Articles | Volume 15, issue 21
Research article
12 Nov 2018
Research article |  | 12 Nov 2018

A perturbed biogeochemistry model ensemble evaluated against in situ and satellite observations

Prima Anugerahanti, Shovonlal Roy, and Keith Haines

Related authors

FABM-NflexPD 2.0: testing an instantaneous acclimation approach for modeling the implications of phytoplankton eco-physiology for the carbon and nutrient cycles
Onur Kerimoglu, Markus Pahlow, Prima Anugerahanti, and Sherwood Lan Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 95–108,,, 2023
Short summary
FABM-NflexPD 1.0: assessing an instantaneous acclimation approach for modeling phytoplankton growth
Onur Kerimoglu, Prima Anugerahanti, and Sherwood Lan Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6025–6047,,, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeochemistry: Modelling, Aquatic
How much do bacterial growth properties and biodegradable dissolved organic matter control water quality at low flow?
Masihullah Hasanyar, Thomas Romary, Shuaitao Wang, and Nicolas Flipo
Biogeosciences, 20, 1621–1633,,, 2023
Short summary
Methane emissions from Arctic landscapes during 2000–2015: an analysis with land and lake biogeochemistry models
Xiangyu Liu and Qianlai Zhuang
Biogeosciences, 20, 1181–1193,,, 2023
Short summary
Including filter-feeding gelatinous macrozooplankton in a global marine biogeochemical model: model–data comparison and impact on the ocean carbon cycle
Corentin Clerc, Laurent Bopp, Fabio Benedetti, Meike Vogt, and Olivier Aumont
Biogeosciences, 20, 869–895,,, 2023
Short summary
Riverine impact on future projections of marine primary production and carbon uptake
Shuang Gao, Jörg Schwinger, Jerry Tjiputra, Ingo Bethke, Jens Hartmann, Emilio Mayorga, and Christoph Heinze
Biogeosciences, 20, 93–119,,, 2023
Short summary
Subsurface oxygen maximum in oligotrophic marine ecosystems: mapping the interaction between physical and biogeochemical processes
Valeria Di Biagio, Stefano Salon, Laura Feudale, and Gianpiero Cossarini
Biogeosciences, 19, 5553–5574,,, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Adamson, M. W. and Morozov, A. Y.: When can we trust our model predictions? Unearthing structural sensitivity in biological systems, P. Roy. Soc. Lond. A Mat., 469, 20120500,, 2013. a, b, c, d
Aldebert, C., Nerini, D., Gauduchon, M., and Poggiale, J. C.: Does structural sensitivity alter complexity–stability relationships?, Ecol. Complex., 28, 104–112,, 2016. a, b, c
Aldebert, C., Kooi, B. W., Nerini, D., and Poggiale, J. C.: Is structural sensitivity a problem of oversimplified biological models? Insights from nested Dynamic Energy Budget models, J. Theor. Biol., 448, 1–8,,2018. a
Anderson, J. L.: An Ensemble Adjustment Kalman Filter for Data Assimilation, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 2884–2903,<2884:AEAKFF>2.0.CO;2, 2001. a
Anderson, T. R.: Plankton functional type modelling: Running before we can walk?, J. Plankton Res., 27, 1073–1081,, 2005. a, b, c
Short summary
Minor changes in the biogeochemical model equations lead to major dynamical changes. We assessed this structural sensitivity for the MEDUSA biogeochemical model on chlorophyll and nitrogen concentrations at five oceanographic stations over 10 years, using 1-D ensembles generated by combining different process equations. The ensemble performed better than the default model in most of the stations, suggesting that our approach is useful for generating a probabilistic biogeochemical ensemble model.
Final-revised paper