Remy Fieuzal, and Eric Ceschia
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 997–1021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-997-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-997-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Quantification of carbon fluxes of crops is an essential building block for the construction of a monitoring, reporting, and verification approach. We developed an end-to-end platform (AgriCarbon-EO) that assimilates, through a Bayesian approach, high-resolution (10 m) optical remote sensing data into radiative transfer and crop modelling at regional scale (100 x 100 km). Large-scale estimates of carbon flux are validated against in situ flux towers and yield maps and analysed at regional scale.
Moritz Laub, Sergey Blagodatsky, Marijn Van de Broek, Samuel Schlichenmaier, Benjapon Kunlanit, Johan Six, Patma Vityakon, and Georg Cadisch
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 931–956, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-931-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-931-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage soil organic matter (SOM) sustainably, we need a better understanding of the role that soil microbes play in aggregate protection. Here, we propose the SAMM model, which connects soil aggregate formation to microbial growth. We tested it against data from a tropical long-term experiment and show that SAMM effectively represents the microbial growth, SOM, and aggregate dynamics and that it can be used to explore the importance of aggregate formation in SOM stabilization.
Dongyu Zheng, Andrew Merdith, Yves Goddéris, Yannick Donnadieu, Khushboo Gurung, and Benjamin J. W. Mills
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-230, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-230, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a deep learning method to enhance the time resolution of paleoclimate simulations to 1 million years. This improved resolution allows a climate-biogeochemical model for more accurate predictions of climate shifts. The method may be critical in developing new fully-continuous methods that are able to translate over a moving continental surface in deep time with high-resolution at a reasonable computational expense.
Jianhong Lin, Daniel Berveiller, Christophe François, Heikki Hänninen, Alexandre Morfin, Gaëlle Vincent, Rui Zhang, Cyrille Rathgeber, and Nicolas Delpierre
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 865–879, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-865-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-865-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Currently, the high variability of budburst between individual trees is overlooked. The consequences of this neglect when projecting the dynamics and functioning of tree communities are unknown. Here we develop the first process-oriented model to describe the difference in budburst dates between individual trees in plant populations. Beyond budburst, the model framework provides a basis for studying the dynamics of phenological traits under climate change, from the individual to the community.
Skyler Kern, Mary E. McGuinn, Katherine M. Smith, Nadia Pinardi, Kyle E. Niemeyer, Nicole S. Lovenduski, and Peter E. Hamlington
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-621-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-621-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Computational models are used to simulate the behavior of marine ecosystems. The models often have unknown parameters that need to be calibrated to accurately represent observational data. Here, we propose a novel approach to simultaneously determine a large set of parameters for a one-dimensional model of a marine ecosystem in the surface ocean at two contrasting sites. By utilizing global and local optimization techniques, we estimate many parameters in a computationally efficient manner.
Alexander S. Brunmayr, Frank Hagedorn, Margaux Moreno Duborgel, Luisa I. Minich, and Heather D. Graven
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-242, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-242, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
A new generation of soil models promises to more accurately predict the carbon cycle in soils under climate change. However, measurements of 14C (the radioactive carbon isotope) in soils reveal that the new soil models face similar problems as the traditional models: they underestimate the residence time of carbon in soils and may therefore overestimate the net uptake of CO2 by the land ecosystem. Proposed solutions include restructuring the models and calibrating model parameters with 14C data.
Shuaitao Wang, Vincent Thieu, Gilles Billen, Josette Garnier, Marie Silvestre, Audrey Marescaux, Xingcheng Yan, and Nicolas Flipo
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 449–476, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-449-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-449-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents unified RIVE v1.0, a unified version of the freshwater biogeochemistry model RIVE. It harmonizes different RIVE implementations, providing the referenced formalisms for microorganism activities to describe full biogeochemical cycles in the water column (e.g., carbon, nutrients, oxygen). Implemented as open-source projects in Python 3 (pyRIVE 1.0) and ANSI C (C-RIVE 0.32), unified RIVE v1.0 promotes and enhances collaboration among research teams and public services.
Jorn Bruggeman, Karsten Bolding, Lars Nerger, Anna Teruzzi, Simone Spada, Jozef Skákala, and Stefano Ciavatta
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-238, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-238, 2023
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
To understand and predict the ocean’s capacity for carbon sequestration, its ability to supply food, and its response to climate change, we need the best possible estimate of its physical and biogeochemical properties. This is obtained through “data assimilation”, which blends numerical models and observations. Here, we present EAT, a flexible and efficient testbed that allows any scientist to explore and further develop the state-of-the-art in data assimilation.
Sam S. Rabin, William J. Sacks, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Lili Xia, and Alan Robock
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7253–7273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models can help us simulate how the agricultural system will be affected by and respond to environmental change, but to be trustworthy they must realistically reproduce historical patterns. When farmers plant their crops and what varieties they choose will be important aspects of future adaptation. Here, we improve the crop component of a global model to better simulate observed growing seasons and examine the impacts on simulated crop yields and irrigation demand.
Weihang Liu, Tao Ye, Christoph Müller, Jonas Jägermeyr, James A. Franke, Haynes Stephens, and Shuo Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7203–7221, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7203-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7203-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We develop a machine-learning-based crop model emulator with the inputs and outputs of multiple global gridded crop model ensemble simulations to capture the year-to-year variation of crop yield under future climate change. The emulator can reproduce the year-to-year variation of simulated yield given by the crop models under CO2, temperature, water, and nitrogen perturbations. Developing this emulator can provide a tool to project future climate change impact in a simple way.
Jurjen Rooze, Heewon Jung, and Hagen Radtke
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7107–7121, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7107-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7107-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Chemical particles in nature have properties such as age or reactivity. Distributions can describe the properties of chemical concentrations. In nature, they are affected by mixing processes, such as chemical diffusion, burrowing animals, and bottom trawling. We derive equations for simulating the effect of mixing on central moments that describe the distributions. We then demonstrate applications in which these equations are used to model continua in disturbed natural environments.
Esteban Acevedo-Trejos, Jean Braun, Katherine Kravitz, N. Alexia Raharinirina, and Benoît Bovy
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6921–6941, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6921-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6921-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The interplay of tectonics and climate influences the evolution of life and the patterns of biodiversity we observe on earth's surface. Here we present an adaptive speciation component coupled with a landscape evolution model that captures the essential earth-surface, ecological, and evolutionary processes that lead to the diversification of taxa. We can illustrate with our tool how life and landforms co-evolve to produce distinct biodiversity patterns on geological timescales.
Veli Çağlar Yumruktepe, Erik Askov Mousing, Jerry Tjiputra, and Annette Samuelsen
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6875–6897, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6875-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6875-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present an along BGC-Argo track 1D modelling framework. The model physics is constrained by the BGC-Argo temperature and salinity profiles to reduce the uncertainties related to mixed layer dynamics, allowing the evaluation of the biogeochemical formulation and parameterization. We objectively analyse the model with BGC-Argo and satellite data and improve the model biogeochemical dynamics. We present the framework, example cases and routines for model improvement and implementations.
Tanya J. R. Lippmann, Ype van der Velde, Monique M. P. D. Heijmans, Han Dolman, Dimmie M. D. Hendriks, and Ko van Huissteden
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6773–6804, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6773-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6773-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Vegetation is a critical component of carbon storage in peatlands but an often-overlooked concept in many peatland models. We developed a new model capable of simulating the response of vegetation to changing environments and management regimes. We evaluated the model against observed chamber data collected at two peatland sites. We found that daily air temperature, water level, harvest frequency and height, and vegetation composition drive methane and carbon dioxide emissions.
Chonggang Xu, Bradley Christoffersen, Zachary Robbins, Ryan Knox, Rosie A. Fisher, Rutuja Chitra-Tarak, Martijn Slot, Kurt Solander, Lara Kueppers, Charles Koven, and Nate McDowell
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6267–6283, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6267-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6267-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a plant hydrodynamic model for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-sponsored model, the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES). To better understand this new model system and its functionality in tropical forest ecosystems, we conducted a global parameter sensitivity analysis at Barro Colorado Island, Panama. We identified the key parameters that affect the simulated plant hydrodynamics to guide both modeling and field campaign studies.
Jianghui Du
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5865–5894, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5865-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5865-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Trace elements and isotopes (TEIs) are important tools to study the changes in the ocean environment both today and in the past. However, the behaviors of TEIs in marine sediments are poorly known, limiting our ability to use them in oceanography. Here we present a modeling framework that can be used to generate and run models of the sedimentary cycling of TEIs assisted with advanced numerical tools in the Julia language, lowering the coding barrier for the general user to study marine TEIs.
Siyu Zhu, Peipei Wu, Siyi Zhang, Oliver Jahn, Shu Li, and Yanxu Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5915–5929, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5915-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5915-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we estimate the global biogeochemical cycling of Hg in a state-of-the-art physical-ecosystem ocean model (high-resolution-MITgcm/Hg), providing a more accurate portrayal of surface Hg concentrations in estuarine and coastal areas, strong western boundary flow and upwelling areas, and concentration diffusion as vortex shapes. The high-resolution model can help us better predict the transport and fate of Hg in the ocean and its impact on the global Hg cycle.
Maria Val Martin, Elena Blanc-Betes, Ka Ming Fung, Euripides P. Kantzas, Ilsa B. Kantola, Isabella Chiaravalloti, Lyla L. Taylor, Louisa K. Emmons, William R. Wieder, Noah J. Planavsky, Michael D. Masters, Evan H. DeLucia, Amos P. K. Tai, and David J. Beerling
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5783–5801, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5783-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5783-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Enhanced rock weathering (ERW) is a CO2 removal strategy that involves applying crushed rocks (e.g., basalt) to agricultural soils. However, unintended processes within the N cycle due to soil pH changes may affect the climate benefits of C sequestration. ERW could drive changes in soil emissions of non-CO2 GHGs (N2O) and trace gases (NO and NH3) that may affect air quality. We present a new improved N cycling scheme for the land model (CLM5) to evaluate ERW effects on soil gas N emissions.
Huajie Zhu, Mousong Wu, Fei Jiang, Michael Vossbeck, Thomas Kaminski, Xiuli Xing, Jun Wang, Weimin Ju, and Jing M. Chen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1955, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1955, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this work, Nanjing University Carbon Assimilation System (NUCAS) was developed. Data assimilation experiments were conducted to demonstrate the robustness and to investigate the feasibility and applicability of NUCAS. The assimilation of COS significantly improved the model performance in gross primary productivity, sensible heat, latent heat and even soil moisture, demonstrating that COS can provide strong constraints on parameters relevant to water, energy and carbon processes.
Özgür Gürses, Laurent Oziel, Onur Karakuş, Dmitry Sidorenko, Christoph Völker, Ying Ye, Moritz Zeising, Martin Butzin, and Judith Hauck
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4883–4936, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4883-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4883-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper assesses the biogeochemical model REcoM3 coupled to the ocean–sea ice model FESOM2.1. The model can be used to simulate the carbon uptake or release of the ocean on timescales of several hundred years. A detailed analysis of the nutrients, ocean productivity, and ecosystem is followed by the carbon cycle. The main conclusion is that the model performs well when simulating the observed mean biogeochemical state and variability and is comparable to other ocean–biogeochemical models.
Hocheol Seo and Yeonjoo Kim
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4699–4713, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4699-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4699-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfire is a crucial factor in carbon and water fluxes on the Earth system. About 2.1 Pg of carbon is released into the atmosphere by wildfires annually. Because the fire processes are still limitedly represented in land surface models, we forced the daily GFED4 burned area into the land surface model over Alaska and Siberia. The results with the GFED4 burned area significantly improved the simulated carbon emissions and net ecosystem exchange compared to the default simulation.
Boris Ťupek, Aleksi Lehtonen, Alla Yurova, Rose Abramoff, Stefano Manzoni, Bertrand Guenet, Elisa Bruni, Samuli Launiainen, Mikko Peltoniemi, Shoji Hashimoto, Xianglin Tian, Juha Heikkinen, Kari Minkkinen, and Raisa Mäkipää
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1523, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1523, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Improving representation of peatlands in Earth system models (ESMs) (e.g., in Yasso soil C model coupled with JSBACH model) is rare. We updated Yasso07 moisture dependency for applications on both the mineral soils and peatlands of boreal forest. Our moisture function improved the simulated peatland C stocks and CO2 dynamics. However, due to nature of the measurements used for Bayesian MCMC data assimilation, it contrasts with functions in other ESMs (see graphical abstract).
Hideki Ninomiya, Tomomichi Kato, Lea Végh, and Lan Wu
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4155–4170, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4155-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4155-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Non-structural carbohydrates (NSCs) play a crucial role in plants to counteract the effects of climate change. We added a new NSC module into the SEIB-DGVM, an individual-based ecosystem model. The simulated NSC levels and their seasonal patterns show a strong agreement with observed NSC data at both point and global scales. The model can be used to simulate the biotic effects resulting from insufficient NSCs, which are otherwise difficult to measure in terrestrial ecosystems globally.
Miquel De Cáceres, Roberto Molowny-Horas, Antoine Cabon, Jordi Martínez-Vilalta, Maurizio Mencuccini, Raúl García-Valdés, Daniel Nadal-Sala, Santiago Sabaté, Nicolas Martin-StPaul, Xavier Morin, Francesco D'Adamo, Enric Batllori, and Aitor Améztegui
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3165–3201, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3165-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3165-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Regional-level applications of dynamic vegetation models are challenging because they need to accommodate the variation in plant functional diversity. This can be done by estimating parameters from available plant trait databases while adopting alternative solutions for missing data. Here we present the design, parameterization and evaluation of MEDFATE (version 2.9.3), a novel model of forest dynamics for its application over a region in the western Mediterranean Basin.
Jens Heinke, Susanne Rolinski, and Christoph Müller
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2455–2475, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2455-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2455-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We develop a livestock module for the global vegetation model LPJmL5.0 to simulate the impact of grazing dairy cattle on carbon and nitrogen cycles in grasslands. A novelty of the approach is that it accounts for the effect of feed quality on feed uptake and feed utilization by animals. The portioning of dietary nitrogen into milk, feces, and urine shows very good agreement with estimates obtained from animal trials.
Yimian Ma, Xu Yue, Stephen Sitch, Nadine Unger, Johan Uddling, Lina M. Mercado, Cheng Gong, Zhaozhong Feng, Huiyi Yang, Hao Zhou, Chenguang Tian, Yang Cao, Yadong Lei, Alexander W. Cheesman, Yansen Xu, and Maria Carolina Duran Rojas
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2261–2276, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2261-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2261-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Plants have been found to respond differently to O3, but the variations in the sensitivities have rarely been explained nor fully implemented in large-scale assessment. This study proposes a new O3 damage scheme with leaf mass per area to unify varied sensitivities for all plant species. Our assessment reveals an O3-induced reduction of 4.8 % in global GPP, with the highest reduction of >10 % for cropland, suggesting an emerging risk of crop yield loss under the threat of O3 pollution.
Winslow D. Hansen, Adrianna Foster, Benjamin Gaglioti, Rupert Seidl, and Werner Rammer
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2011–2036, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2011-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2011-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Permafrost and the thick soil-surface organic layers that insulate permafrost are important controls of boreal forest dynamics and carbon cycling. However, both are rarely included in process-based vegetation models used to simulate future ecosystem trajectories. To address this challenge, we developed a computationally efficient permafrost and soil organic layer module that operates at fine spatial (1 ha) and temporal (daily) resolutions.
Heewon Jung, Hyun-Seob Song, and Christof Meile
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1683–1696, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1683-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1683-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Microbial activity responsible for many chemical transformations depends on environmental conditions. These can vary locally, e.g., between poorly connected pores in porous media. We present a modeling framework that resolves such small spatial scales explicitly, accounts for feedback between transport and biogeochemical conditions, and can integrate state-of-the-art representations of microbes in a computationally efficient way, making it broadly applicable in science and engineering use cases.
Arthur Guignabert, Quentin Ponette, Frédéric André, Christian Messier, Philippe Nolet, and Mathieu Jonard
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1661–1682, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1661-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1661-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Spatially explicit and process-based models are useful to test innovative forestry practices under changing and uncertain conditions. However, their larger use is often limited by the restricted range of species and stand structures they can reliably account for. We therefore calibrated and evaluated such a model, HETEROFOR, for 23 species across southern Québec. Our results showed that the model is robust and can predict accurately both individual tree growth and stand dynamics in this region.
Maureen Beaudor, Nicolas Vuichard, Juliette Lathière, Nikolaos Evangeliou, Martin Van Damme, Lieven Clarisse, and Didier Hauglustaine
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1053–1081, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1053-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1053-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ammonia mainly comes from the agricultural sector, and its volatilization relies on environmental variables. Our approach aims at benefiting from an Earth system model framework to estimate it. By doing so, we represent a consistent spatial distribution of the emissions' response to environmental changes.
We greatly improved the seasonal cycle of emissions compared with previous work. In addition, our model includes natural soil emissions (that are rarely represented in modeling approaches).
Rui Ying, Fanny M. Monteiro, Jamie D. Wilson, and Daniela N. Schmidt
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 813–832, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-813-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-813-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Planktic foraminifera are marine-calcifying zooplankton; their shells are widely used to measure past temperature and productivity. We developed ForamEcoGEnIE 2.0 to simulate the four subgroups of this organism. We found that the relative abundance distribution agrees with marine sediment core-top data and that carbon export and biomass are close to sediment trap and plankton net observations respectively. This model provides the opportunity to study foraminiferal ecology in any geological era.
Onur Kerimoglu, Markus Pahlow, Prima Anugerahanti, and Sherwood Lan Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 95–108, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-95-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-95-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In classical models that track the changes in the elemental composition of phytoplankton, additional state variables are required for each element resolved. In this study, we show how the behavior of such an explicit model can be approximated using an
instantaneous acclimationapproach, in which the elemental composition of the phytoplankton is assumed to adjust to an optimal value instantaneously. Through rigorous tests, we evaluate the consistency of this scheme.
Yuan Zhang, Devaraju Narayanappa, Philippe Ciais, Wei Li, Daniel Goll, Nicolas Vuichard, Martin G. De Kauwe, Laurent Li, and Fabienne Maignan
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9111–9125, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9111-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9111-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
There are a few studies to examine if current models correctly represented the complex processes of transpiration. Here, we use a coefficient Ω, which indicates if transpiration is mainly controlled by vegetation processes or by turbulence, to evaluate the ORCHIDEE model. We found a good performance of ORCHIDEE, but due to compensation of biases in different processes, we also identified how different factors control Ω and where the model is wrong. Our method is generic to evaluate other models.
Thomas Neumann, Hagen Radtke, Bronwyn Cahill, Martin Schmidt, and Gregor Rehder
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8473–8540, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8473-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8473-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Marine ecosystem models are usually constrained by the elements nitrogen and phosphorus and consider carbon in organic matter in a fixed ratio. Recent observations show a substantial deviation from the simulated carbon cycle variables. In this study, we present a marine ecosystem model for the Baltic Sea which allows for a flexible uptake ratio for carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus. With this extension, the model reflects much more reasonable variables of the marine carbon cycle.
Arsène Druel, Simon Munier, Anthony Mucia, Clément Albergel, and Jean-Christophe Calvet
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8453–8471, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8453-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8453-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Crop phenology and irrigation is implemented into a land surface model able to work at a global scale. A case study is presented over Nebraska (USA). Simulations with and without the new scheme are compared to different satellite-based observations. The model is able to produce a realistic yearly irrigation water amount. The irrigation scheme improves the simulated leaf area index, gross primary productivity, evapotransipiration, and land surface temperature.
Thomas Wutzler, Lin Yu, Marion Schrumpf, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8377–8393, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8377-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8377-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Soil microbes process soil organic matter and affect carbon storage and plant nutrition at the ecosystem scale. We hypothesized that decadal dynamics is constrained by the ratios of elements in litter inputs, microbes, and matter and that microbial community optimizes growth. This allowed the SESAM model to descibe decadal-term carbon sequestration in soils and other biogeochemical processes explicitly accounting for microbial processes but without its problematic fine-scale parameterization.
Cited articles
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.
Albani, M., Medvigy, D., Hurtt, G. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: The
contributions of land-use change, CO2 fertilization, and climate variability
to the Eastern US carbon sink, Global Change Biology, 12, 2370–2390,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01254.x, 2006.
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Kidston, M., Bopp, L., Ciais, P., Cox, P.,
Jones, C., Jung, M., Myneni, R., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluating the land and ocean
components of the global carbon cycle in the CMIP5 earth system models, J. Climate, 26,
6801–6843, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00417.1, 2013.
Ball, J. T., Woodrow, I. E., and Berry, J. A.: A model predicting stomatal
conductance and its contribution to the control of photosynthesis under
different environmental conditions, in: Progress in photosynthesis research, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0519-6_48,
Springer, 221–224, 1987.
Beer, C., Reichstein, M., Tomelleri, E., Ciais, P., Jung, M., Carvalhais,
N., Rödenbeck, C., Arain, M. A., Baldocchi, D., Bonan, G. B., Bondeau,
A., Cescatti, A., Lasslop, G., Lindroth, A., Lomas, M., Luyssaert, S.,
Margolis, H., Oleson, K. W., Roupsard, O., Veenendaal, E., Viovy, N.,
Williams, C., Woodward, F. I., and Papale, D.: Terrestrial Gross Carbon
Dioxide Uptake: Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate, Science,
329, 834, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1184984, 2010.
Bernacchi, C. J., Singsaas, E. L., Pimentel Jr., C. A. R. P., and Long, S.
P.: Improved temperature response functions for models of Rubisco-limited
photosynthesis, Plant Cell Environ., 24, 253–259,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2001.00668.x, 2001.
Bonan, G. B.: Comparison of two land surface process models using prescribed
forcings, J. Geographys. Res.-Atmos., 99, 25803–25818, https://doi.org/10.1029/94JD02188, 1994.
Bonan, G. B., Patton, E. G., Finnigan, J. J., Baldocchi, D. D., and Harman,
I. N.: Moving beyond the incorrect but useful paradigm: reevaluating
big-leaf and multilayer plant canopies to model biosphere-atmosphere fluxes
– a review, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 306, 108435,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108435, 2021.
Botkin, D. B., Janak, J. F., and Wallis, J. R.: Some ecological consequences
of a computer model of forest growth, J. Ecol., 60, 849–872,
1972.
Brovkin, V., Sitch, S., Von Bloh, W., Claussen, M., Bauer, E., and Cramer,
W.: Role of land cover changes for atmospheric CO2 increase and climate
change during the last 150 years, Global Change Biol., 10, 1253–1266,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00812.x, 2004.
Canadell, J. G., Kirschbaum, M. U. F., Kurz, W. A., Sanz, M.-J.,
Schlamadinger, B., and Yamagata, Y.: Factoring out natural and indirect human
effects on terrestrial carbon sources and sinks, Environ. Sci.
Policy, 10, 370–384, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.01.009, 2007.
Chevallier, F., Fisher, M., Peylin, P., Serrar, S., Bousquet, P., Bréon, F.-M., Chédin, A., and Ciais, P.: Inferring CO2 sources and sinks from satellite observations: Method and application to TOVS data, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D24309, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006390, 2005.
Chini, L., Hurtt, G., Sahajpal, R., Frolking, S., Klein Goldewijk, K., Sitch, S., Ganzenmüller, R., Ma, L., Ott, L., Pongratz, J., and Poulter, B.: Land-use harmonization datasets for annual global carbon budgets, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4175–4189, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4175-2021, 2021.
Ciais, P., Dolman, A. J., Bombelli, A., Duren, R., Peregon, A., Rayner, P. J., Miller, C., Gobron, N., Kinderman, G., Marland, G., Gruber, N., Chevallier, F., Andres, R. J., Balsamo, G., Bopp, L., Bréon, F.-M., Broquet, G., Dargaville, R., Battin, T. J., Borges, A., Bovensmann, H., Buchwitz, M., Butler, J., Canadell, J. G., Cook, R. B., DeFries, R., Engelen, R., Gurney, K. R., Heinze, C., Heimann, M., Held, A., Henry, M., Law, B., Luyssaert, S., Miller, J., Moriyama, T., Moulin, C., Myneni, R. B., Nussli, C., Obersteiner, M., Ojima, D., Pan, Y., Paris, J.-D., Piao, S. L., Poulter, B., Plummer, S., Quegan, S., Raymond, P., Reichstein, M., Rivier, L., Sabine, C., Schimel, D., Tarasova, O., Valentini, R., Wang, R., van der Werf, G., Wickland, D., Williams, M., and Zehner, C.: Current systematic carbon-cycle observations and the need for implementing a policy-relevant carbon observing system, Biogeosciences, 11, 3547–3602, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-3547-2014, 2014a.
Ciais, P., Sabine, C., Bala, G., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Canadell, J.,
Chhabra, A., DeFries, R., Galloway, J., and Heimann, M.: Carbon and other
biogeochemical cycles, in Climate change 2013: the physical science basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 465–570, Cambridge
University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.015, 2014b.
Collatz, G. J., Ball, J. T., Grivet, C., and Berry, J. A.: Physiological and
environmental regulation of stomatal conductance, photosynthesis and
transpiration: a model that includes a laminar boundary layer, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 54, 107–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(91)90002-8,
1991.
Collatz, G. J., Ribas-Carbo, M., and Berry, J. A.: Coupled
photosynthesis-stomatal conductance model for leaves of C4 plants, Aust. J. Plant Physiol., 19,
519–538, https://doi.org/10.1071/PP9920519, 1992.
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 Sy., 10,
2731–2754, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001354, 2018.
Cramer, W., Bondeau, A., Woodward, F. I., Prentice, I. C., Betts, R. A.,
Brovkin, V., Cox, P. M., Fisher, V., Foley, J. A., Friend, A. D., Kucharik,
C., Lomas, M. R., Ramankutty, N., Sitch, S., Smith, B., White, A., and
Young-Molling, C.: Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and
function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global
vegetation models, Global Change Biol., 7, 357–373,
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2001.00383.x, 2001.
Dickinson, R. E., Henderson-Sellers, A., and Kennedy, P. J.: Biosphere-atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) Version 1e as Coupled to the NCAR Community Climate Model (No. NCAR/TN-387+STR), University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, https://doi.org/10.5065/D67W6959, 1993.
Dubayah, R., Blair, J. B., Goetz, S., Fatoyinbo, L., Hansen, M., Healey, S.,
Hofton, M., Hurtt, G., Kellner, J., Luthcke, S., Armston, J., Tang, H.,
Duncanson, L., Hancock, S., Jantz, P., Marselis, S., Patterson, P. L., Qi,
W., and Silva, C.: The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation:
High-resolution laser ranging of the Earth's forests and topography, Sci. Remote Sens., 1, 100002, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srs.2020.100002,
2020a.
Dubayah, R., Hofton, M., Blair, J., Armston, J., Tang, H., and Luthcke, S.:
GEDI L2A Elevation and Height Metrics Data Global Footprint Level V001, NASA Earth Data,
https://doi.org/10.5067/GEDI/GEDI02_A.001, 2020b.
Dubayah, R., Tang, H., Armston, J., Luthcke, S., Hofton, M., and Blair, J.:
GEDI L2B Canopy Cover and Vertical Profile Metrics Data Global Footprint
Level V001, NASA Earth Data, https://doi.org/10.5067/GEDI/GEDI02_B.001,
2020c.
Erb, K.-H., Kastner, T., Luyssaert, S., Houghton, R. A., Kuemmerle, T.,
Olofsson, P., and Haberl, H.: Bias in the attribution of forest carbon sinks,
Nat. Clim. Change, 3, 854–856,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2004, 2013.
ESA: Land Cover CCI Product User Guide Version 2, Tech. Rep.,
http://maps.elie.ucl.ac.be/CCI/viewer/download/ESACCI-LC-Ph2-PUGv2_2.0.pdf (last access: 1 March 2022), 2017.
Eyring, V., Gleckler, P. J., Heinze, C., Stouffer, R. J., Taylor, K. E., Balaji, V., Guilyardi, E., Joussaume, S., Kindermann, S., Lawrence, B. N., Meehl, G. A., Righi, M., and Williams, D. N.: Towards improved and more routine Earth system model evaluation in CMIP, Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 813–830, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, 2016.
Eyring, V., Cox, P. M., Flato, G. M., Gleckler, P. J., Abramowitz, G.,
Caldwell, P., Collins, W. D., Gier, B. K., Hall, A. D., Hoffman, F. M.,
Hurtt, G. C., Jahn, A., Jones, C. D., Klein, S. A., Krasting, J. P.,
Kwiatkowski, L., Lorenz, R., Maloney, E., Meehl, G. A., Pendergrass, A. G.,
Pincus, R., Ruane, A. C., Russell, J. L., Sanderson, B. M., Santer, B. D.,
Sherwood, S. C., Simpson, I. R., Stouffer, R. J., and Williamson, M. S.:
Taking climate model evaluation to the next level, Nat. Clim. Change, 9,
102–110, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y, 2019.
Farjon, A. and Filer, D.: An Atlas of the World's Conifers: An Analysis of
their Distribution, Biogeography, Diversity and Conservation Status, Brill,
https://brill.com/view/title/20587 (last access: 22 December 2020), 2013.
Farquhar, G. D. and Sharkey, T. D.: Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol.,
33, 317–345, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.33.060182.001533, 1982.
Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., and Berry, J. A.: A biochemical model of
photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species, Planta, 149,
78–90, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00386231, 1980.
Fisher, R. A., Muszala, S., Verteinstein, M., Lawrence, P., Xu, C., McDowell, N. G., Knox, R. G., Koven, C., Holm, J., Rogers, B. M., Spessa, A., Lawrence, D., and Bonan, G.: Taking off the training wheels: the properties of a dynamic vegetation model without climate envelopes, CLM4.5(ED), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3593–3619, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015, 2015.
Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Anderegg, W. R. L., Christoffersen, B. O.,
Dietze, M. C., Farrior, C. E., Holm, J. A., Hurtt, G. C., Knox, R. G.,
Lawrence, P. J., Lichstein, J. W., Longo, M., Matheny, A. M., Medvigy, D.,
Muller-Landau, H. C., Powell, T. L., Serbin, S. P., Sato, H., Shuman, J. K.,
Smith, B., Trugman, A. T., Viskari, T., Verbeeck, H., Weng, E., Xu, C., Xu,
X., Zhang, T., and Moorcroft, P. R.: Vegetation demographics in Earth System
Models: A review of progress and priorities, Global Change Biol., 24,
35–54, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13910, 2018.
Fisk, J. P.: Net effects of disturbance: Spatial, temporal, and soci-etal
dimensions of forest disturbance and recovery on terrestrial carbon
balance, PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 2015.
Fisk, J. P., Hurtt, G. C., Chambers, J. Q., Zeng, H., Dolan, K. A., and
Negrón-Juárez, R. I.: The impacts of tropical cyclones on the net
carbon balance of eastern US forests (1851–2000), Environ. Res. Lett.,
8, 045017, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/045017, 2013.
Flanagan, S. A., Hurtt, G. C., Fisk, J. P., Sahajpal, R., Zhao, M., Dubayah,
R., Hansen, M. C., Sullivan, J. H., and Collatz, G. J.: Potential Transient
Response of Terrestrial Vegetation and Carbon in Northern North America from
Climate Change, Climate, 7, 113, https://doi.org/10.3390/cli7090113,
2019.
Foley, J. A., Prentice, I. C., Ramankutty, N., Levis, S., Pollard, D.,
Sitch, S., and Haxeltine, A.: An integrated biosphere model of land surface
processes, terrestrial carbon balance, and vegetation dynamics, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 10,
603–628, https://doi.org/10.1029/96GB02692, 1996.
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suárez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs,
L., Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan,
K., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A.,
da Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G.-K., Koster, R., Lucchesi, R., Merkova, D.,
Nielsen, J. E., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M.,
Schubert, S. D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The Modern-Era Retrospective
Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2), J. Climate,
30, 5419–5454, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1, 2017.
Ghimire, B., Riley, W. J., Koven, C. D., Mu, M., and Randerson, J. T.:
Representing leaf and root physiological traits in CLM improves global
carbon and nitrogen cycling predictions, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 8, 598–613,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000538, 2016.
Guanter, L., Zhang, Y., Jung, M., Joiner, J., Voigt, M., Berry, J. A.,
Frankenberg, C., Huete, A. R., Zarco-Tejada, P., Lee, J.-E., Moran, M. S.,
Ponce-Campos, G., Beer, C., Camps-Valls, G., Buchmann, N., Gianelle, D.,
Klumpp, K., Cescatti, A., Baker, J. M., and Griffis, T. J.: Global and
time-resolved monitoring of crop photosynthesis with chlorophyll
fluorescence, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, E1327–E1333,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320008111, 2014.
Hansis, E., Davis, S. J., and Pongratz, J.: Relevance of methodological
choices for accounting of land use change carbon fluxes, Global
Biogeochem. Cycles, 29, 1230–1246,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GB004997, 2015.
Haxeltine, A. and Prentice, I. C.: BIOME3: An equilibrium terrestrial
biosphere model based on ecophysiological constraints, resource
availability, and competition among plant functional types, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 10, 693–709,
1996.
Hurtt, G. C., Moorcroft, P. R., Pacala, S. W., and Levin, S. A.: Terrestrial
models and global change: challenges for the future, Global Change Biol.,
4, 581–590, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.t01-1-00203.x,
1998.
Hurtt, G. C., Pacala, S. W., Moorcroft, P. R., Caspersen, J., Shevliakova,
E., Houghton, R. A., and Moore, B.: Projecting the future of the U.S. carbon
sink, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 1389–1394, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.012249999, 2002.
Hurtt, G. C., Dubayah, R., Drake, J., Moorcroft, P. R., Pacala, S. W.,
Blair, J. B., and Fearon, M. G.: Beyond Potential Vegetation: Combining Lidar
Data and a Height-Structured Model for Carbon Studies, Ecol.
Appl., 14, 873–883, https://doi.org/10.1890/02-5317, 2004.
Hurtt, G. C., Fisk, J., Thomas, R. Q., Dubayah, R., Moorcroft, P. R., and
Shugart, H. H.: Linking models and data on vegetation structure, J.
Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 115, G00E10,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JG000937, 2010.
Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L. P., Frolking, S., Betts, R., Feddema, J., Fischer,
G., Fisk, J., Hibbard, K., Houghton, R., and Janetos, A.: Harmonization of
land-use scenarios for the period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded
annual land-use transitions, wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands,
Clim. Change, 109, 117–161, 2011.
Hurtt, G. C., Thomas, R. Q., Fisk, J. P., Dubayah, R. O., and Sheldon, S. L.:
The Impact of Fine-Scale Disturbances on the Predictability of Vegetation
Dynamics and Carbon Flux, PLOS ONE, 11, e0152883,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152883, 2016.
Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L., Sahajpal, R., Frolking, S., Bodirsky, B. L., Calvin,
K., Doelman, J., Fisk, J., Fujimori, S., Goldewijk, K. K., Hasegawa, T.,
Havlik, P., Heinimann, A., Humpenöder, F., Jungclaus, J., Kaplan, J.,
Krisztin, T., Lawrence, D., Lawrence, P., Mertz, O., Pongratz, J., Popp, A.,
Riahi, K., Shevliakova, E., Stehfest, E., Thornton, P., van Vuuren, D., and
Zhang, X.: input4MIPs.CMIP6.CMIP.UofMD, Earth System Grid Federation,
https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/input4MIPs.10454, 2019a.
Hurtt, G. C., Zhao, M., Sahajpal, R., Armstrong, A., Birdsey, R., Campbell,
E., Dolan, K., Dubayah, R., Fisk, J. P., Flanagan, S., Huang, C., Huang, W.,
Johnson, K., Lamb, R., Ma, L., Marks, R., O'Leary, D., O'Neil-Dunne, J.,
Swatantran, A., and Tang, H.: Beyond MRV: high-resolution forest carbon
modeling for climate mitigation planning over Maryland, USA, Environ. Res.
Lett., 14, 045013, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0bbe, 2019b.
Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L., Sahajpal, R., Frolking, S., Bodirsky, B. L., Calvin, K., Doelman, J. C., Fisk, J., Fujimori, S., Klein Goldewijk, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Heinimann, A., Humpenöder, F., Jungclaus, J., Kaplan, J. O., Kennedy, J., Krisztin, T., Lawrence, D., Lawrence, P., Ma, L., Mertz, O., Pongratz, J., Popp, A., Poulter, B., Riahi, K., Shevliakova, E., Stehfest, E., Thornton, P., Tubiello, F. N., van Vuuren, D. P., and Zhang, X.: Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5425–5464, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, 2020.
Ito, A., Hajima, T., Lawrence, D. M., Brovkin, V., Delire, C., Guenet, B.,
Jones, C. D., Malyshev, S., Materia, S., McDermid, S. P., Peano, D.,
Pongratz, J., Robertson, E., Shevliakova, E., Vuichard, N., Wårlind, D.,
Wiltshire, A., and Ziehn, T.: Soil carbon sequestration simulated in
CMIP6-LUMIP models: implications for climatic mitigation, Environ. Res.
Lett., 15, 124061, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc912, 2020.
Joiner, J., Yoshida, Y., Zhang, Y., Duveiller, G., Jung, M., Lyapustin, A.,
Wang, Y., and Tucker, C. J.: Estimation of Terrestrial Global Gross Primary
Production (GPP) with Satellite Data-Driven Models and Eddy Covariance Flux
Data, Remote Sens., 10, 1346, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10091346, 2018.
Jung, M., Schwalm, C., Migliavacca, M., Walther, S., Camps-Valls, G., Koirala, S., Anthoni, P., Besnard, S., Bodesheim, P., Carvalhais, N., Chevallier, F., Gans, F., Goll, D. S., Haverd, V., Köhler, P., Ichii, K., Jain, A. K., Liu, J., Lombardozzi, D., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nelson, J. A., O'Sullivan, M., Pallandt, M., Papale, D., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Rödenbeck, C., Sitch, S., Tramontana, G., Walker, A., Weber, U., and Reichstein, M.: Scaling carbon fluxes from eddy covariance sites to globe: synthesis and evaluation of the FLUXCOM approach, Biogeosciences, 17, 1343–1365, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-1343-2020, 2020.
Kattge, J. and Knorr, W.: Temperature acclimation in a biochemical model of
photosynthesis: a reanalysis of data from 36 species, Plant Cell
Environ., 30, 1176–1190,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01690.x, 2007.
Kattge, J., Ogle, K., Bönisch, G., Díaz, S., Lavorel, S., Madin,
J., Nadrowski, K., Nöllert, S., Sartor, K., and Wirth, C.: A generic
structure for plant trait databases, Methods Ecol. Evol., 2, 202–213,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00067.x, 2011.
Kattge, J., Bönisch, G., Díaz, S., Lavorel, S., Prentice, I. C.,
Leadley, P., Tautenhahn, S., Werner, G. D., Aakala, T., and Abedi, M.: TRY
plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access, Global Change Biol., 26, 119–188, 2020.
Keeling, R. F.: Recording Earth's Vital Signs, Science, 319, 1771,
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1156761, 2008.
Keenan, T. F. and Williams, C. A.: The Terrestrial Carbon Sink, Annu. Rev.
Environ. Resour., 43, 219–243,
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030204, 2018.
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C.,
Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., van Kampenhout, L., and Kennedy, D.:
The Community Land Model version 5: Description of new features,
benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty, J. Adv.
Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4245–4287, 2019.
Lee, J.-E., Frankenberg, C., van der Tol, C., Berry, J. A., Guanter, L.,
Boyce, C. K., Fisher, J. B., Morrow, E., Worden, J. R., Asefi, S., Badgley,
G., and Saatchi, S.: Forest productivity and water stress in Amazonia:
observations from GOSAT chlorophyll fluorescence, P. Roy.
Soc. B, 280, 20130171,
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.0171, 2013.
Lieth, H.: Modeling the primary productivity of the world, in: Primary
productivity of the biosphere, edited by: Lieth, H. and Whittaker, R. H., Springer, 237–263, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-80913-2, 1975.
Longo, M., Knox, R. G., Medvigy, D. M., Levine, N. M., Dietze, M. C., Kim, Y., Swann, A. L. S., Zhang, K., Rollinson, C. R., Bras, R. L., Wofsy, S. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: The biophysics, ecology, and biogeochemistry of functionally diverse, vertically and horizontally heterogeneous ecosystems: the Ecosystem Demography model, version 2.2 – Part 1: Model description, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4309–4346, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4309-2019, 2019.
Luo, Y. Q., Randerson, J. T., Abramowitz, G., Bacour, C., Blyth, E., Carvalhais, N., Ciais, P., Dalmonech, D., Fisher, J. B., Fisher, R., Friedlingstein, P., Hibbard, K., Hoffman, F., Huntzinger, D., Jones, C. D., Koven, C., Lawrence, D., Li, D. J., Mahecha, M., Niu, S. L., Norby, R., Piao, S. L., Qi, X., Peylin, P., Prentice, I. C., Riley, W., Reichstein, M., Schwalm, C., Wang, Y. P., Xia, J. Y., Zaehle, S., and Zhou, X. H.: A framework for benchmarking land models, Biogeosciences, 9, 3857–3874, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-3857-2012, 2012.
Ma, L., Hurtt, G., Ott, L., Sahajpal, R., Fisk, J., Flanagan, S., Poulter,
B., Liang, S., Sullivan, J., and Dubayah, R.: Global Ecosystem Demography
Model (ED-global v1.0): Development, Calibration and Evaluation for NASA's
Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI), Earth and Space Science Open
Archive, https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10505486.1, 2020.
Ma, L., Hurtt, G., Ott, L., Sahajpal, R., Fisk, J., Lamb, R., Tang, H., Flanagan, S., Chini, L., Chatterjee, A., and Sullivan, J.: Global evaluation of the Ecosystem Demography model (ED v3.0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5236771, 2021a.
Ma, L., Hurtt, G., Tang, H., Lamb, R. L., Campbell, E., Dubayah, R. O., Guy,
M., Huang, W., Lister, A., and Lu, J.: High-resolution forest carbon modeling
for climate mitigation planning over the RGGI region, USA, Environ.
Res. Lett., 16, 045014, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe4f4, 2021b.
Markus, T., Neumann, T., Martino, A., Abdalati, W., Brunt, K., Csatho, B.,
Farrell, S., Fricker, H., Gardner, A., Harding, D., Jasinski, M., Kwok, R.,
Magruder, L., Lubin, D., Luthcke, S., Morison, J., Nelson, R.,
Neuenschwander, A., Palm, S., Popescu, S., Shum, C., Schutz, B. E., Smith,
B., Yang, Y., and Zwally, J.: The Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite-2
(ICESat-2): Science requirements, concept, and implementation, Remote
Sens. Environ., 190, 260–273,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.12.029, 2017.
Massad, R.-S., Tuzet, A., and Bethenod, O.: The effect of temperature on
C4-type leaf photosynthesis parameters, Plant Cell Environ., 30,
1191–1204, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01691.x, 2007.
Massoud, E. C., Xu, C., Fisher, R. A., Knox, R. G., Walker, A. P., Serbin, S. P., Christoffersen, B. O., Holm, J. A., Kueppers, L. M., Ricciuto, D. M., Wei, L., Johnson, D. J., Chambers, J. Q., Koven, C. D., McDowell, N. G., and Vrugt, J. A.: Identification of key parameters controlling demographically structured vegetation dynamics in a land surface model: CLM4.5(FATES), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4133–4164, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4133-2019, 2019.
Medvigy, D.: The State of the Regional Carbon Cycle: Results from a
Constrained Coupled Ecosystem-atmosphere Model, PhD thesis, Harvard
University, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
644 pp., 2006.
Medvigy, D., Wofsy, S. C., Munger, J. W., Hollinger, D. Y., and Moorcroft, P.
R.: Mechanistic scaling of ecosystem function and dynamics in space and
time: Ecosystem Demography model version 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 114, G01002, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JG000812, 2009.
Mercado, L. M., Bellouin, N., Sitch, S., Boucher, O., Huntingford, C., Wild,
M., and Cox, P. M.: Impact of changes in diffuse radiation on the global land
carbon sink, Nature, 458, 1014–1017, 2009.
Monteith, J.: Evaporation and environment, Symposia of the Society for
Experimental Biology, 19, 205–234, 1965.
Montzka, C., Herbst, M., Weihermüller, L., Verhoef, A., and Vereecken, H.: A global data set of soil hydraulic properties and sub-grid variability of soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity curves, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 9, 529–543, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-529-2017, 2017.
Moorcroft, P. R., Hurtt, G. C., and Pacala, S. W.: A Method for Scaling
Vegetation Dynamics: The Ecosystem Demography Model, Ecological
Monographs, 71, 557–586,
https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(2001)071[0557:AMFSVD]2.0.CO;2, 2001.
Morton, D. C., Nagol, J., Carabajal, C. C., Rosette, J., Palace, M., Cook,
B. D., Vermote, E. F., Harding, D. J., and North, P. R. J.: Amazon forests
maintain consistent canopy structure and greenness during the dry season, Nature,
506, 221–224, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13006, 2014.
Mu, Q., Zhao, M., and Running, S. W.: Improvements to a MODIS global
terrestrial evapotranspiration algorithm, Remote Sens. Environ., 115, 1781–1800, 2011.
Murray-Tortarolo, G., Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Piao, S.,
Zhu, Z., Poulter, B., Zaehle, S., Ahlström, A., Lomas, M., Levis, S.,
Viovy, N., and Zeng, N.: Evaluation of Land Surface Models in Reproducing
Satellite-Derived LAI over the High-Latitude Northern Hemisphere. Part I:
Uncoupled DGVMs, Remote Sens., 5, 4819–4838,
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5104819, 2013.
Myneni, R., Knyazikhin, Y., and Park, T.: MCD15A3H MODIS/Terra+Aqua Leaf Area
Index/FPAR 4-day L4 Global 500 m SIN Grid V006, NASA Earth Data,
https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD15A3H.006, 2015.
Neilson, R. P.: A model for predicting continental-scale vegetation
distribution and water balance, Ecol. Appl., 5, 362–385, 1995.
Neuenschwander, A. L., Popescu, S. C., Nelson, R. F., Harding, D., Pitts, K.
L., and Robbins, J.: ATLAS/ICESat-2 L3A Land and Vegetation Height, version
3, NSIDC, https://doi.org/10.5067/ATLAS/ATL08.003, 2020.
Ott, L., Hurtt, G. C., Randerson, J. T., Chatterjee, A., Chen, Y., Chini, L.
P., Davis, S. J., Hubacek, K., Lee, E., Ma, L., Poulter, B., Rousseaux, C.
S., Sun, L., Woodard, D., and Zeng, F.: Toward integrated seasonal
predictions of land and ocean carbon flux: lessons from the 2015–16 El Nino,
AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 51,
2018AGUFM.B51E1990O,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AGUFM.B51E1990O (last access: 24 November 2020), 2018.
Pacala, S. W., Canham, C. D., Saponara, J., Silander Jr, J. A., Kobe, R. K.,
and Ribbens, E.: Forest models defined by field measurements: estimation,
error analysis and dynamics, Ecol. Monogr., 66, 1–43, 1996.
Parton, W. J.: The CENTURY model, in: Evaluation of soil organic matter
models, Springer, 283–291, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61094-3_23, 1996.
Peters, W., Jacobson, A. R., Sweeney, C., Andrews, A. E., Conway, T. J.,
Masarie, K., Miller, J. B., Bruhwiler, L. M. P., Pétron, G., Hirsch, A.
I., Worthy, D. E. J., van der Werf, G. R., Randerson, J. T., Wennberg, P.
O., Krol, M. C., and Tans, P. P.: An atmospheric perspective on North
American carbon dioxide exchange: CarbonTracker, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
104, 18925, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0708986104, 2007.
Peylin, P., Law, R. M., Gurney, K. R., Chevallier, F., Jacobson, A. R., Maki, T., Niwa, Y., Patra, P. K., Peters, W., Rayner, P. J., Rödenbeck, C., van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., and Zhang, X.: Global atmospheric carbon budget: results from an ensemble of atmospheric CO2 inversions, Biogeosciences, 10, 6699–6720, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-6699-2013, 2013.
Pielke Sr., R. A., Pitman, A., Niyogi, D., Mahmood, R., McAlpine, C.,
Hossain, F., Goldewijk, K. K., Nair, U., Betts, R., Fall, S., Reichstein,
M., Kabat, P., and de Noblet, N.: Land use/land cover changes and climate:
modeling analysis and observational evidence, WIREs Climate Change, 2,
828–850, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.144, 2011.
Potter, C. S., Randerson, J. T., Field, C. B., Matson, P. A., Vitousek, P.
M., Mooney, H. A., and Klooster, S. A.: Terrestrial ecosystem production: A
process model based on global satellite and surface data, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 7, 811–841,
https://doi.org/10.1029/93GB02725, 1993.
Poulter, B., MacBean, N., Hartley, A., Khlystova, I., Arino, O., Betts, R., Bontemps, S., Boettcher, M., Brockmann, C., Defourny, P., Hagemann, S., Herold, M., Kirches, G., Lamarche, C., Lederer, D., Ottlé, C., Peters, M., and Peylin, P.: Plant functional type classification for earth system models: results from the European Space Agency's Land Cover Climate Change Initiative, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2315–2328, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2315-2015, 2015.
Prentice, I. C. and Cowling, S. A.: Dynamic global vegetation models,
Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 2nd edn., 670–689,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384719-5.00412-3, 2013.
Prentice, I. C., Cramer, W., Harrison, S. P., Leemans, R., Monserud, R. A.,
and Solomon, A. M.: Special paper: a global biome model based on plant
physiology and dominance, soil properties and climate, Biogeography, 19, 117–134, 1992.
Prentice, I. C., Bondeau, A., Cramer, W., Harrison, S. P., Hickler, T.,
Lucht, W., Sitch, S., Smith, B., and Sykes, M. T.: Dynamic Global Vegetation
Modeling: Quantifying Terrestrial Ecosystem Responses to Large-Scale
Environmental Change, in: Terrestrial Ecosystems in a Changing World, edited
by: Canadell, J. G., Pataki, D. E., and Pitelka, L. F., Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, 175–192, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32730-1_15, 2007.
Raich, J. W., Rastetter, E. B., Melillo, J. M., Kicklighter, D. W.,
Steudler, P. A., Peterson, B. J., Grace, A. L., Moore, B., and Vorosmarty,
C. J.: Potential Net Primary Productivity in South America: Application of a
Global Model, Ecol. Appl., 1, 399–429, https://doi.org/10.2307/1941899, 1991.
Randerson, J. T., Hoffman, F. M., Thornton, P. E., Mahowald, N. M., Lindsay,
K., Lee, Y.-H., Nevison, C. D., Doney, S. C., Bonan, G., and Stöckli,
R.: Systematic assessment of terrestrial biogeochemistry in coupled
climate–carbon models, 15, 2462–2484, 2009.
Randerson, J., Van Der Werf, G., Giglio, L., Collatz, G., and Kasibhatla, P.:
Global Fire Emissions Database, Version 4.1 (GFEDv4), ORNL DAAC, https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1293, 2015.
Reich, P. B., Walters, M. B., and Ellsworth, D. S.: From tropics to tundra:
Global convergence in plant functioning, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94,
13730, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.25.13730, 1997.
Restrepo-Coupe, N., Levine, N. M., Christoffersen, B. O., Albert, L. P., Wu,
J., Costa, M. H., Galbraith, D., Imbuzeiro, H., Martins, G., da Araujo, A.
C., Malhi, Y. S., Zeng, X., Moorcroft, P., and Saleska, S. R.: Do dynamic
global vegetation models capture the seasonality of carbon fluxes in the
Amazon basin? A data-model intercomparison, Global Change Biol., 23, 191–208,
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13442, 2017.
Rödenbeck, C., Le Quéré, C., Heimann, M., and Keeling, R. F.:
Interannual variability in oceanic biogeochemical processes inferred by
inversion of atmospheric O2/N2 and CO2 data, Tellus B, 60, 685–705,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00375.x, 2008.
Saleska, S. R., Wu, J., Guan, K., Araujo, A. C., Huete, A., Nobre, A. D.,
and Restrepo-Coupe, N.: Dry-season greening of Amazon forests, Nature, 531, E4–E5,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16457, 2016.
Santoro, M., Cartus, O., Mermoz, S., Bouvet, A., Le Toan, T., Carvalhais,
N., Rozendaal, D., Herold, M., Avitabile, V., Quegan, S., Carreiras, J.,
Rauste, Y., Balzter, H., Schmullius, C., and Seifert, F. M.: GlobBiomass –
global datasets of forest biomass, 174 data points, PANGAEA,
https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.894711, 2018.
Sato, H., Itoh, A., and Kohyama, T.: SEIB–DGVM: A new Dynamic Global
Vegetation Model using a spatially explicit individual-based approach, Ecol. Model., 200,
279–307, 2007.
Sellers, P. J., Mintz, Y., Sud, Y. C., and Dalcher, A.: A Simple Biosphere
Model (SIB) for Use within General Circulation Models, J. Atmos. Sci., 43, 505–531,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1986)043<0505:ASBMFU>2.0.CO;2, 1986.
Shugart, H. H. and West, D.: Development of an Appalachian deciduous forest
succession model and its application to assessment of the impact of the
chestnut blight, J. Environ. Manag., 5, 161–179, 1977.
Shugart, H. H., Wang, B., Fischer, R., Ma, J., Fang, J., Yan, X., Huth, A.,
and Armstrong, A. H.: Gap models and their individual-based relatives in the
assessment of the consequences of global change, Environ. Res.
Lett., 13, 033001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaaacc, 2018.
Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Gedney, N., Levy, P. E., Lomas, M., Piao, S. L.,
Betts, R., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Friedlingstein, P., Jones, C. D., Prentice,
I. C., and Woodward, F. I.: Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle,
future plant geography and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic
Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs), Global Change Biol., 14, 2015–2039,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01626.x, 2008.
Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., and Sykes, M. T.: Representation of vegetation
dynamics in the modelling of terrestrial ecosystems: comparing two
contrasting approaches within European climate space, Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 10, 621–637, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822X.2001.t01-1-00256.x, 2001.
Smith, B., Wårlind, D., Arneth, A., Hickler, T., Leadley, P., Siltberg, J., and Zaehle, S.: Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model, Biogeosciences, 11, 2027–2054, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014, 2014.
Spafford, L. and MacDougall, A. H.: Validation of terrestrial biogeochemistry in CMIP6 Earth system models: a review, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5863–5889, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5863-2021, 2021.
Spawn, S. A., Sullivan, C. C., Lark, T. J., and Gibbs, H. K.: Harmonized
global maps of above and belowground biomass carbon density in the year
2010, Sci. Data, 7, 112, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0444-4,
2020.
Tang, H. and Dubayah, R.: Light-driven growth in Amazon evergreen forests
explained by seasonal variations of vertical canopy structure, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 114,
2640–2644, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616943114, 2017.
Todd-Brown, K. E. O., Randerson, J. T., Post, W. M., Hoffman, F. M., Tarnocai, C., Schuur, E. A. G., and Allison, S. D.: Causes of variation in soil carbon simulations from CMIP5 Earth system models and comparison with observations, Biogeosciences, 10, 1717–1736, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1717-2013, 2013.
van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., van der Velde, I. R., van der Veen, E., Tsuruta, A., Stanislawska, K., Babenhauserheide, A., Zhang, H. F., Liu, Y., He, W., Chen, H., Masarie, K. A., Krol, M. C., and Peters, W.: The CarbonTracker Data Assimilation Shell (CTDAS) v1.0: implementation and global carbon balance 2001–2015, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2785–2800, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2785-2017, 2017.
Verger, A., Baret, F., and Weiss, M.: Near Real-Time Vegetation Monitoring at
Global Scale, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl., 7, 3473–3481,
https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2328632, 2014.
von Caemmerer, S.: Biochemical models of leaf photosynthesis, Csiro
publishing, https://doi.org/10.1071/9780643103405, 2000.
von Caemmerer, S. and Furbank, R. T.: Modeling C4 photosynthesis, C4 plant
biology, edited by: Sage, R. F. and Monson, R. K., 173–211, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-614440-6.X5000-9, 1999.
von Caemmerer, S., Farquhar, G., and Berry, J.: Biochemical Model of C3
Photosynthesis, in: Photosynthesis in silico: Understanding Complexity from
Molecules to Ecosystems, edited by: Laisk, A., Nedbal, L., and Govindjee, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,
209–230,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9237-4_9, 2009.
Walther, G.-R., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T.
J. C., Fromentin, J.-M., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bairlein, F.: Ecological
responses to recent climate change, Nature, 416, 389–395,
https://doi.org/10.1038/416389a, 2002.
Weng, E. S., Malyshev, S., Lichstein, J. W., Farrior, C. E., Dybzinski, R., Zhang, T., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: Scaling from individual trees to forests in an Earth system modeling framework using a mathematically tractable model of height-structured competition, Biogeosciences, 12, 2655–2694, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015, 2015.
Wieder, W. R., Boehnert, J., Bonan, G. B., and Langseth, M.: Regridded
Harmonized World Soil Database v1.2, ORNL DAAC,
https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1247, 2014.
Yang, X., Tang, J., Mustard, J. F., Lee, J.-E., Rossini, M., Joiner, J.,
Munger, J. W., Kornfeld, A., and Richardson, A. D.: Solar-induced chlorophyll
fluorescence that correlates with canopy photosynthesis on diurnal and
seasonal scales in a temperate deciduous forest, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 42, 2977–2987, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063201, 2015.
Zhang, Y., Joiner, J., Alemohammad, S. H., Zhou, S., and Gentine, P.: A global spatially contiguous solar-induced fluorescence (CSIF) dataset using neural networks, Biogeosciences, 15, 5779–5800, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5779-2018, 2018.
Short summary
We present a global version of the Ecosystem Demography (ED) model which can track vegetation 3-D structure and scale up ecological processes from individual vegetation to ecosystem scale. Model evaluation against multiple benchmarking datasets demonstrated the model’s capability to simulate global vegetation dynamics across a range of temporal and spatial scales. With this version, ED has the potential to be linked with remote sensing observations to address key scientific questions.
We present a global version of the Ecosystem Demography (ED) model which can track vegetation...
