Articles | Volume 18, issue 18
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6597-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-18-6597-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model evaluation paper
| 
29 Sep 2025
Model evaluation paper |
| 29 Sep 2025
| 29 Sep 2025
Impact of topography and meteorological forcing on snow simulation in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme Including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC)
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Lawrence Mudryk
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Joe R. Melton
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, BC, Canada
Colleen Mortimer
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Jason Cole
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, BC, Canada
Gesa Meyer
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Victoria, BC, Canada
Paul Bartlett
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Mickaël Lalande
Centre for Research on Watershed-Aquatic Ecosystem Interactions, Environmental Sciences Department, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
Centre for Northern Studies, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Related authors
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, and Libo Wang
Biogeosciences, 21, 3339–3371, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial biosphere models can either prescribe the geographical distribution of biomes or simulate them dynamically, capturing climate-change-driven biome shifts. We isolate and examine the differences between these different land cover implementations. We find that the simulated terrestrial carbon sink at the end of the 21st century is twice as large in simulations with dynamic land cover than in simulations with prescribed land cover due to important range shifts in the Arctic and Amazon.
Michael Sigmond, James Anstey, Vivek Arora, Ruth Digby, Nathan Gillett, Viatcheslav Kharin, William Merryfield, Catherine Reader, John Scinocca, Neil Swart, John Virgin, Carsten Abraham, Jason Cole, Nicolas Lambert, Woo-Sung Lee, Yongxiao Liang, Elizaveta Malinina, Landon Rieger, Knut von Salzen, Christian Seiler, Clint Seinen, Andrew Shao, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Libo Wang, and Duo Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6553–6591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new activity which aims to organize the analysis of biases in the Canadian Earth System model (CanESM) in a systematic manner. Results of this “Analysis for Development” (A4D) activity includes a new CanESM version, CanESM5.1, which features substantial improvements regarding the simulation of dust and stratospheric temperatures, a second CanESM5.1 variant with reduced climate sensitivity, and insights into potential avenues to reduce various other model biases.
Libo Wang, Vivek K. Arora, Paul Bartlett, Ed Chan, and Salvatore R. Curasi
Biogeosciences, 20, 2265–2282, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Plant functional types (PFTs) are groups of plant species used to represent vegetation distribution in land surface models. There are large uncertainties associated with existing methods for mapping land cover datasets to PFTs. This study demonstrates how fine-resolution tree cover fraction and land cover datasets can be used to inform the PFT mapping process and reduce the uncertainties. The proposed largely objective method makes it easier to implement new land cover products in models.
Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Libo Wang, and Sian Kou-Giesbrecht
Biogeosciences, 20, 1313–1355, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The behaviour of natural systems is now very often represented through mathematical models. These models represent our understanding of how nature works. Of course, nature does not care about our understanding. Since our understanding is not perfect, evaluating models is challenging, and there are uncertainties. This paper illustrates this uncertainty for land models and argues that evaluating models in light of the uncertainty in various components provides useful information.
Christian Seiler, Joe R. Melton, Vivek K. Arora, and Libo Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2371–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates how well the CLASSIC land surface model reproduces the energy, water, and carbon cycle when compared against a wide range of global observations. Special attention is paid to how uncertainties in the data used to drive and evaluate the model affect model skill. Our results show the importance of incorporating uncertainties when evaluating land surface models and that failing to do so may potentially misguide future model development.
Richard Essery, Hyungjun Kim, Libo Wang, Paul Bartlett, Aaron Boone, Claire Brutel-Vuilmet, Eleanor Burke, Matthias Cuntz, Bertrand Decharme, Emanuel Dutra, Xing Fang, Yeugeniy Gusev, Stefan Hagemann, Vanessa Haverd, Anna Kontu, Gerhard Krinner, Matthieu Lafaysse, Yves Lejeune, Thomas Marke, Danny Marks, Christoph Marty, Cecile B. Menard, Olga Nasonova, Tomoko Nitta, John Pomeroy, Gerd Schädler, Vladimir Semenov, Tatiana Smirnova, Sean Swenson, Dmitry Turkov, Nander Wever, and Hua Yuan
The Cryosphere, 14, 4687–4698, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4687-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4687-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models are uncertain in predicting how warming changes snow cover. This paper compares 22 snow models with the same meteorological inputs. Predicted trends agree with observations at four snow research sites: winter snow cover does not start later, but snow now melts earlier in spring than in the 1980s at two of the sites. Cold regions where snow can last until late summer are predicted to be particularly sensitive to warming because the snow then melts faster at warmer times of year.
Jade Skye, Joe R. Melton, Colin Goldblatt, Louis Saumier, Angela Gallego-Sala, Michelle Garneau, R. Scott Winton, Erick B. Bahati, Juan C. Benavides, Lee Fedorchuk, Gérard Imani, Carol Kagaba, Frank Kansiime, Mariusz Lamentowicz, Michel Mbasi, Daria Wochal, Sambor Czerwiński, Jacek Landowski, Joanna Landowska, Vincent Maire, Minna M. Väliranta, Matthew Warren, Lydia E. S. Cole, Marissa A. Davies, Erik A. Lilleskov, Jingjing Sun, and Yuwan Wang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-432, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Peatlands are large stores of carbon but are vulnerable to human activities and climate change. Comprehensive peatland data are vital to understand these ecosystems, but existing datasets are fragmented and contain errors. To address this, we created Peat-DBase — a standardized global database of peat depth measurements with > 200,000 measurements worldwide, showing average depths of 144 cm. Peat-DBase avoids overlapping data compilation efforts while identifying critical observational gaps.
Colleen Mortimer and Vincent Vionnet
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 3619–3640, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3619-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3619-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In situ observations of snow water equivalent (SWE) are critical for climate applications and resource management. NorSWE is a dataset of in situ SWE observations covering North America, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, Russia, and Nepal over the period 1979–2021. It includes more than 11.5 million observations from more than 10 000 different locations compiled from nine different sources. Snow depth and derived bulk snow density are included when available.
Yue Li, Gang Tang, Eleanor O’Rourke, Samar Minallah, Martim Mas e Braga, Sophie Nowicki, Robin S. Smith, David M. Lawrence, George C. Hurtt, Daniele Peano, Gesa Meyer, Birgit Hassler, Jiafu Mao, Yongkang Xue, and Martin Juckes
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3207, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3207, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Land and Land Ice Theme Opportunities describe a list that contains 25 variable groups with 716 variables, which are potentially available to the broad scientific audience for performing analysis in land-atmosphere coupling, hydrological processes and freshwater systems, glacier and ice sheet mass balance and their influence on the sea levels, land use, and plant phenology.
Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole, Najda Villefranque, Zhipeng Qu, Almudena Velázquez Blázquez, Carlos Domenech, Shannon L. Mason, and Robin J. Hogan
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 3095–3107, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3095-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3095-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Measurements made by three instruments aboard EarthCARE are used to retrieve estimates of cloud and aerosol properties. A radiative closure assessment of these retrievals is performed by the ACMB-DF processor. Radiative transfer models acting on retrieved information produce broadband radiances commensurate with measurements made by EarthCARE’s broadband radiometer. Measured and modelled radiances for small domains are compared, and the likelihood of them differing by 10 W m2 defines the closure.
Hanyu Liu, Felix R. Vogel, Misa Ishizawa, Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Doug E. J. Worthy, Leyang Feng, Anna L. Gagné-Landmann, Ao Chen, Ziting Huang, Dylan C. Gaeta, Joe R. Melton, Douglas Chan, Vineet Yadav, Deborah Huntzinger, and Scot M. Miller
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2150, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We find that the state-of-the-art process-based methane flux models have both lower flux magnitude and reduced inter-model uncertainty compared to a previous model inter-comparison from over a decade ago. Despite these improvements, methane flux estimates from process-based models are still likely too high compared to atmospheric observations. We also find that models with simpler parameterizations often result in better agreement with atmospheric observations in high-latitude North America.
Haorui Sun, Yiwen Fang, Steven A. Margulis, Colleen Mortimer, Lawrence Mudryk, and Chris Derksen
The Cryosphere, 19, 2017–2036, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-2017-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-2017-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The European Space Agency's Snow Climate Change Initiative (Snow CCI) developed a high-quality snow cover extent and snow water equivalent (SWE) climate data record. However, gaps exist in complex terrain due to challenges in using passive microwave sensing and in situ measurements. This study presents a methodology to fill the mountain SWE gap using Snow CCI snow cover fraction within a Bayesian SWE reanalysis framework, with potential applications in untested regions and with other sensors.
Konstantin Gregor, Benjamin F. Meyer, Tillmann Gaida, Victor Justo Vasquez, Karina Bett-Williams, Matthew Forrest, João P. Darela-Filho, Sam Rabin, Marcos Longo, Joe R. Melton, Johan Nord, Peter Anthoni, Vladislav Bastrikov, Thomas Colligan, Christine Delire, Michael C. Dietze, George Hurtt, Akihiko Ito, Lasse T. Keetz, Jürgen Knauer, Johannes Köster, Tzu-Shun Lin, Lei Ma, Marie Minvielle, Stefan Olin, Sebastian Ostberg, Hao Shi, Reiner Schnur, Urs Schönenberger, Qing Sun, Peter E. Thornton, and Anja Rammig
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1733, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Geoscientific models are crucial for understanding Earth’s processes. However, they sometimes do not adhere to highest software quality standards, and scientific results are often hard to reproduce due to the complexity of the workflows. Here we gather the expertise of 20 modeling groups and software engineers to define best practices for making geoscientific models maintainable, usable, and reproducible. We conclude with an open-source example serving as a reference for modeling communities.
Marielle Saunois, Adrien Martinez, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, Peter A. Raymond, Pierre Regnier, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Bousquet, Philippe Ciais, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Xin Lan, George H. Allen, David Bastviken, David J. Beerling, Dmitry A. Belikov, Donald R. Blake, Simona Castaldi, Monica Crippa, Bridget R. Deemer, Fraser Dennison, Giuseppe Etiope, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Meredith A. Holgerson, Peter O. Hopcroft, Gustaf Hugelius, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Rajesh Janardanan, Matthew S. Johnson, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ronny Lauerwald, Tingting Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe R. Melton, Jens Mühle, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Shufen Pan, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Gerard Rocher-Ros, Judith A. Rosentreter, Motoki Sasakawa, Arjo Segers, Steven J. Smith, Emily H. Stanley, Joël Thanwerdas, Hanqin Tian, Aki Tsuruta, Francesco N. Tubiello, Thomas S. Weber, Guido R. van der Werf, Douglas E. J. Worthy, Yi Xi, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1873–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1873-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2). A consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists synthesise and update the budget of the sources and sinks of CH4. This edition benefits from important progress in estimating emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. For the 2010s decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated at 575 Tg CH4 yr-1, including ~65 % from anthropogenic sources.
Pinja Venäläinen, Colleen Mortimer, Kari Luojus, Lawrence Mudryk, Matias Takala, and Jouni Pulliainen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3643, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3643, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite data-based estimation of large SWE values can be improved with bias correction. This study updates the bias correction method by using updated snow course data, extending correction to two new months. Additionally, bias correction is expanded from a monthly to a daily time scale. The daily bias correction offers more accurate hemispheric snow mass estimation, aligning well with reanalysis data.
Lawrence Mudryk, Colleen Mortimer, Chris Derksen, Aleksandra Elias Chereque, and Paul Kushner
The Cryosphere, 19, 201–218, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-201-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-201-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate and rank 23 different datasets on their ability to accurately estimate historical snow amounts. The evaluation uses new a set of surface snow measurements with improved spatial coverage, enabling evaluation across both mountainous and nonmountainous regions. Performance measures vary tremendously across the products: while most perform reasonably in nonmountainous regions, accurate representation of snow amounts in mountainous regions and of historical trends is much more variable.
Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Joe R. Melton, William J. Riley, George H. Allen, David J. Beerling, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Philippe Ciais, Nicola Gedney, Peter O. Hopcroft, Akihiko Ito, Robert B. Jackson, Atul K. Jain, Katherine Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Sara H. Knox, Tingting Li, Xin Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle McDonald, Gavin McNicol, Paul A. Miller, Jurek Müller, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Zhangcai Qin, Ryan M. Riggs, Marielle Saunois, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Xiaoming Xu, Yuanzhi Yao, Yi Xi, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Biogeosciences, 22, 305–321, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-305-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses global methane emissions from wetlands between 2000 and 2020 using multiple models. We found that wetland emissions increased by 6–7 Tg CH4 yr-1 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s. Rising temperatures primarily drove this increase, while changes in precipitation and CO2 levels also played roles. Our findings highlight the importance of wetlands in the global methane budget and the need for continuous monitoring to understand their impact on climate change.
Colleen Mortimer, Lawrence Mudryk, Eunsang Cho, Chris Derksen, Mike Brady, and Carrie Vuyovich
The Cryosphere, 18, 5619–5639, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5619-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5619-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ground measurements of snow water equivalent (SWE) are vital for understanding the accuracy of large-scale estimates from satellites and climate models. We compare two types of measurements – snow courses and airborne gamma SWE estimates – and analyze how measurement type impacts the accuracy assessment of gridded SWE products. We use this analysis to produce a combined reference SWE dataset for North America, applicable for future gridded SWE product evaluations and other applications.
Aleksandra Elias Chereque, Paul J. Kushner, Lawrence Mudryk, Chris Derksen, and Colleen Mortimer
The Cryosphere, 18, 4955–4969, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4955-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4955-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We look at three commonly used snow depth datasets that are produced through a combination of snow modelling and historical measurements (reanalysis). When compared with each other, these datasets have differences that arise for various reasons. We show that a simple snow model can be used to examine these inconsistencies and highlight issues. This method indicates that one of the complex datasets should be excluded from further studies.
Cynthia Whaley, Montana Etten-Bohm, Courtney Schumacher, Ayodeji Akingunola, Vivek Arora, Jason Cole, Michael Lazare, David Plummer, Knut von Salzen, and Barbara Winter
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7141–7155, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes how lightning was added as a process in the Canadian Earth System Model in order to interactively respond to climate changes. As lightning is an important cause of global wildfires, this new model development allows for more realistic projections of how wildfires may change in the future, responding to a changing climate.
Misa Ishizawa, Douglas Chan, Doug Worthy, Elton Chan, Felix Vogel, Joe R. Melton, and Vivek K. Arora
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10013–10038, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10013-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) emissions in Canada for 2007–2017 were estimated using Canada’s surface greenhouse gas measurements. The estimated emissions show no significant trend, but emission uncertainty was reduced as more measurement sites became available. Notably for climate change, we find the wetland CH4 emissions show a positive correlation with surface air temperature in summer. Canada’s measurement network could monitor future CH4 emission changes and compliance with climate change mitigation goals.
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, and Libo Wang
Biogeosciences, 21, 3339–3371, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3339-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial biosphere models can either prescribe the geographical distribution of biomes or simulate them dynamically, capturing climate-change-driven biome shifts. We isolate and examine the differences between these different land cover implementations. We find that the simulated terrestrial carbon sink at the end of the 21st century is twice as large in simulations with dynamic land cover than in simulations with prescribed land cover due to important range shifts in the Arctic and Amazon.
Salvatore R. Curasi, Joe R. Melton, Elyn R. Humphreys, Txomin Hermosilla, and Michael A. Wulder
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2683–2704, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2683-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Canadian forests are responding to fire, harvest, and climate change. Models need to quantify these processes and their carbon and energy cycling impacts. We develop a scheme that, based on satellite records, represents fire, harvest, and the sparsely vegetated areas that these processes generate. We evaluate model performance and demonstrate the impacts of disturbance on carbon and energy cycling. This work has implications for land surface modeling and assessing Canada’s terrestrial C cycle.
Victoria R. Dutch, Nick Rutter, Leanne Wake, Oliver Sonnentag, Gabriel Hould Gosselin, Melody Sandells, Chris Derksen, Branden Walker, Gesa Meyer, Richard Essery, Richard Kelly, Phillip Marsh, Julia Boike, and Matteo Detto
Biogeosciences, 21, 825–841, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-825-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-825-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We undertake a sensitivity study of three different parameters on the simulation of net ecosystem exchange (NEE) during the snow-covered non-growing season at an Arctic tundra site. Simulations are compared to eddy covariance measurements, with near-zero NEE simulated despite observed CO2 release. We then consider how to parameterise the model better in Arctic tundra environments on both sub-seasonal timescales and cumulatively throughout the snow-covered non-growing season.
Shannon L. Mason, Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole, Nicole Docter, David P. Donovan, Robin J. Hogan, Anja Hünerbein, Pavlos Kollias, Bernat Puigdomènech Treserras, Zhipeng Qu, Ulla Wandinger, and Gerd-Jan van Zadelhoff
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 875–898, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-875-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-875-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
When the EarthCARE mission enters its operational phase, many retrieval data products will be available, which will overlap both in terms of the measurements they use and the geophysical quantities they report. In this pre-launch study, we use simulated EarthCARE scenes to compare the coverage and performance of many data products from the European Space Agency production model, with the intention of better understanding the relation between products and providing a compact guide to users.
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.
Mickaël Lalande, Martin Ménégoz, Gerhard Krinner, Catherine Ottlé, and Frédérique Cheruy
The Cryosphere, 17, 5095–5130, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5095-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5095-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the impact of topography on snow cover parameterizations using models and observations. Parameterizations without topography-based considerations overestimate snow cover. Incorporating topography reduces snow overestimation by 5–10 % in mountains, in turn reducing cold biases. However, some biases remain, requiring further calibration and more data. Assessing snow cover parameterizations is challenging due to limited and uncertain data in mountainous regions.
Michael Sigmond, James Anstey, Vivek Arora, Ruth Digby, Nathan Gillett, Viatcheslav Kharin, William Merryfield, Catherine Reader, John Scinocca, Neil Swart, John Virgin, Carsten Abraham, Jason Cole, Nicolas Lambert, Woo-Sung Lee, Yongxiao Liang, Elizaveta Malinina, Landon Rieger, Knut von Salzen, Christian Seiler, Clint Seinen, Andrew Shao, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Libo Wang, and Duo Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6553–6591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new activity which aims to organize the analysis of biases in the Canadian Earth System model (CanESM) in a systematic manner. Results of this “Analysis for Development” (A4D) activity includes a new CanESM version, CanESM5.1, which features substantial improvements regarding the simulation of dust and stratospheric temperatures, a second CanESM5.1 variant with reduced climate sensitivity, and insights into potential avenues to reduce various other model biases.
Zhipeng Qu, David P. Donovan, Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole, Mark W. Shephard, and Vincent Huijnen
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 4927–4946, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4927-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4927-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The EarthCARE satellite mission Level 2 algorithm development requires realistic 3D cloud and aerosol scenes along the satellite orbits. One of the best ways to produce these scenes is to use a high-resolution numerical weather prediction model to simulate atmospheric conditions at 250 m horizontal resolution. This paper describes the production and validation of three EarthCARE test scenes.
Jason N. S. Cole, Howard W. Barker, Zhipeng Qu, Najda Villefranque, and Mark W. Shephard
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 4271–4288, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4271-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4271-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Measurements from the EarthCARE satellite mission will be used to retrieve profiles of cloud and aerosol properties. These retrievals are combined with auxiliary information about surface properties and atmospheric state, e.g., temperature and water vapor. This information allows computation of 1D and 3D solar and thermal radiative transfer for small domains, which are compared with coincident radiometer observations to continually assess EarthCARE retrievals.
Jason Neil Steven Cole, Knut von Salzen, Jiangnan Li, John Scinocca, David Plummer, Vivek Arora, Norman McFarlane, Michael Lazare, Murray MacKay, and Diana Verseghy
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5427–5448, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Canadian Atmospheric Model version 5 (CanAM5) is used to simulate on a global scale the climate of Earth's atmosphere, land, and lakes. We document changes to the physics in CanAM5 since the last major version of the model (CanAM4) and evaluate the climate simulated relative to observations and CanAM4. The climate simulated by CanAM5 is similar to CanAM4, but there are improvements, including better simulation of temperature and precipitation over the Amazon and better simulation of cloud.
Bo Qu, Alexandre Roy, Joe R. Melton, Jennifer L. Baltzer, Youngryel Ryu, Matteo Detto, and Oliver Sonnentag
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1167, 2023
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Accurately simulating photosynthesis and evapotranspiration challenges terrestrial biosphere models across North America’s boreal biome, in part due to uncertain representation of the maximum rate of photosynthetic carboxylation (Vcmax). This study used forest stand scale observations in an optimization framework to improve Vcmax values for representative vegetation types. Several stand characteristics well explained spatial Vcmax variability and were useful to improve boreal forest modelling.
Libo Wang, Vivek K. Arora, Paul Bartlett, Ed Chan, and Salvatore R. Curasi
Biogeosciences, 20, 2265–2282, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Plant functional types (PFTs) are groups of plant species used to represent vegetation distribution in land surface models. There are large uncertainties associated with existing methods for mapping land cover datasets to PFTs. This study demonstrates how fine-resolution tree cover fraction and land cover datasets can be used to inform the PFT mapping process and reduce the uncertainties. The proposed largely objective method makes it easier to implement new land cover products in models.
Zhipeng Qu, Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole, and Mark W. Shephard
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 2319–2331, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2319-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2319-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes EarthCARE’s L2 product ACM-3D. It includes the scene construction algorithm (SCA) used to produce the indexes for reconstructing 3D atmospheric scene based on satellite nadir retrievals. It also provides the information about the buffer zone sizes of 3D assessment domains and the ranking scores for selecting the best 3D assessment domains. These output variables are needed to run 3D radiative transfer models for the radiative closure assessment of EarthCARE’s L2 retrievals.
Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Libo Wang, and Sian Kou-Giesbrecht
Biogeosciences, 20, 1313–1355, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The behaviour of natural systems is now very often represented through mathematical models. These models represent our understanding of how nature works. Of course, nature does not care about our understanding. Since our understanding is not perfect, evaluating models is challenging, and there are uncertainties. This paper illustrates this uncertainty for land models and argues that evaluating models in light of the uncertainty in various components provides useful information.
Chris Derksen and Lawrence Mudryk
The Cryosphere, 17, 1431–1443, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-1431-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-1431-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We examine Arctic snow cover trends through the lens of climate assessments. We determine the sensitivity of change in snow cover extent to year-over-year increases in time series length, reference period, the use of a statistical methodology to improve inter-dataset agreement, version changes in snow products, and snow product ensemble size. By identifying the sensitivity to the range of choices available to investigators, we increase confidence in reported Arctic snow extent changes.
Pinja Venäläinen, Kari Luojus, Colleen Mortimer, Juha Lemmetyinen, Jouni Pulliainen, Matias Takala, Mikko Moisander, and Lina Zschenderlein
The Cryosphere, 17, 719–736, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-719-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-719-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Snow water equivalent (SWE) is a valuable characteristic of snow cover. In this research, we improve the radiometer-based GlobSnow SWE retrieval methodology by implementing spatially and temporally varying snow densities into the retrieval procedure. In addition to improving the accuracy of SWE retrieval, varying snow densities were found to improve the magnitude and seasonal evolution of the Northern Hemisphere snow mass estimate compared to the baseline product.
Joe R. Melton, Ed Chan, Koreen Millard, Matthew Fortier, R. Scott Winton, Javier M. Martín-López, Hinsby Cadillo-Quiroz, Darren Kidd, and Louis V. Verchot
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4709–4738, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4709-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Peat-ML is a high-resolution global peatland extent map generated using machine learning techniques. Peatlands are important in the global carbon and water cycles, but their extent is poorly known. We generated Peat-ML using drivers of peatland formation including climate, soil, geomorphology, and vegetation data, and we train the model with regional peatland maps. Our accuracy estimation approaches suggest Peat-ML is of similar or higher quality than other available peatland mapping products.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Rob B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Laurent Bopp, Thi Tuyet Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Kim I. Currie, Bertrand Decharme, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Wiley Evans, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Thomas Gasser, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Atul Jain, Steve D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Junjie Liu, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Clemens Schwingshackl, Roland Séférian, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2021 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Mickaël Lalande, Martin Ménégoz, Gerhard Krinner, Kathrin Naegeli, and Stefan Wunderle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1061–1098, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1061-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1061-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change over High Mountain Asia is investigated with CMIP6 climate models. A general cold bias is found in this area, often related to a snow cover overestimation in the models. Ensemble experiments generally encompass the past observed trends, suggesting that even biased models can reproduce the trends. Depending on the future scenario, a warming from 1.9 to 6.5 °C, associated with a snow cover decrease and precipitation increase, is expected at the end of the 21st century.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Andrew J. Pitman, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Anthony P. Walker, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 5639–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Australian continent is included in global assessments of the carbon cycle such as the global carbon budget, yet the performance of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) over Australia has rarely been evaluated. We assessed simulations by an ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models over Australia and highlighted a number of key areas that lead to model divergence on both short (inter-annual) and long (decadal) timescales.
Claude-Michel Nzotungicimpaye, Kirsten Zickfeld, Andrew H. MacDougall, Joe R. Melton, Claire C. Treat, Michael Eby, and Lance F. W. Lesack
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6215–6240, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6215-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we describe a new wetland methane model (WETMETH) developed for use in Earth system models. WETMETH consists of simple formulations to represent methane production and oxidation in wetlands. We also present an evaluation of the model performance as embedded in the University of Victoria Earth System Climate Model (UVic ESCM). WETMETH is capable of reproducing mean annual methane emissions consistent with present-day estimates from the regional to the global scale.
Vincent Vionnet, Colleen Mortimer, Mike Brady, Louise Arnal, and Ross Brown
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4603-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4603-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Water equivalent of snow cover (SWE) is a key variable for water management, hydrological forecasting and climate monitoring. A new Canadian SWE dataset (CanSWE) is presented in this paper. It compiles data collected by multiple agencies and companies at more than 2500 different locations across Canada over the period 1928–2020. Snow depth and derived bulk snow density are also included when available.
Gesa Meyer, Elyn R. Humphreys, Joe R. Melton, Alex J. Cannon, and Peter M. Lafleur
Biogeosciences, 18, 3263–3283, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3263-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Shrub and sedge plant functional types (PFTs) were incorporated in the land surface component of the Canadian Earth System Model to improve representation of Arctic tundra ecosystems. Evaluated against 14 years of non-winter measurements, the magnitude and seasonality of carbon dioxide and energy fluxes at a Canadian dwarf-shrub tundra site were better captured by the shrub PFTs than by previously used grass and tree PFTs. Model simulations showed the tundra site to be an annual net CO2 source.
Wolfgang A. Obermeier, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Tammas Loughran, Kerstin Hartung, Ana Bastos, Felix Havermann, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Daniel S. Goll, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Benjamin Poulter, Stephen Sitch, Michael O. Sullivan, Hanqin Tian, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Soenke Zaehle, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 635–670, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first spatio-temporally explicit comparison of different model-derived fluxes from land use and land cover changes (fLULCCs) by using the TRENDY v8 dynamic global vegetation models used in the 2019 global carbon budget. We find huge regional fLULCC differences resulting from environmental assumptions, simulated periods, and the timing of land use and land cover changes, and we argue for a method consistent across time and space and for carefully choosing the accounting period.
Zichong Chen, Junjie Liu, Daven K. Henze, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Kelley C. Wells, Stephen Sitch, Pierre Friedlingstein, Emilie Joetzjer, Vladislav Bastrikov, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Benjamin Poulter, Hanqin Tian, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Scot M. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6663–6680, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) satellite observes atmospheric CO2 globally. We use a multiple regression and inverse model to quantify the relationships between OCO-2 and environmental drivers within individual years for 2015–2018 and within seven global biomes. Our results point to limitations of current space-based observations for inferring environmental relationships but also indicate the potential to inform key relationships that are very uncertain in process-based models.
Christian Seiler, Joe R. Melton, Vivek K. Arora, and Libo Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2371–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates how well the CLASSIC land surface model reproduces the energy, water, and carbon cycle when compared against a wide range of global observations. Special attention is paid to how uncertainties in the data used to drive and evaluate the model affect model skill. Our results show the importance of incorporating uncertainties when evaluating land surface models and that failing to do so may potentially misguide future model development.
Rhae Sung Kim, Sujay Kumar, Carrie Vuyovich, Paul Houser, Jessica Lundquist, Lawrence Mudryk, Michael Durand, Ana Barros, Edward J. Kim, Barton A. Forman, Ethan D. Gutmann, Melissa L. Wrzesien, Camille Garnaud, Melody Sandells, Hans-Peter Marshall, Nicoleta Cristea, Justin M. Pflug, Jeremy Johnston, Yueqian Cao, David Mocko, and Shugong Wang
The Cryosphere, 15, 771–791, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
High SWE uncertainty is observed in mountainous and forested regions, highlighting the need for high-resolution snow observations in these regions. Substantial uncertainty in snow water storage in Tundra regions and the dominance of water storage in these regions points to the need for high-accuracy snow estimation. Finally, snow measurements during the melt season are most needed at high latitudes, whereas observations at near peak snow accumulations are most beneficial over the midlatitudes.
Richard Essery, Hyungjun Kim, Libo Wang, Paul Bartlett, Aaron Boone, Claire Brutel-Vuilmet, Eleanor Burke, Matthias Cuntz, Bertrand Decharme, Emanuel Dutra, Xing Fang, Yeugeniy Gusev, Stefan Hagemann, Vanessa Haverd, Anna Kontu, Gerhard Krinner, Matthieu Lafaysse, Yves Lejeune, Thomas Marke, Danny Marks, Christoph Marty, Cecile B. Menard, Olga Nasonova, Tomoko Nitta, John Pomeroy, Gerd Schädler, Vladimir Semenov, Tatiana Smirnova, Sean Swenson, Dmitry Turkov, Nander Wever, and Hua Yuan
The Cryosphere, 14, 4687–4698, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4687-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-4687-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models are uncertain in predicting how warming changes snow cover. This paper compares 22 snow models with the same meteorological inputs. Predicted trends agree with observations at four snow research sites: winter snow cover does not start later, but snow now melts earlier in spring than in the 1980s at two of the sites. Cold regions where snow can last until late summer are predicted to be particularly sensitive to warming because the snow then melts faster at warmer times of year.
Cited articles
Abolafia-Rosenzweig, R., He, C., Chen, F., and Barlage, M.: Evaluating and enhancing snow compaction process in the Noah-MP land surface model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 16, e2023MS003869, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023MS003869, 2024.
Adler, R. F., Huffman, G. J., Chang, A., Ferraro, R., Xie, P., Janowiak, J., Rudolf, B., Schneider, U., Curtis, S., Bolvin, D., Gruber, A., Susskind, J., Arkin, P., and Nelkin, E.: The Version-2 Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Monthly Precipitation Analysis (1979–Present), J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 1147–1167, https://doi.org/10.1175/1525-7541(2003)004%3C1147:TVGPCP%3E2.0.CO;2, 2003.
Amante, C. and Eakins, B. W.: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model: Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis, NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-24, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA, https://doi.org/10.7289/V5C8276M, 2009.
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: A parameterization of leaf phenology for the terrestrial ecosystem component of climate models, Glob. Change Biol., 11, 39–59, 2005.
Arora, V. K., Scinocca, J. F., Boer, G. J., Christian, J. R., Denman, K. L., Flato, G. M., Kharin, V. V., Lee, W. G., and Merryfield, W. J.: Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L05805, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046270, 2011.
Bailey, W. G., Saunders, I. R., Bowers, J. D., and Verseghy, D. L.: Application of the Canadian land surface scheme to a full canopy crop during a drying cycle, Atmos.-Ocean, 38, 57–80, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2000.9649640, 2000.
Bair, E. H., Dozier, J., Stern, C., LeWinter, A., Rittger, K., Savagian, A., Stillinger, T., and Davis, R. E.: Divergence of apparent and intrinsic snow albedo over a season at a sub-alpine site with implications for remote sensing, The Cryosphere, 16, 1765–1778, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-1765-2022, 2022.
Bartlett, P. A., MacKay, M. D., and Verseghy, D. L.: Modified snow algorithms in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme:Model runs and sensitivity analysis at three boreal forest stands. Atmos.-Ocean, 44, 207–222, https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.440301, 2006.
Betts, A. K., Viterbo, P., Beljaars, A., Pan, H. L., Hong, S. Y., Goulden, M., and Wofsy, S: Evaluation of land-surface interaction in ECMWF and NCEP/NCAR reanalysis models over grassland (FIFE) and boreal forest (BOREAS), J. Geophys. Res., 103, 23079–23085, https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD02023, 1998.
Bolch, T., Shea, J. M., Liu, S., Azam, F. M., Gao, Y., Gruber, S., Immerzeel, W. W., Kulkarni, A., Li, H., Tahir, A. A., Zhang, G., and Zhang, Y.: Status and Change of the Cryosphere in the Extended Hindu Kush Himalaya Region, in: The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment: Mountainous, Climate Change, Sustainability and People, edited by: Wester, P., Mishra, A., Mukherji, A., and Shrestha, A. B., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 209–255, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1, 2019.
Bonan, G.: A Land Surface Model (LSM Version 1.0) for Ecological, Hydrological, and Atmospheric Studies: Technical Description and User's Guide, NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN- 417+STR, p. 150, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6DF6P5X, 1996.
Brown, R., Brasnett, B., and Robinson, D: Gridded North American monthly snow depth and snow water equivalent for GCM evaluation, Atmos.-Ocean, 41, 1–14, 2003.
Brown, R., Bartlett, P. A., MacKay, M., and Verseghy, D. L.: Evaluation of snow cover in CLASS for SnowMIP, Atmos.-Ocean, 44, 223–238, https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.440302, 2006.
Brown, R., Derksen, C., and Wang, L.: A multi-data set analysis of variability and change in Arctic spring snow cover extent, 1967–2008, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D16111, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD013975, 2010.
Brown, R., Tapsoba, D., and Derksen, C.: Evaluation of snow water equivalent datasets over the Saint-Maurice river basin region of southern Québec, Hydrol. Process., 32, 2748–2764, 2018.
Carroll, T. R.: Airborne Gamma Radiation Snow Survey Program: A user's guide, Version 5.0. National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center (NOHRSC), Chanhassen, 14, https://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/technology/pdf/tom_gamma50.pdf (last access: 18 August 2024), 2001.
Cho, E., Jacobs, J. M., and Vuyovich, C.: The value of longterm (40 years) airborne gamma radiation SWE record for evaluating three observation-based gridded SWE datasets by seasonal snow and land cover classifications, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR025813, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025813, 2019.
Cho, E., Vuyovich, C. M., Kumar, S. V., Wrzesien, M. L., Kim, R. S., and Jacobs, J. M.: Precipitation biases and snow physics limitations drive the uncertainties in macroscale modeled snow water equivalent, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5721–5735, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5721-2022, 2022.
Compo, G. P., Whitaker, J. S., Sardeshmukh, P. D., Matsui, N., Allan, R. J., Yin, X., Gleason, B. E., Vose, R. S., Rutledge, G., Bessemoulin, P., Brönnimann, S., Brunet, M., Crouthamel, R. I., Grant, A. N., Groisman, P. Y., Jones, P. D., Kruk, M. C., Kruger, A. C., Marshall, G. J., Maugeri, M., Mok, H. Y., Nordli, Ø., Ross, T. F., Trigo, R. M., Wang, X. L., Woodruff, S. D., and Worley, S. J.: The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 1–28, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.776, 2011
Cucchi, M., Weedon, G. P., Amici, A., Bellouin, N., Lange, S., Müller Schmied, H., Hersbach, H., and Buontempo, C.: WFDE5: bias-adjusted ERA5 reanalysis data for impact studies, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2097–2120, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2097-2020, 2020.
Dai, A. and Trenberth, K. E.: Estimates of Freshwater Discharge from Continents: Latitudinal and Seasonal Variations, J. Hydrometeorol., 3, 660–687, 2002.
Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J. F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier, A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J. T., García, R. R., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R., Oleson, K. W., Otto-Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S., Kampenhout, L., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C., Fischer, C., Fox-Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J., Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E., Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2), Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916, 2020.
Dickinson, E., Henderson-Sellers, A., and Kennedy, J.: Biosphereatmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) Version 1e as Coupled to the NCAR Community Climate Model (No. NCAR/TN- 387+STR), Tech. Rep. August, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, ISBN NCAR Technical Note, NCAR/TN- 387 + STR, https://doi.org/10.5065/D67W6959, 1993.
Dirmeyer, P. A., Gao, X., Zhao, M., Guo, Z., Oki, T., and Hanasaki, N.: GSWP-2: Multimodel Analysis and Implications for Our Perception of the Land Surface, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 87, 1381–1398, 2006.
Douville, H., Royer, J. F., and Mahfouf, J. F.: A new snow parameterization for the Météo-France climate model, Clim. Dynam., 12, 37–52, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00208761, 1995.
Du, Z. and Qingsong, Z.: Introduction, in: Mountainous Geoecology and Sustainable Development of the Tibetan Plateau, Chap. 1, Springer, Dordrecht, 1–17, ISBN 978-94-010-3800-3, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0965-2_1, 2000.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016.
Fletcher, C. G., Kushner, P. J., Hall, A., and Qu, X.: Circulation responses to snow albedo feedback in climate change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L09702, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038011, 2009.
Frolking, S., Milliman, T., McDonald, K., Kimball, J., Zhao, M., and Fahnestock, M.: Evaluation of the SeaWinds scatterometer for regional monitoring of vegetation phenology, Journal of Geophysical Research, 111, D17302, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006588, 2006.
Ganji, A., Sushama, L., Verseghy, D., and Harvey, R.: On improving cold region hydrological processes in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 127, 45–59, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1618-4, 2015.
Ghiggi, G., Humphrey, V., Seneviratne, S. I., and Gudmundsson, L.: GRUN: an observation-based global gridded runoff dataset from 1902 to 2014, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1655–1674, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1655-2019, 2019.
Hall, D. K., Riggs, G. A., Salomonson, V. V., DiGirolamo, N. E., & Bayr, K. J.: MODIS snow-cover products, Remote Sensing of Environment, 83, 181–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00095-0, 2002.
Hall, D. K. and Riggs, G. A.: MODIS/Terra Snow Cover Monthly L3 Global 0.05Deg CMG, Version 61. [Indicate subset used], Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MOD10CM.061, 2021.
Hao, S., Jiang, L., Shi, J., Wang, G., and Liu, X.: Assessment of MODIS Based Fractional Snow Cover Products Over the Tibetan Plateau, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote, 12, 533–548, 2019.
Harris, I., Osborn, T. J., Jones, P., and Lister, D.: Version 4 of the CRU TS monthly high-resolution gridded multivariate climate dataset, Sci. Data, 7, 109, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0453-3, 2020.
Harris, I. C.: CRU JRA v2.4: A forcings dataset of gridded land surface blend of Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and Japanese reanalysis (JRA) data; Jan. 1901–Dec. 2022, NERC EDS Centre for Environmental Data Analysis [data set], https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/aed8e269513f446fb1b5d2512bb387ad/ (last access: September 2023), 2023.
He, C., Valayamkunnath, P., Barlage, M., Chen, F., Gochis, D., Cabell, R., Schneider, T., Rasmussen, R., Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Niyogi, D., and Ek, M.: The Community Noah-MP Land Surface Modeling System Technical Description Version 5.0. NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-575+STR, https://doi.org/10.5065/ew8g-yr95, 2023.
Helfrich, S. R., McNamara, D., Ramsay, B. H., Baldwin, T., and Kasheta, T.: Enhancements to, and forthcoming developments in the Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System (IMS), Hydrol. Process., 21, 1576–1586, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6720, 2007.
Hengl, T., Mendes de Jesus, J., Heuvelink, G. B. M., Ruiperez Gonzalez, M., Kilibarda, M., Blagotić, A., Shangguan, W., Wright, M. N., Geng, X., Bauer-Marschallinger, B., Guevara, M. A., Vargas, R., MacMillan, R. A., Batjes, N. H., Leenaars, J. G. B., Ribeiro, E., Wheeler, I., Mantel, S., and Kempen, B.: SoilGrids250m: Global gridded soil information based on machine learning, PLOS ONE, 12, 1–40, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169748, 2017
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020.
Hobeichi, S., Abramowitz, G., and Evans, J.: Conserving Land–Atmosphere Synthesis Suite (CLASS), J. Climate, 33, 1821–1844, 2020.
Jennings, K. S., Winchell, T. S., Livneh, B., and Molotch, N. P.: Spatial variation of the rain–snow temperature threshold across the Northern Hemisphere, Nature Communications, 9, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03629-7, 2018.
Jung, M., Koirala, S., Weber, U., Ichii, K., Gans, F., Camps-Valls, G., Papale, D., Schwalm, C., Tramontana, G., and Reichstein, M.: The FLUXCOM ensemble of global land-atmosphere energy fluxes, Scientific Data, 6, 74, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0076-8, 2019.
Kato, S., Loeb, N. G., Rose, F. G., Doelling, D. R., Rutan, D. A., Caldwell, T. E., Yu, L., and Weller, R. A.: Surface Irradiances Consistent with CERES-Derived Top-of-Atmosphere Shortwave and Longwave Irradiances, J. Climate, 26, 2719–2740, 2013.
Kim, H.: Global Soil Wetness Project Phase 3 Atmospheric Boundary Conditions (Experiment 1) Data Integration and Analysis System (DIAS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.20783/DIAS.501, 2017.
Kobayashi, S., Ota, Y., Harada, Y., Ebita, A., Moriya, M., Onoda, H., Onogi, K., Kamahori, H., Kobayashi, C., Endo, H., Miyaoka, K., and Takahashi, K.: The JRA-55 Reanalysis: General Specifications and Basic Characteristics, J. Met. Soc. Jap., 93, 5–48, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2015-001, 2015.
Lalande, M., Ménégoz, M., Krinner, G., Naegeli, K., and Wunderle, S.: Climate change in the High Mountain Asia in CMIP6, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1061–1098, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1061-2021, 2021.
Lalande, M., Ménégoz, M., Krinner, G., Ottlé, C., and Cheruy, F.: Improving climate model skill over High Mountain Asia by adapting snow cover parameterization to complex-topography areas, The Cryosphere, 17, 5095–5130, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5095-2023, 2023.
Lange, S., Menz, C., Gleixner, S., Cucchi, M., Weedon, G. P., Amici, A., Bellouin, N., Müller-Schmied, H., Hersbach, H., Buontempo, C., and Cagnazzo, C.: WFDE5 over land merged with ERA5 over the ocean (W5E5 v2.0), ISIMIP Repository [data set], https://doi.org/10.48364/ISIMIP.342217, 2021.
Lange, S., Mengel, M., Treu, S., and Büchner, M: ISIMIP3a atmospheric climate input data (v1.1), ISIMIP Repository [data set], https://doi.org/10.48364/ISIMIP.982724.1, 2022.
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C., Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., van Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E., Lawrence, P. J., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Riley, W. J., Sacks, W. J., Shi, M., Vertenstein, M., Wieder, W. R., Xu, C., Ali, A. A., Badger, A. M., Bisht, G., van den Broeke, M., Brunke, M. A., Burns, S. P., Buzan, J., Clark, M., Craig, A., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Fisher, J. B., Flanner, M., Fox, A. M., Gentine, P., Hoffman, F., Keppel-Aleks, G., Knox, R., Kumar, S., Lenaerts, J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W. H., Lu, Y., Pandey, A., Pelletier, J. D., Perket, J., Randerson, J. T., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B. M., Slater, A., Subin, Z. M., Tang, J., Thomas, R. Q., Val Martin, M., and Zeng, X.: The Community Land Model version 5: Description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 4245–4287, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ms001583, 2019.
Liston, G. E.: Representing subgrid snow cover heterogeneities in regional and global models, J. Climate, 17, 1381–1397, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<1381:RSSCHI>2.0.CO;2, 2004.
Liu, Y., Fang, Y., and Margulis, S. A.: High Mountainous Asia UCLA Daily Snow Reanalysis, Version 1, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/HNAUGJQXSCVU, 2021a.
Liu, Y., Fang, Y., and Margulis, S. A.: Spatiotemporal distribution of seasonal snow water equivalent in High Mountain Asia from an 18-year Landsat–MODIS era snow reanalysis dataset, The Cryosphere, 15, 5261–5280, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-5261-2021, 2021b.
Liu, Y., Fang, Y., Li, D., and Margulis, S. A.: How well do global snow products characterize snow storage in High Mountainous Asia?, Geophysical Research Letters, 49, e2022GL100082, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL100082, 2022.
Marchane, A., Jarlan, L., Hanich, L., Boudhar, A., Gascoin, S., Tavernier, A., Filali, N., Le Page, M., Hagolle, O., Berjamy, B: Assessment of daily MODIS snow cover products to monitor snow cover dynamics over the Moroccan Atlas mountain range, Remote Sensing of Environment, 160, 72–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.01.002, 2015.
Margulis, S. A., Liu, Y., and Baldo, E.: A Joint Landsat- and MODIS-Based Reanalysis Approach for Midlatitude Montane Seasonal Snow Characterization, Front. Earth Sci., 7, 1–23, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00272, 2019.
Marshall, S. and Oglesby, R. J.: An improved snow hydrology for GCMs. Part 1: snow cover fraction, albedo, grain size, and age, Clim. Dynam., 10, 21–37, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00210334, 1994.
Melton, J. R. and Arora, V. K.: Competition between plant functional types in the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) v. 2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 323–361, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-323-2016, 2016.
Melton, J. R., Verseghy, D. L., Sospedra-Alfonso, R., and Gruber, S.: Improving permafrost physics in the coupled Canadian Land Surface Scheme (v.3.6.2) and Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (v.2.1) (CLASS-CTEM), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4443–4467, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4443-2019, 2019.
Melton, J. R., Arora, V. K., Wisernig-Cojoc, E., Seiler, C., Fortier, M., Chan, E., and Teckentrup, L.: CLASSIC v1.0: the open-source community successor to the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) – Part 1: Model framework and site-level performance, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2825–2850, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2825-2020, 2020.
Miao, X., Guo, W., Qiu, B., Lu, S., Zhang, Y., Xue, Y., and Sun, S.: Accounting for Topographic Effects on Snow Cover Fraction and Surface Albedo Simulations Over the Tibetan Plateau in Winter, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2022MS003035, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003035, 2022.
Myneni, R. B., Keeling, C. D., Tucker, C. J., Asrar, G., and Nemani, R. R.: Increased plant growth in the northern high latitudes from 1981 to 1991, Nature, 386, 698–702, https://doi.org/10.1038/386698a0, 1997.
Mortimer, C. and Vionnet, V.: Northern Hemisphere historical in-situ Snow Water Equivalent dataset (NorSWE, 1979-2021) (2.0), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14503592, 2024.
Mortimer, C., Mudryk, L., Derksen, C., Luojus, K., Brown, R., Kelly, R., and Tedesco, M.: Evaluation of long-term Northern Hemisphere snow water equivalent products, The Cryosphere, 14, 1579–1594, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-1579-2020, 2020.
Mortimer, C., Mudryk, L., Derksen, C., Brady, M., Luo jus, K., Venäläinen, P., Moisander, M., Lemmetyinen, J., Takala, M., Tanis, C., and Pulliainen, J.: Benchmarking algorithm changes to the Snow CCI+ snow water equivalent product, Remote Sens. Environ., 274, 112988, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.112988, 2022.
Mortimer, C., Mudryk, L., Cho, E., Derksen, C., Brady, M., and Vuyovich, C.: Use of multiple reference data sources to cross-validate gridded snow water equivalent products over North America, The Cryosphere, 18, 5619–5639, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5619-2024, 2024.
Mortimer, C. and Vionnet, V.: Northern Hemisphere in situ snow water equivalent dataset (NorSWE, 1979–2021), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 3619–3640, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3619-2025, 2025.
Mudryk, L., Mortimer, C., Derksen, C., Elias Chereque, A., and Kushner, P.: Benchmarking of snow water equivalent (SWE) products based on outcomes of the SnowPEx+ Intercomparison Project, The Cryosphere, 19, 201–218, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-201-2025, 2025.
Namazi, M., von Salzen, K., and Cole, J. N. S.: Simulation of black carbon in snow and its climate impact in the Canadian Global Climate Model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 10887–10904, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10887-2015, 2015.
Nijssen, B., O'Donnell, G. M., Lettenmaier, D. P., Lohmann, D., and Wood, E. F.: Predicting the discharge of global rivers, J. Climate, 14, 3307–3323, 2001.
Niu, G.-Y. and Yang, Z.-L.: An observation-based formulation of snow cover fraction and its evaluation over large North American river basins, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D21101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008674, 2007.
Orsolini, Y., Wegmann, M., Dutra, E., Liu, B., Balsamo, G., Yang, K., de Rosnay, P., Zhu, C., Wang, W., Senan, R., and Arduini, G.: Evaluation of snow depth and snow cover over the Tibetan Plateau in global reanalyses using in situ and satellite remote sensing observations, The Cryosphere, 13, 2221–2239, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-2221-2019, 2019.
Osterkamp, T. E. and Romanovsky, V. E.: Evidence for warming and thawing of discontinuous permafrost in Alaska, Permafrost and Periglacial Processes, 10, 17–37, 1999.
Pastorello, G., Papale, D., Chu, H., Trotta, C., Agarwal, D., Canfora, E., Baldocchi, D., and Torn, M.: A new data set to keep a sharper eye on land-air exchanges, Eos T. Am. Geophys. Union, 98, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017EO071597, 2017.
Qu, X. and Hall, A.: On the persistent spread in snow-albedo feedback, Clim. Dynam., 42, 69–81, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1774-0, 2013.
Ramsay, B.: The interactive multisensor snow and ice mapping system, Hydrol. Process., 12, 1537–1546, 1998.
Riggs, G. A., Hall, D. K., and Roman, M.O.: MODIS Snow Products Collection 6.1 User Guide. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, https://modis-snow-ice.gsfc.nasa.gov/uploads/snow_user_guide_C6.1_final_revised_april.pdf (last access: 10 July 2025), 2019.
Roe, G. H. and Baker, M. B.: Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable?, Science, 318, 629–632, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1144735, 2007.
Roesch, A., Wild, M., Gilgen, H., and Ohmura, A.: A new snow cover fraction parameterization for the ECHAM4 GCM, Clim. Dynam., 17, 933–946, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820100153, 2001.
Schaaf, C. and Wang, Z.: MCD43C3 MODIS/Terra+Aqua BRDF/Albedo Daily L3 0.05Deg CMG, NASA LP DAAC [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD43C3.006, 2015.
Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., Jiao, Y., Qian, M. W., Lazare, M., Solheim, L., Flato, G. M., Biner, S., Desgagne, M., and Dugas, B.: Coordinated Global and Regional Climate Modeling, J. Climate, 29, 17–35, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0161.1, 2016.
Seiler, C.: AMBER: Automated Model Benchmarking R Package, r package version 1.0.3, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=amber (last access: 28 April 2024), 2020.
Seiler, C., Melton, J. R., Arora, V. K., and Wang, L.: CLASSIC v1.0: the open-source community successor to the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM) – Part 2: Global benchmarking, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2371–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2371-2021, 2021.
Shangguan, W., Hengl, T., Mendes de Jesus, J., Yuan, H., and Dai, Y.: Mapping the global depth to bedrock for land surface modeling, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 9, 65–88, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016MS000686, 2017.
Shi, H., Li, T., and Wei, J.: Evaluation of the gridded CRU TS precipitation dataset with the point raingauge records over the Three-River Headwaters Region, Journal of Hydrology, 548, 322–332, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.03.017, 2017.
Sigmond, M., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Digby, R., Gillett, N., Kharin, V., Merryfield, W., Reader, C., Scinocca, J., Swart, N., Virgin, J., Abraham, C., Cole, J., Lambert, N., Lee, W.-S., Liang, Y., Malinina, E., Rieger, L., von Salzen, K., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Sospedra-Alfonso, R., Wang, L., and Yang, D.: Improvements in the Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM) through systematic model analysis: CanESM5.0 and CanESM5.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6553–6591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, 2023.
Slater, A. G., Schlosser, C. A., Desborough, C. E., Pitman, A. J., Henderson-Sellers, A., Robock, A., Vinnikov, K. Y., Entin, J., Mitchell, K., Chen, F., Boone, A., Etchevers, P., Habets, F., Noilhan, J., Braden, H., Cox, P. M., de Rosnay, P., Dickinson, R. E., Yang, Z.-L., Dai, Y.-J., Zeng, Q., Duan, Q., Koren, V., Schaake, S., Gedney, N., Gusev, Y. M., Nasonova, O. N., Kim, J., Kowalczyk, E. A., Shmakin, A. B., Smirnova, T. G., Verseghy, D., Wetzel, P., and Xue, Y.: The representation of snow in land surface schemes: Results from PILPS 2(d), J. Hydrometeorol., 2, 7–25, 2001.
Stackhouse, Jr, P. W., Gupta, S. K., Cox, S. J., Zhang, T., Mikovitz, J. C., and Hinkelman, L. M.: The NASA/GEWEX surface radiation budget release 3.0: 24.5-year dataset, Gewex news, 21, 10–12, 2011.
Stillinger, T., Rittger, K., Raleigh, M. S., Michell, A., Davis, R. E., and Bair, E. H.: Landsat, MODIS, and VIIRS snow cover mapping algorithm performance as validated by airborne lidar datasets, The Cryosphere, 17, 567–590, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-567-2023, 2023.
Su, F., Duan, X., Chen, D., Hao, Z., and Cuo, L.: Evaluation of the Global Climate Models in the CMIP5 over the Tibetan Plateau, J. Climate, 26, 3187–3208, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00321.1, 2013.
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N. S., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Hanna, S., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Sigmond, M., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., and Winter, B.: The Canadian Earth System Model version 5 (CanESM5.0.3), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4823–4873, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4823-2019, 2019.
Swenson, S. C. and Lawrence, D. M.: A new fractional snow-covered area parameterization for the Community Land Model and its effect on the surface energy balance, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D21107, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018178, 2012.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012.
U.S. National Ice Center: IMS Daily Northern Hemisphere Snow and Ice Analysis at 1 km, 4 km, and 24 km Resolutions. (G02156, Version 1), Boulder, Colorado USA. National Snow and Ice Data Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.7265/N52R3PMC, 2008.
Verseghy, D. L.: CLASS – A Canadian Land Surface Scheme for GCMs, I. Soil model, Int. J. Climatol., 11, 111–133, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370110202, 1991.
Verseghy, D., McFarlane, N., and Lazare, M.: Class – A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMs, II: Vegetation model and coupled runs, Int. J. Climatol., 13, 347–370, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370130402, 1993.
Verseghy, D., Brown, R., and Wang, L.: Evaluation of CLASS Snow Simulation over Eastern Canada, Journal of Hydrometeorology, 18, 1205–1225, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0153.1, 2017.
von Salzen, K., Scinocca, J. F., McFarlane, N. A., Li, J., Cole, J. N. S., Plummer, D., Verseghy, D., Reader, M. C., Ma, X., Lazare, M., and Solheim, L.: The Canadian Fourth Generation Atmospheric Global Climate Model (CanAM4). Part I: Representation of Physical Processes, Atmos.-Ocean, 51, 104–125, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2012.755610, 2013.
Wang, L., MacKay, M., Brown, R., Bartlett, P., Harvey, R., and Langlois, A: Application of satellite data for evaluating the cold climate performance of the Canadian Regional Climate model over Québec, Canada, Journal of Hydrometeorology, 15, 614-630, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-13-086.1, 2014.
Wang, L., Arora, V. K., Bartlett, P., Chan, E., and Curasi, S. R.: Mapping of ESA's Climate Change Initiative land cover data to plant functional types for use in the CLASSIC land model, Biogeosciences, 20, 2265–2282, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2265-2023, 2023.
Wang, L., Mudryk, L., Melton, J. R., Mortimer, C., Cole, J., Meyer, G., Bartlett, P., and Lalande, M.: Impact of topography and meteorological forcing on snow simulation in the Canadian Land Surface Scheme Including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC), Zenodo [data set and code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15032447, 2025.
Weedon, G. P., Gomes, S., Viterbo, P., Österle, H., Adam, J. C., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., and Best, M.: The WATCH Forcing Data 1958–2001: A meteorological forcing dataset for land surface and hydrological-models, Tech. rep., WATCH Technical Report 22, https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/rest/items/item_16400_1/component/file_16401/content (last access: 26 August 2020), 2010.
WMO (Ed.): Guide to instruments and methods of observation: Volume II – Measurement of Cryospheric Variables, 2018th edn., World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, WMO-No. 8, 52 pp., ISBN 978-92-63-10008-5, 2018.
Yang, Z.-L., Dickinson, R. E., Robock, A., and Vinnikov, K. Y.: Validation of the Snow Submodel of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme with Russian Snow Cover and Meteorological Observational Data, J. Climate, 10, 353–373, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010<0353:VOTSSO>2.0.CO;2, 1997.
Yao, T., Thompson, L. G., Mosbrugger, V., Zhang, F., Ma, Y., Luo, T., Xu, B., Yang, X., Joswiak, D. R., Wang, W., Joswiak, M. E., Devkota, L. P., Tayal, S., Jilani, R., and Fayziev, R.: Third Pole Environment (TPE), Environmental Development, 3, 52–64, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2012.04.002, 2012.
Short summary
This study shows that an alternate snow cover fraction parameterization significantly improves snow simulation by CLASSIC in mountainous areas for all three choices of meteorological datasets. Annual mean bias, unbiased root mean squared area, and correlation improve by 75 %, 32 %, and 7 % when evaluated with MODIS observations over the Northern Hemisphere. We also link relative biases in the meteorological forcing data to differences in simulated snow water equivalent and snow cover fraction.
This study shows that an alternate snow cover fraction parameterization significantly improves...
