Articles | Volume 17, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1349-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1349-2024
Model evaluation paper
 | 
15 Feb 2024
Model evaluation paper |  | 15 Feb 2024

Evaluation and optimisation of the soil carbon turnover routine in the MONICA model (version 3.3.1)

Konstantin Aiteew, Jarno Rouhiainen, Claas Nendel, and René Dechow

Related authors

Nitrate and Water Isotopes as Tools to Resolve Nitrate Transit Times in a Mixed Land Use Catchment
Christina Franziska Radtke, Xiaoqiang Yang, Christin Müller, Jarno Rouhiainen, Ralf Merz, Stefanie R. Lutz, Paolo Benettin, Hong Wei, and Kay Knöller
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-109,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-109, 2024
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Drought Research Exhibits Shifting Priorities, Trends and Geographic Patterns
Roland Baatz, Gohar Ghazaryan, Michael Hagenlocher, Claas Nendel, Andrea Toreti, and Ehsan Eyshi Rezaei
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1069,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1069, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of denitrification and decomposition from three biogeochemical models using laboratory measurements of N2, N2O and CO2
Balázs Grosz, Reinhard Well, Rene Dechow, Jan Reent Köster, Mohammad Ibrahim Khalil, Simone Merl, Andreas Rode, Bianca Ziehmer, Amanda Matson, and Hongxing He
Biogeosciences, 18, 5681–5697, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5681-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5681-2021, 2021
Short summary
Using Shapley additive explanations to interpret extreme gradient boosting predictions of grassland degradation in Xilingol, China
Batunacun, Ralf Wieland, Tobia Lakes, and Claas Nendel
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1493–1510, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1493-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1493-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
Implementing detailed nucleation predictions in the Earth system model EC-Earth3.3.4: sulfuric acid–ammonia nucleation
Carl Svenhag, Moa K. Sporre, Tinja Olenius, Daniel Yazgi, Sara M. Blichner, Lars P. Nieradzik, and Pontus Roldin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4923–4942, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4923-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4923-2024, 2024
Short summary
Modeling biochar effects on soil organic carbon on croplands in a microbial decomposition model (MIMICS-BC_v1.0)
Mengjie Han, Qing Zhao, Xili Wang, Ying-Ping Wang, Philippe Ciais, Haicheng Zhang, Daniel S. Goll, Lei Zhu, Zhe Zhao, Zhixuan Guo, Chen Wang, Wei Zhuang, Fengchang Wu, and Wei Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4871–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4871-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4871-2024, 2024
Short summary
Hector V3.2.0: functionality and performance of a reduced-complexity climate model
Kalyn Dorheim, Skylar Gering, Robert Gieseke, Corinne Hartin, Leeya Pressburger, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Steven J. Smith, Claudia Tebaldi, Dawn L. Woodard, and Ben Bond-Lamberty
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4855–4869, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of CMIP6 model simulations of PM2.5 and its components over China
Fangxuan Ren, Jintai Lin, Chenghao Xu, Jamiu A. Adeniran, Jingxu Wang, Randall V. Martin, Aaron van Donkelaar, Melanie S. Hammer, Larry W. Horowitz, Steven T. Turnock, Naga Oshima, Jie Zhang, Susanne Bauer, Kostas Tsigaridis, Øyvind Seland, Pierre Nabat, David Neubauer, Gary Strand, Twan van Noije, Philippe Le Sager, and Toshihiko Takemura
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4821–4836, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4821-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4821-2024, 2024
Short summary
Assessment of a tiling energy budget approach in a land surface model, ORCHIDEE-MICT (r8205)
Yi Xi, Chunjing Qiu, Yuan Zhang, Dan Zhu, Shushi Peng, Gustaf Hugelius, Jinfeng Chang, Elodie Salmon, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4727–4754, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4727-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4727-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Abrahamsen, P. and Hansen, S.: Daisy: an open soil-crop-atmosphere system model, Environ. Model. Softw., 15, 313–330, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-8152(00)00003-7, 2000. 
Agumas, B., Blagodatsky, S., Balume, I., Musyoki, M. K., Marhan, S., and Rasche, F.: Microbial carbon use efficiency during plant residue decomposition: Integrating multi-enzyme stoichiometry and C balance approach, Appl. Soil Ecol., 159, 103820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103820, 2021. 
Aiteew, K., Rouhiainen, J., Nendel, C., and Dechow, R.: Evaluation and optimisation of the soil carbon turnover routine in the MONICA model (version 3.3.1) (3.3.1), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8380341, 2023a. 
Aiteew, K., Rouhiainen, J., Nendel, C., and Dechow, R.: Evaluation and optimisation of the soil carbon turnover routine in the MONICA model (version 3.3.1) – MONICA model source code and data, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8380332, 2023b. 
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., and Smith, M.: Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56, Fao, Rome, 300, D05109, M-56, ISBN 92-5-104219-5, 1998. 
Download
Short summary
This study evaluated the biogeochemical model MONICA and its performance in simulating soil organic carbon changes. MONICA can reproduce plant growth, carbon and nitrogen dynamics, soil water and temperature. The model results were compared with five established carbon turnover models. With the exception of certain sites, adequate reproduction of soil organic carbon stock change rates was achieved. The MONICA model was capable of performing similar to or even better than the other models.