Articles | Volume 20, issue 23
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4795-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4795-2023
Research article
 | 
06 Dec 2023
Research article |  | 06 Dec 2023

Temporal variability of observed and simulated gross primary productivity, modulated by vegetation state and hydrometeorological drivers

Jan De Pue, Sebastian Wieneke, Ana Bastos, José Miguel Barrios, Liyang Liu, Philippe Ciais, Alirio Arboleda, Rafiq Hamdi, Maral Maleki, Fabienne Maignan, Françoise Gellens-Meulenberghs, Ivan Janssens, and Manuela Balzarolo

Related authors

Local-scale evaluation of the simulated interactions between energy, water and vegetation in ISBA, ORCHIDEE and a diagnostic model
Jan De Pue, José Miguel Barrios, Liyang Liu, Philippe Ciais, Alirio Arboleda, Rafiq Hamdi, Manuela Balzarolo, Fabienne Maignan, and Françoise Gellens-Meulenberghs
Biogeosciences, 19, 4361–4386, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-4361-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-4361-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeochemistry: Modelling, Terrestrial
Estimates of critical loads and exceedances of acidity and nutrient nitrogen for mineral soils in Canada for 2014–2016 average annual sulfur and nitrogen atmospheric deposition
Hazel Cathcart, Julian Aherne, Michael D. Moran, Verica Savic-Jovcic, Paul A. Makar, and Amanda Cole
Biogeosciences, 22, 535–554, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-535-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-535-2025, 2025
Short summary
Development of the DO3SE-Crop model to assess ozone effects on crop phenology, biomass, and yield
Pritha Pande, Sam Bland, Nathan Booth, Jo Cook, Zhaozhong Feng, and Lisa Emberson
Biogeosciences, 22, 181–212, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-181-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-181-2025, 2025
Short summary
Future methane fluxes of peatlands are controlled by management practices and fluctuations in hydrological conditions due to climatic variability
Vilna Tyystjärvi, Tiina Markkanen, Leif Backman, Maarit Raivonen, Antti Leppänen, Xuefei Li, Paavo Ojanen, Kari Minkkinen, Roosa Hautala, Mikko Peltoniemi, Jani Anttila, Raija Laiho, Annalea Lohila, Raisa Mäkipää, and Tuula Aalto
Biogeosciences, 21, 5745–5771, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5745-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5745-2024, 2024
Short summary
Understanding and simulating cropland and non-cropland burning in Europe using the BASE (Burnt Area Simulator for Europe) model
Matthew Forrest, Jessica Hetzer, Maik Billing, Simon P. K. Bowring, Eric Kosczor, Luke Oberhagemann, Oliver Perkins, Dan Warren, Fátima Arrogante-Funes, Kirsten Thonicke, and Thomas Hickler
Biogeosciences, 21, 5539–5560, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5539-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5539-2024, 2024
Short summary
Representation of the terrestrial carbon cycle in CMIP6
Bettina K. Gier, Manuel Schlund, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Sönke Zaehle, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 21, 5321–5360, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

AghaKouchak, A., Farahmand, A., Melton, F. S., Teixeira, J., Anderson, M. C., Wardlow, B. D., and Hain, C. R.: Remote sensing of drought: Progress, challenges and opportunities, Rev. Geophys., 53, 452–480, 2015. a
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Beer, C., Ciais, P., Harper, A., Jones, C., Murray-Tortarolo, G., Papale, D., Parazoo, N. C., Peylin, P., Piao, S., Sitch, S., Viovy, N., Wiltshire, A., and Moasheng, Z.: Spatiotemporal patterns of terrestrial gross primary production: A review, Rev. Geophys., 53, 785–818, 2015. a, b, c, d
Badgley, G., Field, C. B., and Berry, J. A.: Canopy near-infrared reflectance and terrestrial photosynthesis, Science Advances, 3, e1602244, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1602244, 2017. a, b
Badgley, G., Anderegg, L. D., Berry, J. A., and Field, C. B.: Terrestrial gross primary production: Using NIRV to scale from site to globe, Glob. Change Biol., 25, 3731–3740, 2019. a
Baldocchi, D., Chu, H., and Reichstein, M.: Inter-annual variability of net and gross ecosystem carbon fluxes: A review, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 249, 520–533, 2018. a
Download
Short summary
The gross primary production (GPP) of the terrestrial biosphere is a key source of variability in the global carbon cycle. To estimate this flux, models can rely on remote sensing data (RS-driven), meteorological data (meteo-driven) or a combination of both (hybrid). An intercomparison of 11 models demonstrated that RS-driven models lack the sensitivity to short-term anomalies. Conversely, the simulation of soil moisture dynamics and stress response remains a challenge in meteo-driven models.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint