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, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda R. Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul K. Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Xin Lan, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 965–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and datasets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
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.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda R. Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul K. Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Xin Lan, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 965–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and datasets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Dilli Paudel, Michiel Kallenberg, Stella Ofori-Ampofo, Hilmy Baja, Ron van Bree, Aike Potze, Pratishtha Poudel, Abdelrahman Saleh, Weston Anderson, Malte von Bloh, Andres Castellano, Oumnia Ennaji, Raed Hamed, Rahel Laudien, Donghoon Lee, Inti Luna, Michele Meroni, Janet Mumo Mutuku, Siyabusa Mkuhlani, Jonathan Richetti, Alex C. Ruane, Ritvik Sahajpal, Guanyuan Shai, Vasileios Sitokonstantinou, Rogério de Souza Nóia Júnior, Amit Kumar Srivastava, Robert Strong, Lily-belle Sweet, Petar Vojnovic, and Ioannis N. Athanasiadis
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-83, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-83, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Improving crop yield predictions is crucial for food security. Prior research relied on case studies, making it hard to compare methods & track progress. We introduce CY-Bench, a global dataset for forecasting maize and wheat yields across diverse farming systems in over 25 countries. It includes standardized weather, soil, and satellite data, curated by a diverse set of experts. CY-Bench supports the development of better forecasting tools to help decision-makers plan for global food security.
Jeongmin Yun, Junjie Liu, Brendan Byrne, Brad Weir, Lesley E. Ott, Kathryn McKain, Bianca C. Baier, Luciana V. Gatti, and Sebastien C. Biraud
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1725–1748, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1725-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1725-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study quantifies errors in regional net surface–atmosphere CO2 flux estimates from an inverse model ensemble using airborne CO2 measurements. Our results show that flux error estimates based on observations significantly exceed those computed from the ensemble spread of flux estimates in regions with high fossil fuel emissions. This finding suggests the presence of systematic biases in the inversion estimates, associated with errors in the fossil fuel emissions common to all models.
Detlef van Vuuren, Brian O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Louise Chini, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tomoko Hasegawa, Keywan Riahi, Benjamin Sanderson, Bala Govindasamy, Nico Bauer, Veronika Eyring, Cheikh Fall, Katja Frieler, Matthew Gidden, Laila Gohar, Andrew Jones, Andrew King, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Peter Lawrence, Chris Lennard, Jason Lowe, Camila Mathison, Shahbaz Mehmood, Luciana Prado, Qiang Zhang, Steven Rose, Alexander Ruane, Carl-Friederich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Jana Sillmann, Chris Smith, Anna Sörensson, Swapna Panickal, Kaoru Tachiiri, Naomi Vaughan, Saritha Vishwanathan, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a set of six plausible 21st century emission scenarios, and their multi-century extensions, that will be used by the international community of climate modeling centers to produce the next generation of climate projections. These projections will support climate, impact and mitigation researchers, provide information to practitioners to address future risks from climate change, and contribute to policymakers’ considerations of the trade-offs among various levels of mitigation.
Peter Somkuti, Greg M. McGarragh, Christopher O'Dell, Antonio Di Noia, Leif Vogel, Sean Crowell, Lesley E. Ott, and Hartmut Bösch
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2024-145, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2024-145, 2025
Revised manuscript under review for AMT
Short summary
Short summary
In space-based estimates of atmospheric methane concentrations, one can often observe biases that look like imprints of surface features. We performed realistic simulation experiments and find the root cause to be unaccounted aerosols. Since good knowledge of aerosols is difficult to achieve for operational science data processing, we conclude that a comprehensive surface bias correction scheme is highly important for missions utilizing the 2.3 µm spectral band for methane retrievals.
Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Michael O'Sullivan, Maria Carolina Duran-Rojas, Thais Michele Rosan, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Louise P. Chini, and George C. Hurtt
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3165, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3165, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Indonesia is 3 world's highest carbon emitter from land use change. However, there are uncertainties of the carbon emission of Indonesia that can be reduced with satellite-based datasets. But later, we found that the uncertainties are also caused by the difference of carbon pool in various models. Our best estimation of carbon emissions from land use change in Indonesia is 0.12 ± 0.02 PgC/yr with steady trend. This double when include peat fire and peat drainage emissions.
Edna Johanna Molina Bacca, Miodrag Stevanović, Benjamin Leon Bodirsky, Jonathan C. Doelman, Louise Parsons Chini, Jan Volkholz, Katja Frieler, Christopher Reyer, George Hurtt, Florian Humpenöder, Kristine Karstens, Jens Heinke, Christoph Müller, Jan Philipp Dietrich, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Elke Stehfest, and Alexander Popp
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2441, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2441, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Land-use change projections are vital for impact studies. This study compares updated land-use model projections, including CO2 fertilization among other upgrades, from the MAgPIE and IMAGE models under three scenarios, highlighting differences, uncertainty hotspots, and harmonization effects. Key findings include reduced bioenergy crop demand projections and differences in grassland area allocation and sizes, with socioeconomic-climate scenarios' largest effect on variance starting in 2030.
Xiaoran Zhu, Dong Chen, Maruko Kogure, Elizabeth Hoy, Logan T. Berner, Amy L. Breen, Abhishek Chatterjee, Scott J. Davidson, Gerald V. Frost, Teresa N. Hollingsworth, Go Iwahana, Randi R. Jandt, Anja N. Kade, Tatiana V. Loboda, Matt J. Macander, Michelle Mack, Charles E. Miller, Eric A. Miller, Susan M. Natali, Martha K. Raynolds, Adrian V. Rocha, Shiro Tsuyuzaki, Craig E. Tweedie, Donald A. Walker, Mathew Williams, Xin Xu, Yingtong Zhang, Nancy French, and Scott Goetz
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 3687–3703, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3687-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3687-2024, 2024
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 studies compared to other terrestrial biomes. To support synthesis research and inform future studies, we created the Synthesized Alaskan Tundra Field Dataset (SATFiD), which brings together field datasets and includes vegetation, active-layer, and fire properties.
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.
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
H2MV (v1.0): global physically constrained deep learning water cycle model with vegetation
NN-TOC v1: global prediction of total organic carbon in marine sediments using deep neural networks
China Wildfire Emission Dataset (ChinaWED v1) for the period 2012–2022
Process-based modeling of solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence with VISIT-SIF version 1.0
Including the phosphorus cycle into the LPJ-GUESS dynamic global vegetation model (v4.1, r10994) – global patterns and temporal trends of N and P primary production limitation
A comprehensive land-surface vegetation model for multi-stream data assimilation, D&B v1.0
Sources of uncertainty in the SPITFIRE global fire model: development of LPJmL-SPITFIRE1.9 and directions for future improvements
The unicellular NUM v.0.91: a trait-based plankton model evaluated in two contrasting biogeographic provinces
FESOM2.1-REcoM3-MEDUSA2: an ocean–sea ice–biogeochemistry model coupled to a sediment model
Satellite-based modeling of wetland methane emissions on a global scale (SatWetCH4 1.0)
Emulating grid-based forest carbon dynamics using machine learning: an LPJ-GUESS v4.1.1 application
Systematic underestimation of type-specific ecosystem process variability in the Community Land Model v5 over Europe
Soil nitrous oxide emissions from global land ecosystems and their drivers within the LPJ-GUESS model (v4.1)
Lambda-PFLOTRAN 1.0: a workflow for incorporating organic matter chemistry informed by ultra high resolution mass spectrometry into biogeochemical modeling
An improved model for air–sea exchange of elemental mercury in MITgcm-ECCOv4-Hg: the role of surfactants and waves
BOATSv2: new ecological and economic features improve simulations of high seas catch and effort
A dynamical process-based model for quantifying global agricultural ammonia emissions – AMmonia–CLIMate v1.0 (AMCLIM v1.0) – Part 1: Land module for simulating emissions from synthetic fertilizer use
Simulating Ips typographus L. outbreak dynamics and their influence on carbon balance estimates with ORCHIDEE r8627
Biological nitrogen fixation of natural and agricultural vegetation simulated with LPJmL 5.7.9
Learning from conceptual models – a study of the emergence of cooperation towards resource protection in a social–ecological system
Development and assessment of the physical-biogeochemical ocean regional model in the Northwest Pacific: NPRT v1.0 (ROMS v3.9–TOPAZ v2.0)
TROLL 4.0: representing water and carbon fluxes, leaf phenology and intraspecific trait variation in a mixed-species individual-based forest dynamics model – Part 1: Model description
The biogeochemical model Biome-BGCMuSo v6.2 provides plausible and accurate simulations of the carbon cycle in central European beech forests
Parameterisation toolbox for physical-biogeochemical model compatible with FABM. Case study: the coupled 1D GOTM-ECOSMO E2E for the Sylt-Romo Bight, North Sea
TROLL 4.0: representing water and carbon fluxes, leaf phenology, and intraspecific trait variation in a mixed-species individual-based forest dynamics model – Part 2: Model evaluation for two Amazonian sites
Estimation of above- and below-ground ecosystem parameters for the DVM-DOS-TEM v0.7.0 model using MADS v1.7.3: a synthetic case study
DeepPhenoMem V1.0: deep learning modelling of canopy greenness dynamics accounting for multi-variate meteorological memory effects on vegetation phenology
Impacts of land-use change on biospheric carbon: an oriented benchmark using the ORCHIDEE land surface model
Implementing the iCORAL (version 1.0) coral reef CaCO3 production module in the iLOVECLIM climate model
Assimilation of carbonyl sulfide (COS) fluxes within the adjoint-based data assimilation system – Nanjing University Carbon Assimilation System (NUCAS v1.0)
ML4Fire-XGBv1.0: Improving North American wildfire prediction by integrating a machine-learning fire model in a land surface model
Alquimia v1.0: A generic interface to biogeochemical codes – A tool for interoperable development, prototyping and benchmarking for multiphysics simulators
Quantifying the role of ozone-caused damage to vegetation in the Earth system: a new parameterization scheme for photosynthetic and stomatal responses
Radiocarbon analysis reveals underestimation of soil organic carbon persistence in new-generation soil models
Exploring the potential of history matching for land surface model calibration
EAT v1.0.0: a 1D test bed for physical–biogeochemical data assimilation in natural waters
Using deep learning to integrate paleoclimate and global biogeochemistry over the Phanerozoic Eon
Modelling boreal forest's mineral soil and peat C dynamics with the Yasso07 model coupled with the Ricker moisture modifier
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
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
Zavud Baghirov, Martin Jung, Markus Reichstein, Marco Körner, and Basil Kraft
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2921–2943, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2921-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2921-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We use an innovative approach to studying the Earth's water cycle by integrating advanced machine learning techniques with a traditional water cycle model. Our model is designed to learn from observational data, with a particular emphasis on understanding the influence of vegetation on water movement. By closely aligning with real-world observations, our model offers new possibilities for enhancing our understanding of the water cycle and its interactions with vegetation.
Naveenkumar Parameswaran, Everardo González, Ewa Burwicz-Galerne, Malte Braack, and Klaus Wallmann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2521–2544, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2521-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2521-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our research uses deep learning to predict organic carbon stocks in ocean sediments, which is crucial for understanding their role in the global carbon cycle. By analysing over 22 000 samples and various seafloor characteristics, our model gives more accurate results than traditional methods. We estimate that the top 10 cm of ocean sediments hold about 156 Pg of carbon. This work enhances carbon stock estimates and helps plan future sampling strategies to better understand oceanic carbon burial.
Zhengyang Lin, Ling Huang, Hanqin Tian, Anping Chen, and Xuhui Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2509–2520, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2509-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2509-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The China Wildfire Emission Dataset (ChinaWED v1) estimated wildfire emissions in China during 2012–2022 as 78.13 Tg CO2, 279.47 Gg CH4, and 6.26 Gg N2O annually. Agricultural fires dominated emissions, while forest and grassland emissions decreased. Seasonal peaks occurred in late spring, with hotspots in northeast, southwest, and east China. The model emphasizes the importance of using localized emission factors and high-resolution fire estimates for accurate assessments.
Tatsuya Miyauchi, Makoto Saito, Hibiki M. Noda, Akihiko Ito, Tomomichi Kato, and Tsuneo Matsunaga
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2329–2347, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2329-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2329-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) is an effective indicator for monitoring photosynthetic activity. This paper introduces VISIT-SIF, a biogeochemical model developed based on the Vegetation Integrative Simulator for Trace gases (VISIT) to represent satellite-observed SIF. Our simulations reproduced the global distribution and seasonal variations in observed SIF. VISIT-SIF helps to improve photosynthetic processes through a combination of biogeochemical modeling and observed SIF.
Mateus Dantas de Paula, Matthew Forrest, David Warlind, João Paulo Darela Filho, Katrin Fleischer, Anja Rammig, and Thomas Hickler
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2249–2274, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2249-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2249-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study maps global nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability and how they changed from 1901 to 2018. We find that tropical regions are mostly P-limited, while temperate and boreal areas face N limitations. Over time, P limitation increased, especially in the tropics, while N limitation decreased. These shifts are key to understanding global plant growth and carbon storage, highlighting the importance of including P dynamics in ecosystem models.
Wolfgang Knorr, Matthew Williams, Tea Thum, Thomas Kaminski, Michael Voßbeck, Marko Scholze, Tristan Quaife, T. Luke Smallman, Susan C. Steele-Dunne, Mariette Vreugdenhil, Tim Green, Sönke Zaehle, Mika Aurela, Alexandre Bouvet, Emanuel Bueechi, Wouter Dorigo, Tarek S. El-Madany, Mirco Migliavacca, Marika Honkanen, Yann H. Kerr, Anna Kontu, Juha Lemmetyinen, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, Arnaud Mialon, Tuuli Miinalainen, Gaétan Pique, Amanda Ojasalo, Shaun Quegan, Peter J. Rayner, Pablo Reyes-Muñoz, Nemesio Rodríguez-Fernández, Mike Schwank, Jochem Verrelst, Songyan Zhu, Dirk Schüttemeyer, and Matthias Drusch
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2137–2159, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
When it comes to climate change, the land surface is where the vast majority of impacts happen. The task of monitoring those impacts across the globe is formidable and must necessarily rely on satellites – at a significant cost: the measurements are only indirect and require comprehensive physical understanding. We have created a comprehensive modelling system that we offer to the research community to explore how satellite data can be better exploited to help us capture the changes that happen on our lands.
Luke Oberhagemann, Maik Billing, Werner von Bloh, Markus Drüke, Matthew Forrest, Simon P. K. Bowring, Jessica Hetzer, Jaime Ribalaygua Batalla, and Kirsten Thonicke
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2021–2050, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2021-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2021-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Under climate change, the conditions necessary for wildfires to form are occurring more frequently in many parts of the world. To help predict how wildfires will change in future, global fire models are being developed. We analyze and further develop one such model, SPITFIRE. Our work identifies and corrects sources of substantial bias in the model that are important to the global fire modelling field. With this analysis and these developments, we help to provide a basis for future improvements.
Trine Frisbæk Hansen, Donald Eugene Canfield, Ken Haste Andersen, and Christian Jannik Bjerrum
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1895–1916, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1895-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1895-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We describe and test the size-based Nutrient-Unicellular-Multicellular model, which defines unicellular plankton using a single set of parameters, on a eutrophic and oligotrophic ecosystem. The results demonstrate that both sites can be modeled with similar parameters and robust performance over a wide range of parameters. The study shows that the model is useful for non-experts and applicable for modeling ecosystems with limited data. It holds promise for evolutionary and deep-time climate models.
Ying Ye, Guy Munhoven, Peter Köhler, Martin Butzin, Judith Hauck, Özgür Gürses, and Christoph Völker
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 977–1000, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-977-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-977-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Many biogeochemistry models assume all material reaching the seafloor is remineralized and returned to solution, which is sufficient for studies on short-term climate change. Under long-term climate change, the carbon storage in sediments slows down carbon cycling and influences feedbacks in the atmosphere–ocean–sediment system. This paper describes the coupling of a sediment model to an ocean biogeochemistry model and presents results under the pre-industrial climate and under CO2 perturbation.
Juliette Bernard, Elodie Salmon, Marielle Saunois, Shushi Peng, Penélope Serrano-Ortiz, Antoine Berchet, Palingamoorthy Gnanamoorthy, Joachim Jansen, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 863–883, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-863-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-863-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Despite their importance, uncertainties remain in the evaluation of the drivers of temporal variability of methane emissions from wetlands on a global scale. Here, a simplified global model is developed, taking advantage of advances in remote-sensing data and in situ observations. The model reproduces the large spatial and temporal patterns of emissions, albeit with limitations in the tropics due to data scarcity. This model, while simple, can provide valuable insights into sensitivity analyses.
Carolina Natel, David Martin Belda, Peter Anthoni, Neele Haß, Sam Rabin, and Almut Arneth
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4064, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4064, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Complex models predict forest carbon responses to future climate change but are slow and computationally intensive, limiting large-scale analyses. We used machine learning to accelerate predictions from the LPJ-GUESS vegetation model. Our emulators, based on random forests and neural networks, achieved 97 % faster simulations. This approach enables rapid exploration of climate mitigation strategies and supports informed policy decisions.
Christian Poppe Terán, Bibi S. Naz, Harry Vereecken, Roland Baatz, Rosie A. Fisher, and Harrie-Jan Hendricks Franssen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 287–317, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-287-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-287-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon and water exchanges between the atmosphere and the land surface contribute to water resource availability and climate change mitigation. Land surface models, like the Community Land Model version 5 (CLM5), simulate these. This study finds that CLM5 and other data sets underestimate the magnitudes of and variability in carbon and water exchanges for the most abundant plant functional types compared to observations. It provides essential insights for further research into these processes.
Jianyong Ma, Almut Arneth, Benjamin Smith, Peter Anthoni, Xu-Ri, Peter Eliasson, David Wårlind, Martin Wittenbrink, and Stefan Olin
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-223, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-223, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a powerful greenhouse gas mainly released from natural and agricultural soils. This study examines how global soil N2O emissions have changed from 1961 to 2020 and identifies key factors driving these changes using an ecological model. The findings highlight croplands as the largest source, with factors like fertilizer use and climate change enhancing emissions. Rising CO2 levels, however, can partially mitigate N2O emissions through increased plant nitrogen uptake.
Katherine A. Muller, Peishi Jiang, Glenn Hammond, Tasneem Ahmadullah, Hyun-Seob Song, Ravi Kukkadapu, Nicholas Ward, Madison Bowe, Rosalie K. Chu, Qian Zhao, Vanessa A. Garayburu-Caruso, Alan Roebuck, and Xingyuan Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8955–8968, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8955-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8955-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The new Lambda-PFLOTRAN workflow incorporates organic matter chemistry into reaction networks to simulate aerobic respiration and biogeochemistry. Lambda-PFLOTRAN is a Python-based workflow in a Jupyter notebook interface that digests raw organic matter chemistry data via Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry, develops a representative reaction network, and completes a biogeochemical simulation with the open-source, parallel-reactive-flow, and transport code PFLOTRAN.
Ling Li, Peipei Wu, Peng Zhang, Shaojian Huang, and Yanxu Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8683–8695, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8683-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8683-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we incorporate sea surfactants and wave-breaking processes into MITgcm-ECCOv4-Hg. The updated model shows increased fluxes in high-wind-speed and high-wave regions and vice versa, enhancing spatial heterogeneity. It shows that elemental mercury (Hg0) transfer velocity is more sensitive to wind speed. These findings may elucidate the discrepancies in previous estimations and offer insights into global Hg cycling.
Jerome Guiet, Daniele Bianchi, Kim J. N. Scherrer, Ryan F. Heneghan, and Eric D. Galbraith
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8421–8454, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8421-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8421-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The BiOeconomic mArine Trophic Size-spectrum (BOATSv2) model dynamically simulates global commercial fish populations and their coupling with fishing activity, as emerging from environmental and economic drivers. New features, including separate pelagic and demersal populations, iron limitation, and spatial variation of fishing costs and management, improve the accuracy of high seas fisheries. The updated model code is available to simulate both historical and future scenarios.
Jize Jiang, David S. Stevenson, and Mark A. Sutton
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8181–8222, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A special model called AMmonia–CLIMate (AMCLIM) has been developed to understand and calculate NH3 emissions from fertilizer use and also taking into account how the environment influences these NH3 emissions. It is estimated that about 17 % of applied N in fertilizers was lost due to NH3 emissions. Hot and dry conditions and regions with high-pH soils can expect higher NH3 emissions.
Guillaume Marie, Jina Jeong, Hervé Jactel, Gunnar Petter, Maxime Cailleret, Matthew J. McGrath, Vladislav Bastrikov, Josefine Ghattas, Bertrand Guenet, Anne Sofie Lansø, Kim Naudts, Aude Valade, Chao Yue, and Sebastiaan Luyssaert
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8023–8047, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8023-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8023-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This research looks at how climate change influences forests, and particularly how altered wind and insect activities could make forests emit instead of absorb carbon. We have updated a land surface model called ORCHIDEE to better examine the effect of bark beetles on forest health. Our findings suggest that sudden events, such as insect outbreaks, can dramatically affect carbon storage, offering crucial insights into tackling climate change.
Stephen Björn Wirth, Johanna Braun, Jens Heinke, Sebastian Ostberg, Susanne Rolinski, Sibyll Schaphoff, Fabian Stenzel, Werner von Bloh, Friedhelm Taube, and Christoph Müller
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7889–7914, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7889-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7889-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new approach to modelling biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) in the Lund–Potsdam–Jena managed Land dynamic global vegetation model. While in the original approach BNF depended on actual evapotranspiration, the new approach considers soil water content and temperature, vertical root distribution, the nitrogen (N) deficit and carbon (C) costs. The new approach improved simulated BNF compared to the scientific literature and the model ability to project future C and N cycle dynamics.
Saeed Harati-Asl, Liliana Perez, and Roberto Molowny-Horas
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7423–7443, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7423-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7423-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Social–ecological systems are the subject of many sustainability problems. Because of the complexity of these systems, we must be careful when intervening in them; otherwise we may cause irreversible damage. Using computer models, we can gain insight about these complex systems without harming them. In this paper we describe how we connected an ecological model of forest insect infestation with a social model of cooperation and simulated an intervention measure to save a forest from infestation.
Daehyuk Kim, Hyun-Chae Jung, Jae-Hong Moon, and Na-Hyeon Lee
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1509, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1509, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Physical–biogeochemical ocean global models is difficult to analyze oceanic environmental systems. To accurately understand the physical–biogeochemical processes at the regional scale, physical and biogeochemical models were coupled at a high resolution. The results successfully simulated the seasonal variations of chlorophyll and nutrients, particularly in the marginal seas, which were not captured by global models. The model is an important tool for studying physical–biogeochemical processes.
Isabelle Maréchaux, Fabian Jörg Fischer, Sylvain Schmitt, and Jérôme Chave
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3104, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3104, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We describe TROLL 4.0, a simulator of forest dynamics that represents trees in a virtual space at one-meter resolution. Tree birth, growth, death and the underlying physiological processes such as carbon assimilation, water transpiration and leaf phenology depend on plant traits that are measured in the field for many individuals and species. The model is thus capable of jointly simulating forest structure, diversity and ecosystem functioning, a major challenge in modelling vegetation dynamics.
Katarína Merganičová, Ján Merganič, Laura Dobor, Roland Hollós, Zoltán Barcza, Dóra Hidy, Zuzana Sitková, Pavel Pavlenda, Hrvoje Marjanovic, Daniel Kurjak, Michal Bošel'a, Doroteja Bitunjac, Maša Zorana Ostrogović Sever, Jiří Novák, Peter Fleischer, and Tomáš Hlásny
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7317–7346, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7317-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7317-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a multi-objective calibration approach leading to robust parameter values aiming to strike a balance between their local precision and broad applicability. Using the Biome-BGCMuSo model, we tested the calibrated parameter sets for simulating European beech forest dynamics across large environmental gradients. Leveraging data from 87 plots and five European countries, the results demonstrated reasonable local accuracy and plausible large-scale productivity responses.
Hoa T. T. Nguyen, Ute Daewel, Neil Banas, and Corinna Schrum
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2710, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2710, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Parameterisation is key in modeling to reproduce observations well but is often done manually. This study presents a Particle Swarm Optimizer-based toolbox for marine ecosystem models, compatible with the Framework for Aquatic Biogeochemical Models, thus enhancing its reusability. Applied to the Sylt ecosystem, the toolbox effectively (1) identified multiple parameter sets that matched observations well, thus providing different insights into ecosystem dynamics, (2) optimized model complexity.
Sylvain Schmitt, Fabian Fischer, James Ball, Nicolas Barbier, Marion Boisseaux, Damien Bonal, Benoit Burban, Xiuzhi Chen, Géraldine Derroire, Jeremy Lichstein, Daniela Nemetschek, Natalia Restrepo-Coupe, Scott Saleska, Giacomo Sellan, Philippe Verley, Grégoire Vincent, Camille Ziegler, Jérôme Chave, and Isabelle Maréchaux
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3106, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3106, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate the capability of TROLL 4.0, a simulator of forest dynamics, to represent tropical forest structure, diversity and functioning in two Amazonian forests. Evaluation data include forest inventories, carbon and water fluxes between the forest and the atmosphere, and leaf area and canopy height from remote-sensing products. The model realistically predicts the structure and composition, and the seasonality of carbon and water fluxes at both sites.
Elchin E. Jafarov, Helene Genet, Velimir V. Vesselinov, Valeria Briones, Aiza Kabeer, Andrew L. Mullen, Benjamin Maglio, Tobey Carman, Ruth Rutter, Joy Clein, Chu-Chun Chang, Dogukan Teber, Trevor Smith, Joshua M. Rady, Christina Schädel, Jennifer D. Watts, Brendan M. Rogers, and Susan M. Natali
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-158, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-158, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
Thawing permafrost could greatly impact global climate. Our study improves modeling of carbon cycling in Arctic ecosystems. We developed an automated method to fine-tune a model that simulates carbon and nitrogen flows, using computer-generated data. Using computer-generated data, we tested our method and found it enhances accuracy and reduces the time needed for calibration. This work helps make climate predictions more reliable in sensitive permafrost regions.
Guohua Liu, Mirco Migliavacca, Christian Reimers, Basil Kraft, Markus Reichstein, Andrew D. Richardson, Lisa Wingate, Nicolas Delpierre, Hui Yang, and Alexander J. Winkler
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6683–6701, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6683-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6683-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our study employs long short-term memory (LSTM) networks to model canopy greenness and phenology, integrating meteorological memory effects. The LSTM model outperforms traditional methods, enhancing accuracy in predicting greenness dynamics and phenological transitions across plant functional types. Highlighting the importance of multi-variate meteorological memory effects, our research pioneers unlock the secrets of vegetation phenology responses to climate change with deep learning techniques.
Thi Lan Anh Dinh, Daniel Goll, Philippe Ciais, and Ronny Lauerwald
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6725–6744, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6725-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6725-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The study assesses the performance of the dynamic global vegetation model (DGVM) ORCHIDEE in capturing the impact of land-use change on carbon stocks across Europe. Comparisons with observations reveal that the model accurately represents carbon fluxes and stocks. Despite the underestimations in certain land-use conversions, the model describes general trends in soil carbon response to land-use change, aligning with the site observations.
Nathaelle Bouttes, Lester Kwiatkowski, Manon Berger, Victor Brovkin, and Guy Munhoven
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6513–6528, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6513-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6513-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Coral reefs are crucial for biodiversity, but they also play a role in the carbon cycle on long time scales of a few thousand years. To better simulate the future and past evolution of coral reefs and their effect on the global carbon cycle, hence on atmospheric CO2 concentration, it is necessary to include coral reefs within a climate model. Here we describe the inclusion of coral reef carbonate production in a carbon–climate model and its validation in comparison to existing modern data.
Huajie Zhu, Mousong Wu, Fei Jiang, Michael Vossbeck, Thomas Kaminski, Xiuli Xing, Jun Wang, Weimin Ju, and Jing M. Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6337–6363, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6337-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6337-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In this work, we developed the Nanjing University Carbon Assimilation System (NUCAS v1.0). Data assimilation experiments were conducted to demonstrate the robustness and investigate the feasibility and applicability of NUCAS. The assimilation of ecosystem carbonyl sulfide (COS) fluxes improved the model performance in gross primary productivity, evapotranspiration, and sensible heat, showing that COS provides constraints on parameters relevant to carbon-, water-, and energy-related processes.
Ye Liu, Huilin Huang, Sing-Chun Wang, Tao Zhang, Donghui Xu, and Yang Chen
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-151, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-151, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
This study integrates machine learning with a land surface model to improve wildfire predictions in North America. Traditional models struggle with accurately simulating burned areas due to simplified processes. By combining the predictive power of machine learning with a land model, our hybrid framework better captures fire dynamics. This approach enhances our understanding of wildfire behavior and aids in developing more effective climate and fire management strategies.
Sergi Molins, Benjamin Andre, Jeffrey Johnson, Glenn Hammond, Benjamin Sulman, Konstantin Lipnikov, Marcus Day, James Beisman, Daniil Svyatsky, Hang Deng, Peter Lichtner, Carl Steefel, and David Moulton
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-108, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-108, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
Developing scientific software and making sure it functions properly requires a significant effort. As we advance our understanding of natural systems, however, there is the need to develop yet more complex models and codes. In this work, we present a piece of software that facilitates this work, specifically with regard to reactive processes. Existing tried-and-true codes are made available via this new interface, freeing up resources to focus on the new aspects of the problems at hand.
Fang Li, Zhimin Zhou, Samuel Levis, Stephen Sitch, Felicity Hayes, Zhaozhong Feng, Peter B. Reich, Zhiyi Zhao, and Yanqing Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6173–6193, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A new scheme is developed to model the 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 responses 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.
Alexander S. Brunmayr, Frank Hagedorn, Margaux Moreno Duborgel, Luisa I. Minich, and Heather D. Graven
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5961–5985, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5961-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5961-2024, 2024
Short summary
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 to 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.
Nina Raoult, Simon Beylat, James M. Salter, Frédéric Hourdin, Vladislav Bastrikov, Catherine Ottlé, and Philippe Peylin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5779–5801, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5779-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5779-2024, 2024
Short summary
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. We test a technique called history matching against more common approaches. This method adapts well to these models, helping us better understand how they work and therefore how to make them more realistic.
Jorn Bruggeman, Karsten Bolding, Lars Nerger, Anna Teruzzi, Simone Spada, Jozef Skákala, and Stefano Ciavatta
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5619–5639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5619-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5619-2024, 2024
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. We present the Ensemble and Assimilation Tool (EAT), a flexible and efficient test bed that allows any scientist to explore and further develop the state of the art in data assimilation.
Dongyu Zheng, Andrew S. Merdith, Yves Goddéris, Yannick Donnadieu, Khushboo Gurung, and Benjamin J. W. Mills
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5413–5429, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5413-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5413-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a deep learning method to upscale the time resolution of paleoclimate simulations to 1 million years. This improved resolution allows a climate-biogeochemical model to more accurately predict climate shifts. The method may be critical in developing new fully continuous methods that are able to be applied over a moving continental surface in deep time with high resolution at reasonable computational expense.
Boris Ťupek, Aleksi Lehtonen, Alla Yurova, Rose Abramoff, Bertrand Guenet, Elisa Bruni, Samuli Launiainen, Mikko Peltoniemi, Shoji Hashimoto, Xianglin Tian, Juha Heikkinen, Kari Minkkinen, and Raisa Mäkipää
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5349–5367, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5349-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5349-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Updating the Yasso07 soil C model's dependency on decomposition with a hump-shaped Ricker moisture function improved modelled soil organic C (SOC) stocks in a catena of mineral and organic soils in boreal forest. The Ricker function, set to peak at a rate of 1 and calibrated against SOC and CO2 data using a Bayesian approach, showed a maximum in well-drained soils. Using SOC and CO2 data together with the moisture only from the topsoil humus was crucial for accurate model estimates.
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.
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.
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...
