Articles | Volume 18, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-763-2025
© 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-18-763-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
10 Feb 2025
Development and technical paper |
| 10 Feb 2025
| 10 Feb 2025
Improving the representation of major Indian crops in the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5) using site-scale crop data
Kangari Narender Reddy
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Somnath Baidya Roy
Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Sam S. Rabin
Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory, National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, USA
Danica L. Lombardozzi
Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory, National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, USA
Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma
Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Ruchira Biswas
Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Devavat Chiru Naik
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi 110016, India
Related authors
Kangari Narender Reddy and Somnath Baidya Roy
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1987, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1987, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
The spatiotemporal variability of land fluxes over agroecosystems, which cover ~55 % of India's land surface, is poorly understood. Previous studies mostly use site-scale observations that fail to capture spatial variations across India's diverse climatic regions. First comprehensive study of long-term trends (1970–2014) and numerical experiments to examine the impact of natural and management factors on crop physiology and terrestrial fluxes.
Kangari Narender Reddy, Shilpa Gahlot, Somnath Baidya Roy, Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma, Vinay Kumar Sehgal, and Gayatri Vangala
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 915–930, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-915-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-915-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon fluxes from agroecosystems change the carbon cycle and the amount of CO2 in the air. Using the Integrated Science Assessment Model (ISAM), we looked at the carbon cycle in areas where spring wheat is grown. The results showed that fluxes vary a lot between regions, mostly because planting times are different. According to our investigation into which variables have the greatest impact on the carbon cycle, nitrogen fertilizers added to crops have the greatest impact on carbon uptake.
Carolina Natel, David Martín Belda, Peter Anthoni, Neele Haß, Sam Rabin, and Almut Arneth
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4317–4333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4317-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4317-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We developed fast machine learning models to predict forest regrowth and carbon dynamics under climate change. These models mimic the outputs of a complex vegetation model but run 95 % faster, enabling global analyses and supporting climate solutions in large modeling frameworks such as LandSyMM.
Kangari Narender Reddy and Somnath Baidya Roy
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1987, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1987, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
The spatiotemporal variability of land fluxes over agroecosystems, which cover ~55 % of India's land surface, is poorly understood. Previous studies mostly use site-scale observations that fail to capture spatial variations across India's diverse climatic regions. First comprehensive study of long-term trends (1970–2014) and numerical experiments to examine the impact of natural and management factors on crop physiology and terrestrial fluxes.
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.
Katja Frieler, Stefan Lange, Jacob Schewe, Matthias Mengel, Simon Treu, Christian Otto, Jan Volkholz, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Stefanie Heinicke, Colin Jones, Julia L. Blanchard, Cheryl S. Harrison, Colleen M. Petrik, Tyler D. Eddy, Kelly Ortega-Cisneros, Camilla Novaglio, Ryan Heneghan, Derek P. Tittensor, Olivier Maury, Matthias Büchner, Thomas Vogt, Dánnell Quesada Chacón, Kerry Emanuel, Chia-Ying Lee, Suzana J. Camargo, Jonas Jägermeyr, Sam Rabin, Jochen Klar, Iliusi D. Vega del Valle, Lisa Novak, Inga J. Sauer, Gitta Lasslop, Sarah Chadburn, Eleanor Burke, Angela Gallego-Sala, Noah Smith, Jinfeng Chang, Stijn Hantson, Chantelle Burton, Anne Gädeke, Fang Li, Simon N. Gosling, Hannes Müller Schmied, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Rafael Marcé, Don Pierson, Wim Thiery, Daniel Mercado-Bettín, Robert Ladwig, Ana Isabel Ayala-Zamora, Matthew Forrest, Michel Bechtold, Robert Reinecke, Inge de Graaf, Jed O. Kaplan, Alexander Koch, and Matthieu Lengaigne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2103, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2103, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the experiments and data sets necessary to run historic and future impact projections, and the underlying assumptions of future climate change as defined by the 3rd round of the ISIMIP Project (Inter-sectoral Impactmodel Intercomparison Project, isimip.org). ISIMIP provides a framework for cross-sectorally consistent climate impact simulations to contribute to a comprehensive and consistent picture of the world under different climate-change scenarios.
Fang Li, Xiang Song, Sandy P. Harrison, Jennifer R. Marlon, Zhongda Lin, L. Ruby Leung, Jörg Schwinger, Virginie Marécal, Shiyu Wang, Daniel S. Ward, Xiao Dong, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, Sam S. Rabin, and Roland Séférian
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8751–8771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study provides the first comprehensive assessment of historical fire simulations from 19 Earth system models in phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Most models reproduce global totals, spatial patterns, seasonality, and regional historical changes well but fail to simulate the recent decline in global burned area and underestimate the fire response to climate variability. CMIP6 simulations address three critical issues of phase-5 models.
Sabin I. Taranu, David M. Lawrence, Yoshihide Wada, Ting Tang, Erik Kluzek, Sam Rabin, Yi Yao, Steven J. De Hertog, Inne Vanderkelen, and Wim Thiery
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7365–7399, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7365-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7365-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we improved a climate model by adding the representation of water use sectors such as domestic, industry, and agriculture. This new feature helps us understand how water is used and supplied in various areas. We tested our model from 1971 to 2010 and found that it accurately identifies areas with water scarcity. By modelling the competition between sectors when water availability is limited, the model helps estimate the intensity and extent of individual sectors' water shortages.
Katja Frieler, Jan Volkholz, Stefan Lange, Jacob Schewe, Matthias Mengel, María del Rocío Rivas López, Christian Otto, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Dirk Nikolaus Karger, Johanna T. Malle, Simon Treu, Christoph Menz, Julia L. Blanchard, Cheryl S. Harrison, Colleen M. Petrik, Tyler D. Eddy, Kelly Ortega-Cisneros, Camilla Novaglio, Yannick Rousseau, Reg A. Watson, Charles Stock, Xiao Liu, Ryan Heneghan, Derek Tittensor, Olivier Maury, Matthias Büchner, Thomas Vogt, Tingting Wang, Fubao Sun, Inga J. Sauer, Johannes Koch, Inne Vanderkelen, Jonas Jägermeyr, Christoph Müller, Sam Rabin, Jochen Klar, Iliusi D. Vega del Valle, Gitta Lasslop, Sarah Chadburn, Eleanor Burke, Angela Gallego-Sala, Noah Smith, Jinfeng Chang, Stijn Hantson, Chantelle Burton, Anne Gädeke, Fang Li, Simon N. Gosling, Hannes Müller Schmied, Fred Hattermann, Jida Wang, Fangfang Yao, Thomas Hickler, Rafael Marcé, Don Pierson, Wim Thiery, Daniel Mercado-Bettín, Robert Ladwig, Ana Isabel Ayala-Zamora, Matthew Forrest, and Michel Bechtold
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1–51, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our paper provides an overview of all observational climate-related and socioeconomic forcing data used as input for the impact model evaluation and impact attribution experiments within the third round of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project. The experiments are designed to test our understanding of observed changes in natural and human systems and to quantify to what degree these changes have already been induced by climate change.
Sam S. Rabin, William J. Sacks, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Lili Xia, and Alan Robock
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7253–7273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models can help us simulate how the agricultural system will be affected by and respond to environmental change, but to be trustworthy they must realistically reproduce historical patterns. When farmers plant their crops and what varieties they choose will be important aspects of future adaptation. Here, we improve the crop component of a global model to better simulate observed growing seasons and examine the impacts on simulated crop yields and irrigation demand.
Kangari Narender Reddy, Shilpa Gahlot, Somnath Baidya Roy, Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma, Vinay Kumar Sehgal, and Gayatri Vangala
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 915–930, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-915-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-915-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon fluxes from agroecosystems change the carbon cycle and the amount of CO2 in the air. Using the Integrated Science Assessment Model (ISAM), we looked at the carbon cycle in areas where spring wheat is grown. The results showed that fluxes vary a lot between regions, mostly because planting times are different. According to our investigation into which variables have the greatest impact on the carbon cycle, nitrogen fertilizers added to crops have the greatest impact on carbon uptake.
Axel Kleidon, Gabriele Messori, Somnath Baidya Roy, Ira Didenkulova, and Ning Zeng
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 241–242, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-241-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-241-2023, 2023
Jianyong Ma, Stefan Olin, Peter Anthoni, Sam S. Rabin, Anita D. Bayer, Sylvia S. Nyawira, and Almut Arneth
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 815–839, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-815-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-815-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The implementation of the biological N fixation process in LPJ-GUESS in this study provides an opportunity to quantify N fixation rates between legumes and to better estimate grain legume production on a global scale. It also helps to predict and detect the potential contribution of N-fixing plants as
green manureto reducing or removing the use of N fertilizer in global agricultural systems, considering different climate conditions, management practices, and land-use change scenarios.
Tanvi Gupta and Somnath Baidya Roy
Adv. Geosci., 56, 129–139, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-56-129-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-56-129-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we study how the momentum extracted by wind turbines get replenished so that the wind farm can continue to function. We use a numerical model to simulate the dynamics of a hypothetical coastal wind farm in the Arabian Sea under sea breeze conditions. Results show that vertical turbulent eddies can replenish more than half of the lost momentum, but horizontal advection also plays a role near the wind farm edges especially in sparsely packed wind farms.
Aheli Das and Somnath Baidya Roy
Adv. Geosci., 56, 89–96, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-56-89-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-56-89-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we evaluated subseasonal-seasonal scale forecasts of solar radiation, wind speed, temperature and relative humidity over India from 6 global models by comparing against observations. Results show that the overall quality of the forecasts are not good. However, they demonstrate enough skill suggesting that further improvement through calibration may make then useful for the renewable energy sector.
Tanvi Gupta and Somnath Baidya Roy
Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 1089–1106, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1089-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1089-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Wind turbines extract momentum from atmospheric flow and convert that to electricity. This study explores recovery processes in wind farms that replenish the momentum so that wind farms can continue to function. Experiments with a numerical model show that momentum transport by turbulent eddies from above the wind turbines is the major contributor to recovery except for strong wind conditions and low wind turbine density, where horizontal advection can also play a major role.
Camelia-Eliza Telteu, Hannes Müller Schmied, Wim Thiery, Guoyong Leng, Peter Burek, Xingcai Liu, Julien Eric Stanislas Boulange, Lauren Seaby Andersen, Manolis Grillakis, Simon Newland Gosling, Yusuke Satoh, Oldrich Rakovec, Tobias Stacke, Jinfeng Chang, Niko Wanders, Harsh Lovekumar Shah, Tim Trautmann, Ganquan Mao, Naota Hanasaki, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Yadu Pokhrel, Luis Samaniego, Yoshihide Wada, Vimal Mishra, Junguo Liu, Petra Döll, Fang Zhao, Anne Gädeke, Sam S. Rabin, and Florian Herz
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3843–3878, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3843-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3843-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We analyse water storage compartments, water flows, and human water use sectors included in 16 global water models that provide simulations for the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b. We develop a standard writing style for the model equations. We conclude that even though hydrologic processes are often based on similar equations, in the end these equations have been adjusted, or the models have used different values for specific parameters or specific variables.
Narender Kangari Reddy and Somnath Baidya Roy
Adv. Geosci., 54, 79–87, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-54-79-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-54-79-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we apply the Genetic Algorithm technique that mimics the natural selection process observed in nature to design optimal layouts for massive wind farms off the southeastern coast of India using real wind data. Our results show that layout optimization leads to large improvements in power generation (up to 28 %), efficiency (up to 34 %), and cost (up to 25 %) due to the reduction in wake losses.
Cited articles
Asseng, S., Cammarano, D., Basso, B., Chung, U., Alderman, P. D., Sonder, K., Reynolds, M., and Lobell, D. B.: Hot spots of wheat yield decline with rising temperatures, Glob. Change Biol., 23, 2464–2472, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13530, 2017.
Bal, S. K., Sattar, A., Nidhi., Chandran, M. A. S., Subba Rao, A. V. M., Manikandan. N., Banerjee. S., Choudhary. J. L., More. V. G., Singh. C. B., Sandhu, S. S., and Singh, V. K.: Critical weather limits for paddy rice under diverse ecosystems of India, Front. Plant Sci., 14, 1226064, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1226064, 2023.
Biemans, H., Siderius, C., Mishra, A., and Ahmad, B.: Crop-specific seasonal estimates of irrigation-water demand in South Asia, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 1971–1982, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-1971-2016, 2016.
Blyth, E. M., Arora, V. K., Clark, D. B., Dadson, S. J., de Kauwe, M. G., Lawrence, D. M., Melton, J. R., Pongratz, J., Turton, R. H., Yoshimura, K., and Yuan, H.: Advances in Land Surface Modelling, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 7, 45–71, https://doi.org/10.1007/S40641-021-00171-5, 2021.
Boas, T., Bogena, H., Grünwald, T., Heinesch, B., Ryu, D., Schmidt, M., Vereecken, H., Western, A., and Hendricks Franssen, H.-J.: Improving the representation of cropland sites in the Community Land Model (CLM) version 5.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 573–601, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-573-2021, 2021.
Boas, T., Bogena, H. R., Ryu, D., Vereecken, H., Western, A., and Hendricks Franssen, H.-J.: Seasonal soil moisture and crop yield prediction with fifth-generation seasonal forecasting system (SEAS5) long-range meteorological forecasts in a land surface modelling approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3143–3167, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3143-2023, 2023.
Chen, M., Griffis, T. J., Baker, J. M., Wood, J. D., Meyers, T., and Suyker, A.: Comparing crop growth and carbon budgets simulated across AmeriFlux agricultural sites using the Community Land Model (CLM), Agr. Forest Meteorol., 256–257, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2018.03.012, 2018.
Cheng, Y., Huang, M., Chen, M., Guan, K., Bernacchi, C., Peng, B., and Tan, Z.: Parameterizing Perennial Bioenergy Crops in Version 5 of the Community Land Model Based on Site-Level Observations in the Central Midwestern United States, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001719, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001719, 2020.
Cheng, Y., Huang, M., Zhu, B., Bisht, G., Zhou, T., Liu, Y., Song, F., and He, X.: Validation of the Community Land Model Version 5 Over the Contiguous United States (CONUS) Using In-Situ and Remote Sensing Data Sets, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, 1–27, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033539, 2021.
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.
Denager, T., Sonnenborg, T. O., Looms, M. C., Bogena, H., and Jensen, K. H.: Point-scale multi-objective calibration of the Community Land Model (version 5.0) using in situ observations of water and energy fluxes and variables, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2827–2845, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2827-2023, 2023.
Elliott, J., Müller, C., Deryng, D., Chryssanthacopoulos, J., Boote, K. J., Büchner, M., Foster, I., Glotter, M., Heinke, J., Iizumi, T., Izaurralde, R. C., Mueller, N. D., Ray, D. K., Rosenzweig, C., Ruane, A. C., and Sheffield, J.: The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 261–277, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015, 2015.
Fang, H., Zhang, Y., Wei, S., Li, W., Ye, Y., Sun, T., and Liu, W.: Validation of global moderate resolution leaf area index (LAI) products over croplands in northeastern China, Remote Sens. Environ., 233, 111377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111377, 2019.
Fisher, R. A. and Koven, C. D.: Perspectives on the Future of Land Surface Models and the Challenges of Representing Complex Terrestrial Systems, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2018MS001453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001453, 2020.
Fisher, R. A., Wieder, W. R., Sanderson, B. M., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Xu, C., Fisher, J. B., Shi, M., Walker, A. P., and Lawrence, D. M.: Parametric Controls on Vegetation Responses to Biogeochemical Forcing in the CLM5, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 2879–2895, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001609, 2019.
Gahlot, S., Lin, T.-S., Jain, A. K., Baidya Roy, S., Sehgal, V. K., and Dhakar, R.: Impact of environmental changes and land management practices on wheat production in India, Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 641–652, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-641-2020, 2020.
Gibelin, A.-L., Calvet, J.-C., Roujean, J.-L., Jarlan, L., and Los, S. O.: Ability of the land surface model ISBA-A-gs to simulate leaf area index at global scale: comparison with satellite products, J. Geophys. Res., 111, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006691, 2006.
Graham, M. W., Thomas, R. Q., Lombardozzi, D. L., and O'Rourke, M. E.: Modest capacity of no-till farming to offset emissions over 21st century, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 054055, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe6c6, 2021.
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling, J. Hydrol., 377, 80–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003, 2009.
Jat, R. K., Singh, R. G., Kumar, M., Jat, M. L., Parihar, C. M., Bijarniya, D., Sutaliya, J. M., Jat, M. K., Parihar, M. D., Kakraliya, S. K., and Gupta, R. K.: Ten years of conservation agriculture in a rice–maize rotation of Eastern Gangetic Plains of India: Yield trends, water productivity and economic profitability, Field Crops Res., 232, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2018.12.004, 2019.
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, Sci. Data, 6, 74, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0076-8, 2019.
Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, J. Hydrol., 424–425, 264–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011, 2012.
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R., Koven, C., Oleson, K., Svenson, S., Vertenstein, M. (coordinating lead authors), Andre, B., Bonan, G., Ghimire, B., van Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E., Knox, R., Lawrence, P., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Lu, Y., Perket, J., Riley, W., Sacks, W., Shi, M., Wieder, W., Xu, C. (lead authors), Ali, A., Badger, A., Bisht, G., Broxton, P., Brunke, M., Buzan, J., Clark, M., Craig, T., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Emmons, L., Fisher, J., Flanner, M., Gentine, P., Lenaerts, J., Levis, S., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W., Pelletier, J., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B., Shuman, J., Slater, A., Subin, Z., Tang, J., Tawfik, A., Thomas, Q., Tilmes, S., Vitt, F., and Zeng, X.: Technical Description of version 5.0 of the Community Land Model (CLM), Natl. Cent. Atmospheric Res. (NCAR), http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm2/land/CLM50_Tech_Note.pdf (last access: 15 June 2020), 2018.
Lawrence, P., Lawrence, D. M., Hurtt, G. C., and Calvin, K. V.: Advancing our understanding of the impacts of historic and projected land use in the Earth System: The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP), AGU Fall Meeting 2019, San Francisco, USA, 9–13 December 2019, abstract: GC23B-01, https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm19/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/493015 (last access: 4 February 2025), 2019.
Levis, S., Bonan, G. B., Kluzek, E., Thornton, P. E., Jones, A., Sacks, W. J., and Kucharik, C. J.: Interactive Crop Management in the Community Earth System Model (CESM1): Seasonal Influences on Land–Atmosphere Fluxes, J. Climate, 25, 4839–4859, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00446.1, 2012.
Lin, W., Yuan, H., Dong, W., Zhang, S., Liu, S., Wei, N., Lu, X., Wei, Z., Hu, Y., and Dai, Y.: Reprocessed MODIS Version 6.1 Leaf Area Index Dataset and Its Evaluation for Land Surface and Climate Modeling, Remote Sens.-Basel, 15, 1–25, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15071780, 2023.
Lobell, D. B., Schlenker, W., and Costa-Roberts, J.: Climate Trends and Global Crop Production Since 1980, Science, 333, 616–620, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204531, 2011.
Lokupitiya, E., Denning, S., Paustian, K., Baker, I., Schaefer, K., Verma, S., Meyers, T., Bernacchi, C. J., Suyker, A., and Fischer, M.: Incorporation of crop phenology in Simple Biosphere Model (SiBcrop) to improve land-atmosphere carbon exchanges from croplands, Biogeosciences, 6, 969–986, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-6-969-2009, 2009.
Lombardozzi, D. L., Lu, Y., Lawrence, P. J., Lawrence, D. M., Swenson, S., Oleson, K. W., Wieder, W. R., and Ainsworth, E. A.: Simulating Agriculture in the Community Land Model Version 5, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 125, e2019JG005529, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JG005529, 2020.
Lu, Y. and Yang, X.: Using the anomaly forcing Community Land Model (CLM 4.5) for crop yield projections, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1253–1265, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1253-2021, 2021.
Lu, Y., Williams, I. N., Bagley, J. E., Torn, M. S., and Kueppers, L. M.: Representing winter wheat in the Community Land Model (version 4.5), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1873–1888, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1873-2017, 2017.
Ma, Y., Woolf, D., Fan, M., Qiao, L., Li, R., and Lehmann, J.: Global crop production increase by soil organic carbon, Nat. Geosci., 16, 1159–1165, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01302-3, 2023.
Mathur, R. and AchutaRao, K.: A modelling exploration of the sensitivity of the India's climate to irrigation, Clim. Dynam., 54, 1851–1872, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-05090-8, 2019.
McDermid, S. S., Mearns, L. O. and Ruane, A. C.: Representing agriculture in Earth System Models: Approaches and priorities for development, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 9, 2230–2265, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016MS000749, 2017.
Mehta, P. and Dhaliwal, L. K.: Agromet wheat app for estimation of phenology and yield of wheat under Punjab conditions, Int. J. Biometeorol., 67, 439–445, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-022-02423-x, 2023.
Mukherjee, A., Wang, S. Y. S., and Promchote, P.: Examination of the climate factors that reduced wheat yield in Northwest India during the 2000s. Water, 11, 343, https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020343, 2019.
Myneni, R., Knyazikhin, Y., and Park, T.: MODIS/Terra + Aqua Leaf Area Index/FPAR 8-Day L4 Global 500 m SIN Grid V061, NASA EOSDIS Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MCD15A2H.061, 2021.
Oo, A. Z., Yamamoto, A., Ono, K., Umamageswari, C., Mano, M., Vanitha, K., Elayakumar, P., Matsuura, S., Bama, K. S., Raju, M., and Inubushi, K.: Ecosystem carbon dioxide exchange and water use efficiency in a triple-cropping rice paddy in Southern India: A two-year field observation, Sci. Total Environ., 854, 158541, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158541, 2023.
Osborne, T., Gornall, J., Hooker, J., Williams, K., Wiltshire, A., Betts, R., and Wheeler, T.: JULES-crop: a parametrisation of crops in the Joint UK Land Environment Simulator, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1139–1155, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1139-2015, 2015.
Rabin, S. S., Sacks, W. J., Lombardozzi, D. L., Xia, L., and Robock, A.: Observation-based sowing dates and cultivars significantly affect yield and irrigation for some crops in the Community Land Model (CLM5), Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7253–7273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7253-2023, 2023.
Raczka, B., Hoar, T. J., Duarte, H. F., Fox, A. M., Anderson, J. L., Bowling, D. R., and Lin, J. C.: Improving CLM5.0 biomass and carbon exchange across the Western United States using a data assimilation system, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002421, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002421, 2021.
Rao, B. B., Chowdary, P. S., Sandeep, V. M., Pramod, V. P., and Rao, V. U. M.: Spatial analysis of the sensitivity of wheat yields to temperature in India, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 200, 192–202, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.09.023, 2015.
Ray, D. K., Ramankutty, N., Mueller, N. D., West, P. C., and Foley, J. A.: Recent patterns of crop yield growth and stagnation, Nat. Commun., 3, 1293, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2296, 2012.
Reddy, K. N., Baidya Roy, S., and Rabin, S.: KNR8070/CLM5_IndianCrop_improvements: v1.1 (v1.1), Zenodo [code and data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14040383, 2024.
Richardson, A. D., Anderson, R. S., Arain, M. A., Barr, A. G., Bohrer, G., Chen, G., Chen, J. M., Ciais, P., Davis, K. J., Desai, A. R., Dietze, M. C., Dragoni, D., Garrity, S. R., Gough, C. M., Grant, R., Hollinger, D. Y., Margolis, H. A., McCaughey, H., Migliavacca, M., Monson, R. K., Munger, J. W., Poulter, B., Raczka, B. M., Ricciuto, D. M., Sahoo, A. K., Schaefer, K., Tian, H., Vargas, R., Verbeeck, H., Xiao, J., and Xue, Y.: Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis, Glob. Change Biol., 18, 566–584, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02562.x, 2012.
Ruiz-Vásquez, M. O. S., Arduini, G., Boussetta, S., Brenning, A., Bastos, A., Koirala, S., Balsamo, G., Reichstein, M., and Orth, R.: Impact of updating vegetation information on land surface model performance, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 128, 2023JD039076, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023JD039076, 2023.
Running, S. W. and Zhao, M.: User's Guide: Daily GPP and annual NPP(MOD17A2/A3) products, NASA Earth Observing System MODIS land algorithm, 1–28, https://www.cen.uni-hamburg.de/en/icdc/data/land/docs-land/running-zhaomod17-users-guide-c006-2015-v03.pdf (last access: 4 February 2025), 2015.
Sacks, W. J., Deryng, D., Foley, J. A., and Ramankutty, N.: Crop planting dates: an analysis of global patterns, Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 19, 607–620, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00551.x, 2010.
Seo, H. and Kim, Y.: Forcing the Global Fire Emissions Database burned-area dataset into the Community Land Model version 5.0: impacts on carbon and water fluxes at high latitudes, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4699–4713, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4699-2023, 2023.
Sheng, M., Liu, J., Zhu, A.-X., Rossiter, D. G., Zhu, L., and Peng, G.: Evaluation of CLM-Crop for maize growth simulation over Northeast China, Ecol. Model., 377, 26–34, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.03.005, 2018.
Song, J., Miller, G. R., Cahill, A. T., Aparecido, L. M. T., and Moore, G. W.: Modeling land surface processes over a mountainous rainforest in Costa Rica using CLM4.5 and CLM5, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5147–5173, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5147-2020, 2020.
Strebel, L., Bogena, H. R., Vereecken, H., and Hendricks Franssen, H.-J.: Coupling the Community Land Model version 5.0 to the parallel data assimilation framework PDAF: description and applications, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 395–411, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-395-2022, 2022.
Su, Y., Wu, J., Zhang, C., Wu, X., Li, Q., Liu, L., Bi, C., Zhang, H., Lafortezza, R., and Chen, X.: Estimating the Cooling Effect Magnitude of Urban Vegetation in Different Climate Zones Using Multi-Source Remote Sensing, Urban Clim., 43, 101155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101155, 2022.
Taylor, K. E.: Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 7183–7192, 2001.
Thakur, S., Rana, R. S., and Manuja, S.: Thermal time requirement and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under varying growing environments in changed climatic scenarios of Northwestern Himalayas, J. Pharm. Innov., SP-11, 35–38, 2022.
Tramontana, G., Jung, M., Schwalm, C. R., Ichii, K., Camps-Valls, G., Ráduly, B., Reichstein, M., Arain, M. A., Cescatti, A., Kiely, G., Merbold, L., Serrano-Ortiz, P., Sickert, S., Wolf, S., and Papale, D.: Predicting carbon dioxide and energy fluxes across global FLUXNET sites with regression algorithms, Biogeosciences, 13, 4291–4313, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-4291-2016, 2016.
Varma, G. V., Reddy, K. N., Baidya Roy, S., Yadav, R., Vangala, G., and Biswas, R.: Indian cereal crops (wheat and rice) phenology and agricultural management data across Indian croplands from 1960's to 2020, PANGAEA [data set], https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.964634, 2024.
Veeranjaneyulu, K.: KrishiKosh: an institutional repository of national agricultural research system in India, Libr. Manag., 35, 345–354, https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-08-2013-0083, 2014.
Wang, X., Folberth, C., Skalsky, R., Wang, S., Chen, B., Liu, Y., Chen, J., and Balkovic, J.: Crop calendar optimization for climate change adaptation in rice-based multiple cropping systems of India and Bangladesh, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 315, 108830, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2022.108830, 2022.
Yin, D., Yan, J., Li, F., Song, T.: Evaluation of global gridded crop models in simulating sugarcane yield in China, Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Lett., 16, 100329, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aosl.2023.100329, 2023.
Yin, D., Li, F., Lu, Y., Zeng, X., Lin, Z., and Zhou, Y.: Assessment of Crop Yield in China Simulated by Thirteen Global Gridded Crop Models, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 41, 420–434, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-023-2234-3, 2024.
Short summary
The study aimed to improve the representation of wheat and rice in a land model for the Indian region. The modified model performed significantly better than the default model in simulating crop phenology, yield, and carbon, water, and energy fluxes compared to observations. The study highlights the need for global land models to use region-specific crop parameters for accurately simulating vegetation processes and land surface processes.
The study aimed to improve the representation of wheat and rice in a land model for the Indian...
