Articles | Volume 20, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1313-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
06 Apr 2023
Research article |
| 06 Apr 2023
| 06 Apr 2023
Towards an ensemble-based evaluation of land surface models in light of uncertain forcings and observations
Vivek K. Arora
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Climate Research
Division, Environment Canada, Victoria, BC, Canada
Christian Seiler
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and
Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Libo Wang
Climate Processes Section, Climate Research Division, Environment and
Climate Change Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Climate Research
Division, Environment Canada, Victoria, BC, Canada
Related authors
Vivek K. Arora, Chris D. Jones, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tatiana Ilyina, Guilherme L. Torres Mendonça, Benjamin Sanderson, Charles Koven, Heather Graven, Michio Kawamiya, Victor Brovkin, John Dunne, Forrest M. Hoffman, Julia Pongratz, James T. Randerson, Anastasia Romanou, Sönke Zaehle, and Kirsten Zickfeld
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5533, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5533, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models (ESM) are important tools for understanding how the Earth’s climate and carbon cycle interact, and how Earth system responds to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The Coupled Climate-Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project (C4MIP) compares Earth system models from around the world in context of climate and carbon cycle interactions. This manuscript describes the new set of experiments for C4MIP for the seventh phase of the coupled modelling intercomparison project (CMIP7).
Marzieh Mortezapour, Kirsten Zickfeld, Vivek K. Arora, and Christine Leclerc
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2620, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2620, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Planting trees is often seen as a simple way to fight climate change, but its effects are more complex. Using a global climate model, we show that while worldwide impacts are small, reforestation can strongly reshape rainfall, water flow, and soil moisture in different regions. These changes persist long after forests recover. Our results highlight that reforestation plans should consider not only carbon storage but also impacts on water and local climates.
Nikolina Mileva, Julia Pongratz, Vivek K. Arora, Akihiko Ito, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Sonali S. McDermid, Paul A. Miller, Daniele Peano, Roland Séférian, Yanwu Zhang, and Wolfgang Buermann
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 2137–2160, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-2137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-2137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Despite forests being so important for mitigating climate change, there are still uncertainties about how much the changes in forest cover contribute to the cooling/warming of the climate. Climate models and real-world observations often disagree about the magnitude and even the direction of these changes. We constrain climate models scenarios of widespread deforestation with satellite and in-situ data and show that models still have difficulties representing the movement of heat and water.
Nathan P. Gillett, Isla R. Simpson, Gabi Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Dann Mitchell, Aurélien Ribes, Hideo Shiogama, Dáithí Stone, Claudia Tebaldi, Piotr Wolski, Wenxia Zhang, and Vivek K. Arora
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4399–4416, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model simulations of the response to human and natural influences together, natural climate influences alone and greenhouse gases alone are key to quantifying human influence on the climate. The last set of such coordinated simulations underpinned key findings in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Here we propose a new set of such simulations to be used in the next generation of attribution studies and to underpin the next IPCC report.
Tomohiro Hajima, Michio Kawamiya, Akihiko Ito, Kaoru Tachiiri, Chris D. Jones, Vivek Arora, Victor Brovkin, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Elena Shevliakova
Biogeosciences, 22, 1447–1473, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyzes atmospheric CO2 concentrations and global carbon budgets simulated by multiple Earth system models, using several types of simulations (CO2 concentration- and emission-driven experiments). We successfully identified problems with regard to the global carbon budget in each model. We also found urgent issues with regard to land use change CO2 emissions that should be solved in the latest generation of models.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda R. Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul K. Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Xin Lan, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 965–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and datasets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Vivek K. Arora, Aranildo Lima, and Rajesh Shrestha
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 291–312, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a Canada-wide assessment of climate change impacts on the hydro-climatology of the region's major river basins. We find that precipitation, runoff, and temperature are all expected to increase over Canada in the future. The northerly Mackenzie and Yukon rivers are relatively less affected by climate change compared to the southerly Fraser and Columbia rivers, which are located in the milder northwestern Pacific region.
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.
Ali Asaadi, Jörg Schwinger, Hanna Lee, Jerry Tjiputra, Vivek Arora, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Tomohiro Hajima, Yeray Santana-Falcón, and Chris D. Jones
Biogeosciences, 21, 411–435, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon cycle feedback metrics are employed to assess phases of positive and negative CO2 emissions. When emissions become negative, we find that the model disagreement in feedback metrics increases more strongly than expected from the assumption that the uncertainties accumulate linearly with time. The geographical patterns of such metrics over land highlight that differences in response between tropical/subtropical and temperate/boreal ecosystems are a major source of model disagreement.
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.
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.
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Almut Arneth, Stefanie Falk, Atul K. Jain, Fortunat Joos, Daniel Kennedy, Jürgen Knauer, Stephen Sitch, Michael O'Sullivan, Naiqing Pan, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Nicolas Vuichard, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 767–795, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Nitrogen (N) is an essential limiting nutrient to terrestrial carbon (C) sequestration. We evaluate N cycling in an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models. We find that variability in N processes across models is large. Models tended to overestimate C storage per unit N in vegetation and soil, which could have consequences for projecting the future terrestrial C sink. However, N cycling measurements are highly uncertain, and more are necessary to guide the development of N cycling in models.
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.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Luke Gregor, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Ramdane Alkama, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Lucas Gloege, Giacomo Grassi, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Annika Jersild, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Keith Lindsay, Junjie Liu, Zhu Liu, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Matthew J. McGrath, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Naiqing Pan, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Carmen Rodriguez, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Jamie D. Shutler, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Xiangjun Tian, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Chris Whitehead, Anna Willstrand Wranne, Rebecca Wright, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2022 describes the datasets and methodology used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, the land ecosystems, and the ocean. These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Charles D. Koven, Vivek K. Arora, Patricia Cadule, Rosie A. Fisher, Chris D. Jones, David M. Lawrence, Jared Lewis, Keith Lindsay, Sabine Mathesius, Malte Meinshausen, Michael Mills, Zebedee Nicholls, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Neil C. Swart, William R. Wieder, and Kirsten Zickfeld
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 885–909, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We explore the long-term dynamics of Earth's climate and carbon cycles under a pair of contrasting scenarios to the year 2300 using six models that include both climate and carbon cycle dynamics. One scenario assumes very high emissions, while the second assumes a peak in emissions, followed by rapid declines to net negative emissions. We show that the models generally agree that warming is roughly proportional to carbon emissions but that many other aspects of the model projections differ.
Vivek K. Arora, Chris D. Jones, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tatiana Ilyina, Guilherme L. Torres Mendonça, Benjamin Sanderson, Charles Koven, Heather Graven, Michio Kawamiya, Victor Brovkin, John Dunne, Forrest M. Hoffman, Julia Pongratz, James T. Randerson, Anastasia Romanou, Sönke Zaehle, and Kirsten Zickfeld
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5533, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5533, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models (ESM) are important tools for understanding how the Earth’s climate and carbon cycle interact, and how Earth system responds to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The Coupled Climate-Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project (C4MIP) compares Earth system models from around the world in context of climate and carbon cycle interactions. This manuscript describes the new set of experiments for C4MIP for the seventh phase of the coupled modelling intercomparison project (CMIP7).
Mickaël Lalande, Alexandre Roy, Libo Wang, Diana Verseghy, Vincent Vionnet, Florent Dominé, and Christophe Kinnard
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 9581–9625, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-9581-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-9581-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study enhances a snow model for Arctic environments by improving the heat exchanges within the snowpack and at its interfaces, revising the compaction scheme, and adding consideration of blowing snow sublimation losses. Simulations at ten Arctic, mid-latitude, and Alpine sites show significant reductions in simulated soil and snow temperature biases and improved simulated snow depth and density, which are key features to improve simulated energy, water, and carbon budgets in the Arctic.
Christian Seiler
Earth Syst. Dynam., 17, 651–671, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-651-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-651-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study shows how machine learning combined with global Earth observations can improve simulations of the land carbon cycle. Optimizing key model parameters enhances the accuracy of historical carbon fluxes, while machine-learning tools help assess the robustness of these results in the presence of compensating parameter effects. The findings demonstrate that parameter optimization strongly influences simulated carbon fluxes, highlighting its importance for improving climate models.
Marzieh Mortezapour, Kirsten Zickfeld, Vivek K. Arora, and Christine Leclerc
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2620, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2620, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Planting trees is often seen as a simple way to fight climate change, but its effects are more complex. Using a global climate model, we show that while worldwide impacts are small, reforestation can strongly reshape rainfall, water flow, and soil moisture in different regions. These changes persist long after forests recover. Our results highlight that reforestation plans should consider not only carbon storage but also impacts on water and local climates.
Cheng Gong, Yan Wang, Hanqin Tian, Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Nicolas Vuichard, and Sönke Zaehle
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 17009–17025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-17009-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-17009-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our results showed substantially varied fertilizer-induced soil NOx emissions in 2019 from 0.84 to 2.2 Tg N yr-1 globally. Such variations further lead to 0.1 to 3.3 ppbv summertime ozone enhancement in agricultural hotspot regions and 6.7 ppbv to 16.6 ppbv reductions in global methane concentrations.
Nikolina Mileva, Julia Pongratz, Vivek K. Arora, Akihiko Ito, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Sonali S. McDermid, Paul A. Miller, Daniele Peano, Roland Séférian, Yanwu Zhang, and Wolfgang Buermann
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 2137–2160, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-2137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-2137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Despite forests being so important for mitigating climate change, there are still uncertainties about how much the changes in forest cover contribute to the cooling/warming of the climate. Climate models and real-world observations often disagree about the magnitude and even the direction of these changes. We constrain climate models scenarios of widespread deforestation with satellite and in-situ data and show that models still have difficulties representing the movement of heat and water.
Libo Wang, Lawrence Mudryk, Joe R. Melton, Colleen Mortimer, Jason Cole, Gesa Meyer, Paul Bartlett, and Mickaël Lalande
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 6597–6621, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6597-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6597-2025, 2025
Short summary
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.
Nathan P. Gillett, Isla R. Simpson, Gabi Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Dann Mitchell, Aurélien Ribes, Hideo Shiogama, Dáithí Stone, Claudia Tebaldi, Piotr Wolski, Wenxia Zhang, and Vivek K. Arora
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4399–4416, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model simulations of the response to human and natural influences together, natural climate influences alone and greenhouse gases alone are key to quantifying human influence on the climate. The last set of such coordinated simulations underpinned key findings in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Here we propose a new set of such simulations to be used in the next generation of attribution studies and to underpin the next IPCC report.
Tomohiro Hajima, Michio Kawamiya, Akihiko Ito, Kaoru Tachiiri, Chris D. Jones, Vivek Arora, Victor Brovkin, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Elena Shevliakova
Biogeosciences, 22, 1447–1473, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyzes atmospheric CO2 concentrations and global carbon budgets simulated by multiple Earth system models, using several types of simulations (CO2 concentration- and emission-driven experiments). We successfully identified problems with regard to the global carbon budget in each model. We also found urgent issues with regard to land use change CO2 emissions that should be solved in the latest generation of models.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda R. Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul K. Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Xin Lan, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 965–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-965-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and datasets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Vivek K. Arora, Aranildo Lima, and Rajesh Shrestha
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 291–312, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-291-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a Canada-wide assessment of climate change impacts on the hydro-climatology of the region's major river basins. We find that precipitation, runoff, and temperature are all expected to increase over Canada in the future. The northerly Mackenzie and Yukon rivers are relatively less affected by climate change compared to the southerly Fraser and Columbia rivers, which are located in the milder northwestern Pacific region.
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.
Hanqin Tian, Naiqing Pan, Rona L. Thompson, Josep G. Canadell, Parvadha Suntharalingam, Pierre Regnier, Eric A. Davidson, Michael Prather, Philippe Ciais, Marilena Muntean, Shufen Pan, Wilfried Winiwarter, Sönke Zaehle, Feng Zhou, Robert B. Jackson, Hermann W. Bange, Sarah Berthet, Zihao Bian, Daniele Bianchi, Alexander F. Bouwman, Erik T. Buitenhuis, Geoffrey Dutton, Minpeng Hu, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Aurich Jeltsch-Thömmes, Fortunat Joos, Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Paul B. Krummel, Xin Lan, Angela Landolfi, Ronny Lauerwald, Ya Li, Chaoqun Lu, Taylor Maavara, Manfredi Manizza, Dylan B. Millet, Jens Mühle, Prabir K. Patra, Glen P. Peters, Xiaoyu Qin, Peter Raymond, Laure Resplandy, Judith A. Rosentreter, Hao Shi, Qing Sun, Daniele Tonina, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Junjie Wang, Kelley C. Wells, Luke M. Western, Chris Wilson, Jia Yang, Yuanzhi Yao, Yongfa You, and Qing Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2543–2604, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas 273 times more potent than carbon dioxide, have increased by 25 % since the preindustrial period, with the highest observed growth rate in 2020 and 2021. This rapid growth rate has primarily been due to a 40 % increase in anthropogenic emissions since 1980. Observed atmospheric N2O concentrations in recent years have exceeded the worst-case climate scenario, underscoring the importance of reducing anthropogenic N2O emissions.
Ali Asaadi, Jörg Schwinger, Hanna Lee, Jerry Tjiputra, Vivek Arora, Roland Séférian, Spencer Liddicoat, Tomohiro Hajima, Yeray Santana-Falcón, and Chris D. Jones
Biogeosciences, 21, 411–435, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-411-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon cycle feedback metrics are employed to assess phases of positive and negative CO2 emissions. When emissions become negative, we find that the model disagreement in feedback metrics increases more strongly than expected from the assumption that the uncertainties accumulate linearly with time. The geographical patterns of such metrics over land highlight that differences in response between tropical/subtropical and temperate/boreal ecosystems are a major source of model disagreement.
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.
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.
Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Vivek K. Arora, Christian Seiler, Almut Arneth, Stefanie Falk, Atul K. Jain, Fortunat Joos, Daniel Kennedy, Jürgen Knauer, Stephen Sitch, Michael O'Sullivan, Naiqing Pan, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Nicolas Vuichard, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 767–795, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Nitrogen (N) is an essential limiting nutrient to terrestrial carbon (C) sequestration. We evaluate N cycling in an ensemble of terrestrial biosphere models. We find that variability in N processes across models is large. Models tended to overestimate C storage per unit N in vegetation and soil, which could have consequences for projecting the future terrestrial C sink. However, N cycling measurements are highly uncertain, and more are necessary to guide the development of N cycling in models.
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.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Luke Gregor, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Ramdane Alkama, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Lucas Gloege, Giacomo Grassi, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Annika Jersild, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Keith Lindsay, Junjie Liu, Zhu Liu, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Matthew J. McGrath, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Naiqing Pan, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Carmen Rodriguez, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Jamie D. Shutler, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Xiangjun Tian, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Chris Whitehead, Anna Willstrand Wranne, Rebecca Wright, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2022 describes the datasets and methodology used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, the land ecosystems, and the ocean. These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Charles D. Koven, Vivek K. Arora, Patricia Cadule, Rosie A. Fisher, Chris D. Jones, David M. Lawrence, Jared Lewis, Keith Lindsay, Sabine Mathesius, Malte Meinshausen, Michael Mills, Zebedee Nicholls, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Neil C. Swart, William R. Wieder, and Kirsten Zickfeld
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 885–909, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We explore the long-term dynamics of Earth's climate and carbon cycles under a pair of contrasting scenarios to the year 2300 using six models that include both climate and carbon cycle dynamics. One scenario assumes very high emissions, while the second assumes a peak in emissions, followed by rapid declines to net negative emissions. We show that the models generally agree that warming is roughly proportional to carbon emissions but that many other aspects of the model projections differ.
Cited articles
Agustí-Panareda, A., Diamantakis, M., Massart, S., Chevallier, F., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Barré, J., Curcoll, R., Engelen, R., Langerock, B., Law, R. M., Loh, Z., Morguí, J. A., Parrington, M., Peuch, V.-H., Ramonet, M., Roehl, C., Vermeulen, A. T., Warneke, T., and Wunch, D.: Modelling CO2 weather – why horizontal resolution matters, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 7347–7376, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7347-2019, 2019.
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, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00890.x, 2005.
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: Simulating Competition and Coexistence between
Plant Functional Types in a Dynamic Vegetation Model, Earth Interact., 10,
1–30, 2006.
Arora, V. K. and Melton, J. R.: Reduction in global area burned and wildfire
emissions since 1930s enhances carbon uptake by land, Nat. Commun., 9, 1326,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03838-0, 2018.
Arora, V. K., Boer, G. J., Christian, J. R., Curry, C. L., Denman, K. L.,
Zahariev, K., Flato, G. M., Scinocca, J. F., Merryfield, W. J., and Lee, W.
G.: The Effect of Terrestrial Photosynthesis Down Regulation on the
Twentieth-Century Carbon Budget Simulated with the CCCma Earth System Model,
J. Climate, 22, 6066–6088, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI3037.1, 2009.
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.
Arora, V. K., Katavouta, A., Williams, R. G., Jones, C. D., Brovkin, V., Friedlingstein, P., Schwinger, J., Bopp, L., Boucher, O., Cadule, P., Chamberlain, M. A., Christian, J. R., Delire, C., Fisher, R. A., Hajima, T., Ilyina, T., Joetzjer, E., Kawamiya, M., Koven, C. D., Krasting, J. P., Law, R. M., Lawrence, D. M., Lenton, A., Lindsay, K., Pongratz, J., Raddatz, T., Séférian, R., Tachiiri, K., Tjiputra, J. F., Wiltshire, A., Wu, T., and Ziehn, T.: Carbon–concentration and carbon–climate feedbacks in CMIP6 models and their comparison to CMIP5 models, Biogeosciences, 17, 4173–4222, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4173-2020, 2020.
Asaadi, A. and Arora, V. K.: Implementation of nitrogen cycle in the CLASSIC land model, Biogeosciences, 18, 669–706, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-669-2021, 2021.
Avitabile, V., Herold, M., Heuvelink, G. B. M., Lewis, S. L., Phillips, O. L., Asner, G. P., Armston, J., Ashton, P. S., Banin, L., Bayol, N., Berry, N. J., Boeckx, P., de Jong, B. H. J., DeVries, B., Girardin, C. A. J., Kearsley, E., Lindsell, J. A., Lopez-Gonzalez, G., Lucas, R., Malhi, Y., Morel, A., Mitchard, E. T. A., Nagy, L., Qie, L., Quinones, M. J., Ryan, C. M., Ferry, S. J. W., Sunderland, T., Laurin, G. V., Gatti, R. C., Valentini, R., Verbeeck, H., Wijaya, A., and Willcock, S.: An integrated pan-tropical biomass map using multiple reference datasets, Glob. Change Biol., 22, 1406–1420, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13139, 2016.
Beyer, H.: Tukey, John W.: Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Reading, Mass. – Menlo Park, Cal., London, Amsterdam, Don Mills, Ontario, Sydney 1977, XVI, 688 S., Biom. J., 23,: 413–414, https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.4710230408, 1981.
Beven, K. and Binley, A.: The future of distributed models: Model
calibration and uncertainty prediction, Hydrol. Process., 6, 279–298,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.3360060305, 1992.
Bonan, G. B. and Doney, S. C.: Climate, ecosystems, and planetary futures:
The challenge to predict life in Earth system models, Science, 359,
eaam8328, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam8328, 2018.
Bonan, G. B., Lombardozzi, D. L., Wieder, W. R., Oleson, K. W., Lawrence, D.
M., Hoffman, F. M., and Collier, N.: Model Structure and Climate Data
Uncertainty in Historical Simulations of the Terrestrial Carbon Cycle
(1850–2014), Global Biogeochem. Cy., 33, 1310–1326,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006175, 2019.
Booth, B. B. B., Jones, C. D., Collins, M., Totterdell, I. J., Cox, P. M.,
Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Betts, R. A., Harris, G. R., and Lloyd, J.: High
sensitivity of future global warming to land carbon cycle processes,
Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 024002,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/2/024002, 2012.
Chuvieco, E., Lizundia-Loiola, J., Pettinari, M. L., Ramo, R., Padilla, M., Tansey, K., Mouillot, F., Laurent, P., Storm, T., Heil, A., and Plummer, S.: Generation and analysis of a new global burned area product based on MODIS 250 m reflectance bands and thermal anomalies, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 2015–2031, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2015-2018, 2018.
Claverie, M., Matthews, J. L., Vermote, E. F., and Justice, C. O.: A 30+
Year AVHRR LAI and FAPAR Climate Data Record: Algorithm Description and
Validation, Remote Sens., 8, 263, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8030263, 2016.
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 Syst., 10, 2731–2754, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001354,
2018.
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.
Dai, A. and Trenberth, K. E.: Estimates of Freshwater Discharge from
Continents: Latitudinal and Seasonal Variations, J. Hydrometeorol., 3,
660–687, 2002.
Di Vittorio, A. V., Chini, L. P., Bond-Lamberty, B., Mao, J., Shi, X., Truesdale, J., Craig, A., Calvin, K., Jones, A., Collins, W. D., Edmonds, J., Hurtt, G. C., Thornton, P., and Thomson, A.: From land use to land cover: restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment–earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations, Biogeosciences, 11, 6435–6450, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014, 2014.
Di Vittorio, A. V., Mao, J., Shi, X., Chini, L., Hurtt, G., and Collins, W.
D.: Quantifying the Effects of Historical Land Cover Conversion Uncertainty
on Global Carbon and Climate Estimates, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 974–982,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075124, 2018.
ESA: Land Cover CCI Product User Guide Version 2 Technical Report, European
Space Agency, http://maps.elie.ucl.ac.be/CCI/viewer/download/ESACCI-LC-Ph2-PUGv2_2.0.pdf (last access: July 2022), 2017.
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.
Fischer, G., Nachtergaele, F., Prieler, S., van Velthuizen, H. T., Verelst,
L., and Wiberg, D.: Global Agro-ecological Zones Assessment for Agriculture
(GAEZ 2008), IIASA and FAO, Laxenburg, Austria and Rome, Italy,
https://www.fao.org/soils-portal/data-hub/soil-maps-and-databases/harmonized-world-soil-database-v12/en/ (last access: July 2022), 2008.
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 Syst., 12, e2018MS001453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001453, 2020.
Garrigues, S., Lacaze, R., Baret, F., Morisette, J. T., Weiss, M., Nickeson,
J. E., Fernandes, R., Plummer, S., Shabanov, N. V., Myneni, R. B., and
Others: Validation and intercomparison of global Leaf Area Index products
derived from remote sensing data, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G02028, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000635,
2008.
Giglio, L., Randerson, J. T., van der Werf, G. R., Kasibhatla, P. S., Collatz, G. J., Morton, D. C., and DeFries, R. S.: Assessing variability and long-term trends in burned area by merging multiple satellite fire products, Biogeosciences, 7, 1171–1186, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1171-2010, 2010.
Giglio, L., Randerson, J. T., and van der Werf, G. R.: Analysis of daily,
monthly, and annual burned area using the fourth-generation global fire
emissions database (GFED4), J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 118, 317–328,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrg.20042, 2013.
Harris, I. C.: CRU JRA v2.1: A forcings dataset of gridded land surface
blend of Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and Japanese reanalysis (JRA) data;
January 1901–December 2019, Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, University of
East Anglia Climatic Research Unit,
https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/10d2c73e5a7d46f4ada08b0a26302ef7 (last access: July 2022), 2020.
Hegglin, M., Kinnison, D., and Lamarque, J.-F.: Wet and dry NHx and NOy
deposition data, input4MIPs.CMIP6.CMIP.NCAR, Version 2016-11-15, Earth
System Grid Federation, https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/input4MIPs.10448,
2016.
Hengl, T., Mendes de Jesus, J., Heuvelink, G. B. M., Ruiperez Gonzalez, M.,
Kilibarda, M., Blagotiæ, 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.
Hobeichi, S., Abramowitz, G., and Evans, J.: Conserving Land-Atmosphere
Synthesis Suite (CLASS), J. Climate, 33, 1821–1844, 2019.
Hornberger, G. M. and Spear, R. C.: Approach to the preliminary analysis of
environmental systems, J. Env. Manage U. S., 12, https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6396608 (last access: July 2022), 1981.
Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L., Sahajpal, R., Frolking, S., Bodirsky, B. L., Calvin, K., Doelman, J. C., Fisk, J., Fujimori, S., Klein Goldewijk, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Heinimann, A., Humpenöder, F., Jungclaus, J., Kaplan, J. O., Kennedy, J., Krisztin, T., Lawrence, D., Lawrence, P., Ma, L., Mertz, O., Pongratz, J., Popp, A., Poulter, B., Riahi, K., Shevliakova, E., Stehfest, E., Thornton, P., Tubiello, F. N., van Vuuren, D. P., and Zhang, X.: Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5425–5464, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5425-2020, 2020.
Jacobson, A. R., Schuldt, K. N., Miller, J. B., Oda, T., et al.: Carbontracker CT2019, Model published 2020 by NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Global Monitoring Division, https://doi.org/10.25925/39m3-6069, 2020.
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.
Jung, M., Schwalm, C., Migliavacca, M., Walther, S., Camps-Valls, G., Koirala, S., Anthoni, P., Besnard, S., Bodesheim, P., Carvalhais, N., Chevallier, F., Gans, F., Goll, D. S., Haverd, V., Köhler, P., Ichii, K., Jain, A. K., Liu, J., Lombardozzi, D., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nelson, J. A., O'Sullivan, M., Pallandt, M., Papale, D., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Rödenbeck, C., Sitch, S., Tramontana, G., Walker, A., Weber, U., and Reichstein, M.: Scaling carbon fluxes from eddy covariance sites to globe: synthesis and evaluation of the FLUXCOM approach, Biogeosciences, 17, 1343–1365, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-1343-2020, 2020.
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.
Kou-Giesbrecht, S. and Arora, V. K.: Representing the Dynamic Response of
Vegetation to Nitrogen Limitation via Biological Nitrogen Fixation in the
CLASSIC Land Model, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 36, e2022GB007341,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GB007341, 2022.
Kyker-Snowman, E., Lombardozzi, D. L., Bonan, G. B., Cheng, S. J., Dukes, J.
S., Frey, S. D., Jacobs, E. M., McNellis, R., Rady, J. M., Smith, N. G.,
Thomas, R. Q., Wieder, W. R., and Grandy, A. S.: Increasing the spatial and
temporal impact of ecological research: A roadmap for integrating a novel
terrestrial process into an Earth system model, Glob. Change Biol., 28,
665–684, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15894, 2022.
Lawrence, P. J. and Chase, T. N.: Representing a new MODIS consistent land
surface in the Community Land Model (CLM 3.0), J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 112, G01023, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JG000168, 2007.
Li, X. and Xiao, J.: Mapping Photosynthesis Solely from Solar-Induced
Chlorophyll Fluorescence: A Global, Fine-Resolution Dataset of Gross Primary
Production Derived from OCO-2, Remote Sens., 11, 2563, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11212563, 2019.
Li, J., Duan, Q., Wang, Y.-P., Gong, W., Gan, Y., and Wang, C.: Parameter
optimization for carbon and water fluxes in two global land surface models
based on surrogate modelling, Int. J. Climate, 38, 1016–1031,
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5428, 2018.
Li, W., MacBean, N., Ciais, P., Defourny, P., Lamarche, C., Bontemps, S., Houghton, R. A., and Peng, S.: Gross and net land cover changes in the main plant functional types derived from the annual ESA CCI land cover maps (1992–2015), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 219–234, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-219-2018, 2018.
Liu, Y. Y., Parinussa, R. M., Dorigo, W. A., De Jeu, R. A. M., Wagner, W., van Dijk, A. I. J. M., McCabe, M. F., and Evans, J. P.: Developing an improved soil moisture dataset by blending passive and active microwave satellite-based retrievals, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 425–436, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-425-2011, 2011.
Lu, C. and Tian, H.: Global nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer use for agriculture production in the past half century: shifted hot spots and nutrient imbalance, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 9, 181–192, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-181-2017, 2017.
Mauder, M., Foken, T., and Cuxart, J.: Surface-Energy-Balance Closure over
Land: A Review, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 177, 395–426,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-020-00529-6, 2020.
Meiyappan, P. and Jain, A. K.: Three distinct global estimates of historical
land-cover change and land-use conversions for over 200 years, Front. Earth
Sci., 6, 122–139, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-012-0314-2, 2012.
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., 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.
Melton, J.: Model code for the Canadian Land Surface Scheme Including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC), [code], https://cccma.gitlab.io/classic_pages/, last access: July 2022.
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.
Mudryk, L.: Historical gridded snow water equivalent and snow cover fraction
over Canada from remote sensing and land surface models,
http://climate-scenarios.canada.ca/?page=blended-snow-data (last access: October 2022), 2020.
Myneni, R. B., Hoffman, S., Knyazikhin, Y., Privette, J. L., Glassy, J.,
Tian, Y., Wang, Y., Song, X., Zhang, Y., Smith, G. R., Lotsch, A., Friedl,
M., Morisette, J. T., Votava, P., Nemani, R. R., and Running, S. W.: Global
products of vegetation leaf area and fraction absorbed PAR from year one of
MODIS data, Remote Sens. Environ., 83, 214–231, 2002.
Pastorello, G., Trotta, C., Canfora, E., Chu, H., Christianson, D., Cheah,
Y.-W., Poindexter, C., Chen, J., Elbashandy, A., Humphrey, M., Isaac, P.,
Polidori, D., Ribeca, A., van Ingen, C., Zhang, L., Amiro, B., Ammann, C.,
Arain, M. A., Ardö, J., Arkebauer, T., Arndt, S. K., Arriga, N.,
Aubinet, M., Aurela, M., Baldocchi, D., Barr, A., Beamesderfer, E.,
Marchesini, L. B., Bergeron, O., Beringer, J., Bernhofer, C., Berveiller,
D., Billesbach, D., Black, T. A., Blanken, P. D., Bohrer, G., Boike, J.,
Bolstad, P. V., Bonal, D., Bonnefond, J.-M., Bowling, D. R., Bracho, R.,
Brodeur, J., Brümmer, C., Buchmann, N., Burban, B., Burns, S. P.,
Buysse, P., Cale, P., Cavagna, M., Cellier, P., Chen, S., Chini, I.,
Christensen, T. R., Cleverly, J., Collalti, A., Consalvo, C., Cook, B. D.,
Cook, D., Coursolle, C., Cremonese, E., Curtis, P. S., D'Andrea, E., da
Rocha, H., Dai, X., Davis, K. J., De Cinti, B., de Grandcourt, A., De Ligne,
A., De Oliveira, R. C., Delpierre, N., Desai, A. R., Di Bella, C. M., di
Tommasi, P., Dolman, H., Domingo, F., Dong, G., Dore, S., Duce, P.,
Dufrêne, E., Dunn, A., Dušek, J., Eamus, D., Eichelmann, U.,
ElKhidir, H. A. M., Eugster, W., Ewenz, C. M., Ewers, B., Famulari, D.,
Fares, S., Feigenwinter, I., Feitz, A., Fensholt, R., Filippa, G., Fischer,
M., Frank, J., Galvagno, M., Gharun, M., Gianelle, D., et al.: The
FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance
data, Sci. Data, 7, 225, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0534-3, 2020.
Peng, S., Ciais, P., Maignan, F., Li, W., Chang, J., Wang, T., and Yue, C.:
Sensitivity of land use change emission estimates to historical land use and
land cover mapping, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 31, 626–643,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005360, 2017.
Poulter, B., Hattermann, F., Hawkins, E., Zaehle, S., Sitch, S.,
Restrepo-Coupe, N., Heyder, U., and Cramer, W.: Robust dynamics of Amazon
dieback to climate change with perturbed ecosystem model parameters, Glob.
Change Biol., 16, 2476–2495,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.02157.x, 2010.
Reusch, A. and Gibbs, H. K.: New IPCC Tier-1 Global Biomass Carbon Map For
the Year 2000, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/epubs/ndp/global_carbon/carbon_documentation.html (last access: July 2022), 2008.
Rödenbeck, C., Zaehle, S., Keeling, R., and Heimann, M.: How does the terrestrial carbon exchange respond to inter-annual climatic variations? A quantification based on atmospheric CO2 data, Biogeosciences, 15, 2481–2498, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-2481-2018, 2018.
Santoro, M., Beaudoin, A., Beer, C., Cartus, O., Fransson, J. E. S., Hall,
R. J., Pathe, C., Schmullius, C., Schepaschenko, D., Shvidenko, A., Thurner,
M., and Wegmüller, U.: Forest growing stock volume of the northern
hemisphere: Spatially explicit estimates for 2010 derived from Envisat ASAR,
Remote Sens Environ., 168, 316–334, 2015.
Seiler, C.: Repository for the data and code required for reproducing the results presented in the paper “Are terrestrial biosphere models fit for simulating the global land carbon sink?” by Seiler et al., 2021, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5670387, 2021.
Seiler, C.: Full set of AMBER plots for the results presented in this manuscript, [data set], https://cseiler.shinyapps.io/ShinyCLASSIC/, last access: July 2022.
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.
Seiler, C., Melton, J. R., Arora, V. K., Sitch, S., Friedlingstein, P.,
Anthoni, P., Goll, D., Jain, A. K., Joetzjer, E., Lienert, S., Lombardozzi,
D., Luyssaert, S., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Tian, H., Vuichard, N., Walker, A.
P., Yuan, W., and Zaehle, S.: Are Terrestrial Biosphere Models Fit for
Simulating the Global Land Carbon Sink?, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 14,
e2021MS002946, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002946, 2022.
Shangguan, W., Dai, Y., Duan, Q., Liu, B., and Yuan, H.: A global soil data
set for earth system modeling, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 6, 249–263,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2013MS000293, 2014.
Slevin, D., Tett, S. F. B., Exbrayat, J.-F., Bloom, A. A., and Williams, M.: Global evaluation of gross primary productivity in the JULES land surface model v3.4.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2651–2670, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2651-2017, 2017.
Stackhouse, P. W., Jr, 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.
Strahler, A. H., Muller, J., Lucht, W., Schaaf, C., and others: MODIS
BRDF/albedo product: algorithm theoretical basis document version 5.0,
MODIS, https://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/atbd/atbd_mod09.pdf (last access: July 2022), 1999.
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.
Tebaldi, C. and Knutti, R.: The use of the multi-model ensemble in
probabilistic climate projections, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 365, 2053–2075, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2076, 2007.
Tian, Y., Dickinson, R. E., Zhou, L., and Shaikh, M.: Impact of new land
boundary conditions from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
(MODIS) data on the climatology of land surface variables, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D20115, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004499, 2004.
Todd-Brown, K. E. O., Randerson, J. T., Post, W. M., Hoffman, F. M., Tarnocai, C., Schuur, E. A. G., and Allison, S. D.: Causes of variation in soil carbon simulations from CMIP5 Earth system models and comparison with observations, Biogeosciences, 10, 1717–1736, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1717-2013, 2013.
van den Hurk, B., Kim, H., Krinner, G., Seneviratne, S. I., Derksen, C., Oki, T., Douville, H., Colin, J., Ducharne, A., Cheruy, F., Viovy, N., Puma, M. J., Wada, Y., Li, W., Jia, B., Alessandri, A., Lawrence, D. M., Weedon, G. P., Ellis, R., Hagemann, S., Mao, J., Flanner, M. G., Zampieri, M., Materia, S., Law, R. M., and Sheffield, J.: LS3MIP (v1.0) contribution to CMIP6: the Land Surface, Snow and Soil moisture Model Intercomparison Project – aims, setup and expected outcome, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2809–2832, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2809-2016, 2016.
Verger, A., Baret, F., and Weiss, M.: Near real-time vegetation monitoring
at global scale, in: IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 7, 8, 3473–3481, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2328632, 2014.
Verseghy, D. L.: Class – A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMS, I. Soil
model, Int. J. Clim., 11, 111–133,
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370110202, 1991.
Verseghy, D. L., McFarlane, N. A., and Lazare, M.: Class – A Canadian land
surface scheme for GCMS, II. Vegetation model and coupled runs, Int. J.
Clim., 13, 347–370, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370130402, 1993.
Wang, A., Price, D. T., and Arora, V.: Estimating changes in global
vegetation cover (1850–2100) for use in climate models, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 20, GB3028, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002514, 2006.
Wang, L., Bartlett, P., Chan, E., and Xiao, M.: Mapping of Plant Functional
Type from Satellite-Derived Land Cover Datasets for Climate Models, in:
IGARSS 2018–2018, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 3416–3419, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2018.8518046, 2018.
Wang, L., Bartlett, P., Pouliot, D., Chan, E., Lamarche, C., Wulder, M. A.,
Defourny, P., and Brady, M.: Comparison and Assessment of Regional and
Global Land Cover Datasets for Use in CLASS over Canada, Remote Sens., 11,
2286, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11192286, 2019.
Wang, L., Arora, V. K., Bartlett, P., Chan, E., and Curasi, S. R.: Mapping of ESA-CCI land cover data to plant functional types for use in the CLASSIC land model, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-923, 2022.
Wieder, W.: Regridded Harmonized World Soil Database v1.2,
https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1247, 2014.
Wu, Z., Ahlström, A., Smith, B., Ardö, J., Eklundh, L., Fensholt,
R., and Lehsten, V.: Climate data induced uncertainty in model-based
estimations of terrestrial primary productivity, Environ. Res. Lett., 12,
064013, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6fd8, 2017.
Xue, B.-L., Guo, Q., Hu, T., Wang, G., Wang, Y., Tao, S., Su, Y., Liu, J.,
and Zhao, X.: Evaluation of modeled global vegetation carbon dynamics:
Analysis based on global carbon flux and above-ground biomass data, Ecol.
Modell., 355, 84–96, 2017.
Zhang, Y. and Liang, S.: Fusion of Multiple Gridded Biomass Datasets for
Generating a Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Map, Remote Sens., 12, 2559, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162559,
2020.
Zhang, Y., Xiao, X., Wu, X., Zhou, S., Zhang, G., Qin, Y., and Dong, J.: A
global moderate resolution dataset of gross primary production of vegetation
for 2000–2016, Sci. Data, 4, 170165, https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.165, 2017.
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.
The behaviour of natural systems is now very often represented through mathematical models....
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint