Articles | Volume 21, issue 22
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024
© Author(s) 2024. 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-21-5321-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| Highlight paper
| 
28 Nov 2024
Research article | Highlight paper |
| 28 Nov 2024
| 28 Nov 2024
Representation of the terrestrial carbon cycle in CMIP6
University of Bremen, Institute of Environmental Physics (IUP), Bremen, Germany
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Manuel Schlund
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Pierre Friedlingstein
College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QE, UK
LMD/IPSL, ENS, PSL Université, École Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Sorbonne Université, CNRS, Paris, France
Chris D. Jones
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
Colin Jones
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Sönke Zaehle
Biogeochemical Signals Department, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany
Veronika Eyring
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
University of Bremen, Institute of Environmental Physics (IUP), Bremen, Germany
Related authors
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Katja Weigel, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Kemisola Adeniyi, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Peter Berg, Louis-Philippe Caron, Irene Cionni, Susanna Corti, Niels Drost, Alasdair Hunter, Llorenç Lledó, Christian Wilhelm Mohr, Aytaç Paçal, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Valeriu Predoi, Marit Sandstad, Jana Sillmann, Andreas Sterl, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents new diagnostics for the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 on the hydrological cycle, extreme events, impact assessment, regional evaluations, and ensemble member selection. The ESMValTool v2.0 diagnostics are developed by a large community of scientists aiming to facilitate the evaluation and comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with a focus on the ESMs participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).
Bettina K. Gier, Michael Buchwitz, Maximilian Reuter, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 17, 6115–6144, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Models from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) phases 5 and 6 are compared to a satellite data product of column-averaged CO2 mole fractions (XCO2). The previously believed discrepancy of the negative trend in seasonal cycle amplitude in the satellite product, which is not seen in in situ data nor in the models, is attributed to a sampling characteristic. Furthermore, CMIP6 models are shown to have made progress in reproducing the observed XCO2 time series compared to CMIP5.
Axel Lauer, Veronika Eyring, Omar Bellprat, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Alasdair Hunter, Ruth Lorenz, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Daniel Senftleben, Katja Weigel, and Sabrina Zechlau
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4205–4228, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool is a community software tool designed for evaluation and analysis of climate models. New features of version 2.0 include analysis scripts for important large-scale features in climate models, diagnostics for extreme events, regional model and impact evaluation. In this paper, newly implemented climate metrics, emergent constraints for climate-relevant feedbacks and diagnostics for future model projections are described and illustrated with examples.
Veronika Eyring, Lisa Bock, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Omar Bellprat, Björn Brötz, Louis-Philippe Caron, Nuno Carvalhais, Irene Cionni, Nicola Cortesi, Bas Crezee, Edouard L. Davin, Paolo Davini, Kevin Debeire, Lee de Mora, Clara Deser, David Docquier, Paul Earnshaw, Carsten Ehbrecht, Bettina K. Gier, Nube Gonzalez-Reviriego, Paul Goodman, Stefan Hagemann, Steven Hardiman, Birgit Hassler, Alasdair Hunter, Christopher Kadow, Stephan Kindermann, Sujan Koirala, Nikolay Koldunov, Quentin Lejeune, Valerio Lembo, Tomas Lovato, Valerio Lucarini, François Massonnet, Benjamin Müller, Amarjiit Pandde, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Adam Phillips, Valeriu Predoi, Joellen Russell, Alistair Sellar, Federico Serva, Tobias Stacke, Ranjini Swaminathan, Verónica Torralba, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, Katja Weigel, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3383–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool designed to improve comprehensive and routine evaluation of earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). It has undergone rapid development since the first release in 2016 and is now a well-tested tool that provides end-to-end provenance tracking to ensure reproducibility.
Rubaya Pervin, Scott Robeson, Mallory Barnes, Stephen Sitch, Anthony Walker, Ben Poulter, Fabienne Maignan, Qing Sun, Thomas Colligan, Sönke Zaehle, Kashif Mahmud, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Vladislav Bastrikov, Liam Bogucki, Bertrand Decharme, Christine Delire, Stefanie Falk, Akihiko Ito, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Jürgen Knauer, Michael O’Sullivan, Wenping Yuan, and Natasha MacBean
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2841, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2841, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
Drylands contribute more than a third of the global vegetation productivity. Yet, these regions are not well represented in global vegetation models. Here, we tested how well 15 global models capture annual changes in dryland vegetation productivity. Models that didn’t have vegetation change over time or fire have lower variability in vegetation productivity. Models need better representation of grass cover types and their coverage. Our work highlights where and how these models need to improve.
Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Michael O'Sullivan, Maria Carolina Duran-Rojas, Thais Michele Rosan, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Louise P. Chini, and George C. Hurtt
Biogeosciences, 22, 3547–3561, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-3547-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-3547-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Indonesia is the world's third-highest carbon emitter from land use change. However, there are uncertainties in the carbon emissions of Indonesia. Our best estimate of carbon emissions from land use change in Indonesia is 0.12 ± 0.02 PgC/yr with a steady trend. Despite many uncertainties created by drivers, models, and products, we also found robust agreements between these models and products. All agree that Indonesian carbon emissions from LULCC (land use and land cover change) have had no decreasing trend for the last 2 decades.
Victor Brovkin, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Noel G. Brizuela, Tomohiro Hajima, Tatiana Ilyina, Chris D. Jones, Charles Koven, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Hongmei Li, Spencer Liddcoat, Anastasia Romanou, Roland Séférian, Lori T. Sentman, Abigail L. S. Swann, Jerry Tjiputra, Tilo Ziehn, and Alexander J. Winkler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3270, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3270, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
Idealized experiments with Earth system models provide a basis for understanding the response of the carbon cycle to emissions. We show that most models exhibit a quasi-linear relationship between cumulative carbon uptake on land and in the ocean and hypothesize that this relationship does not depend on emission pathways. We reduce the coupled system to only one differential equation, which represents a powerful simplification of the Earth system dynamics as a function of fossil fuel emissions.
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Tuuli Miinalainen, Amanda Ojasalo, Holly Croft, Mika Aurela, Mikko Peltoniemi, Silvia Caldararu, Sönke Zaehle, and Tea Thum
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2987, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2987, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
Estimating the future carbon budget requires an accurate understanding of the interlinkages between the land carbon and nitrogen cycles. We use a remote sensing leaf chlorophyll product to evaluate a terrestrial biosphere model, QUINCY (QUantifying Interactions between terrestrial Nutrient CYcles and the climate system). Our study showcases how the latest advancements in remote sensing-based vegetation monitoring can be harnessed for improving and evaluating process-based vegetation models.
Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Jörg Benke, Ruth Comer, Birgit Hassler, Emma Hogan, Peter Kalverla, Axel Lauer, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Francesco Nattino, Patrick Peglar, Valeriu Predoi, Stef Smeets, Stephen Worsley, Martin Yeo, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4009–4021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models. Here, we describe recent significant improvements of ESMValTool’s computational efficiency including parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing. Evaluations with the enhanced version of ESMValTool are faster, use less computational resources, and can handle input data larger than the available memory.
Pauline Bonnet, Lorenzo Pastori, Mierk Schwabe, Marco Giorgetta, Fernando Iglesias-Suarez, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3681–3706, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3681-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3681-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Tuning a climate model means adjusting uncertain parameters in the model to best match observations like the global radiation balance and cloud cover. This is usually done by running many simulations of the model with different settings, which can be time-consuming and relies heavily on expert knowledge. To make this process faster and more objective, we developed a machine learning emulator to create a large ensemble and apply a method called history matching to find the best settings.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Christophe Cassou, Mathias Hauser, Zeke Hausfather, June-Yi Lee, Matthew D. Palmer, Karina von Schuckmann, Aimée B. A. Slangen, Sophie Szopa, Blair Trewin, Jeongeun Yun, Nathan P. Gillett, Stuart Jenkins, H. Damon Matthews, Krishnan Raghavan, Aurélien Ribes, Joeri Rogelj, Debbie Rosen, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Lara Aleluia Reis, Robbie M. Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Jiddu A. Broersma, Samantha N. Burgess, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Catia M. Domingues, Marco Gambarini, Thomas Gasser, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Aurélien Liné, Didier P. Monselesan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Jan C. Minx, Matthew Rigby, Robert Rohde, Abhishek Savita, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Peter Thorne, Christopher Wells, Luke M. Western, Guido R. van der Werf, Susan E. Wijffels, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 2641–2680, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In a rapidly changing climate, evidence-based decision-making benefits from up-to-date and timely information. Here we compile monitoring datasets to track real-world changes over time. To make our work relevant to policymakers, we follow methods from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Human activities are increasing the Earth's energy imbalance and driving faster sea-level rise compared to the IPCC assessment.
Ricarda Winkelmann, Donovan P. Dennis, Jonathan F. Donges, Sina Loriani, Ann Kristin Klose, Jesse F. Abrams, Jorge Alvarez-Solas, Torsten Albrecht, David Armstrong McKay, Sebastian Bathiany, Javier Blasco Navarro, Victor Brovkin, Eleanor Burke, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Reik V. Donner, Markus Drüke, Goran Georgievski, Heiko Goelzer, Anna B. Harper, Gabriele Hegerl, Marina Hirota, Aixue Hu, Laura C. Jackson, Colin Jones, Hyungjun Kim, Torben Koenigk, Peter Lawrence, Timothy M. Lenton, Hannah Liddy, José Licón-Saláiz, Maxence Menthon, Marisa Montoya, Jan Nitzbon, Sophie Nowicki, Bette Otto-Bliesner, Francesco Pausata, Stefan Rahmstorf, Karoline Ramin, Alexander Robinson, Johan Rockström, Anastasia Romanou, Boris Sakschewski, Christina Schädel, Steven Sherwood, Robin S. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Didier Swingedouw, Matteo Willeit, Wilbert Weijer, Richard Wood, Klaus Wyser, and Shuting Yang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Tipping Points Modelling Intercomparison Project (TIPMIP) is an international collaborative effort to systematically assess tipping point risks in the Earth system using state-of-the-art coupled and stand-alone domain models. TIPMIP will provide a first global atlas of potential tipping dynamics, respective critical thresholds and key uncertainties, generating an important building block towards a comprehensive scientific basis for policy- and decision-making.
Aytaç Paçal, Birgit Hassler, Katja Weigel, Miguel-Ángel Fernández-Torres, Gustau Camps-Valls, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2460, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2460, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Heatwaves are among the deadliest natural hazards, yet their causes and changes over time are not fully understood. We analyzed European heatwaves using a machine learning method that detects atmospheric patterns from these data. Our findings show that recent summer heatwaves differ from historical ones, indicating a shift in atmospheric dynamics consistent with climate change. This approach improves our understanding of the temporal evolution of heatwaves.
Wolfgang A. Müller, Stephan Lorenz, Trang V. Pham, Andrea Schneidereit, Renate Brokopf, Victor Brovkin, Nils Brüggemann, Fatemeh Chegini, Dietmar Dommenget, Kristina Fröhlich, Barbara Früh, Veronika Gayler, Helmuth Haak, Stefan Hagemann, Moritz Hanke, Tatiana Ilyina, Johann Jungclaus, Martin Köhler, Peter Korn, Luis Kornblüh, Clarissa Kroll, Julian Krüger, Karel Castro-Morales, Ulrike Niemeier, Holger Pohlmann, Iuliia Polkova, Roland Potthast, Thomas Riddick, Manuel Schlund, Tobias Stacke, Roland Wirth, Dakuan Yu, and Jochem Marotzke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2473, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2473, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
ICON XPP is a newly developed Earth System model configuration based on the ICON modeling framework. It merges accomplishments from the recent operational numerical weather prediction model with well-established climate components for the ocean, land and ocean-biogeochemistry. ICON XPP reaches typical targets of a coupled climate simulation, and is able to run long integrations and large-ensemble experiments, making it suitable for climate predictions and projections, and for climate research.
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.
Cheng Gong, Yan Wang, Hanqin Tian, Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Nicolas Vuichard, and Sönke Zaehle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1416, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1416, 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 0.3 to 3.3 ppbv summertime ozone enhancement in agricultural hotspot regions and 7.1 ppbv to 16.6 ppbv reductions in global methane concentrations
Kevin Debeire, Lisa Bock, Peer Nowack, Jakob Runge, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 607–630, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-607-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-607-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Projecting future precipitation is essential for preparing for climate change, but current climate models still have large uncertainties, especially over land. This study presents a new method to improve precipitation projections by identifying which models best capture key climate patterns. By giving more weight to models that better represent these patterns, our approach leads to more reliable future precipitation projections over land.
Lukas Lindenlaub, Katja Weigel, Birgit Hassler, Colin Jones, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores changes in drought characteristic based on projections by 18 different Earth system models. Their performance is evaluated by comparing historical simulations to observation based reanalysis. The analysis of a standardized drought index under different future scenarios revealed that the harvest area that is projected to experience extreme drought conditions towards the end of this century ranges from 10 % to 40 % depending on the emission scenario.
William Lamb, Robbie Andrew, Matthew Jones, Zebedee Nicholls, Glen Peters, Chris Smith, Marielle Saunois, Giacomo Grassi, Julia Pongratz, Steven Smith, Francesco Tubiello, Monica Crippa, Matthew Gidden, Pierre Friedlingstein, Jan Minx, and Piers Forster
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-188, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-188, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores why global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions estimates vary. Key reasons include different coverage of gases and sectors, varying definitions of anthropogenic land use change emissions, and the Paris Agreement not covering all emission sources. The study highlights three main ways emissions data is reported, each with different objectives and resulting in varying global emission totals. It emphasizes the need for transparency in choosing datasets and setting assessment scopes.
Tea Thum, Tuuli Miinalainen, Outi Seppälä, Holly Croft, Cheryl Rogers, Ralf Staebler, Silvia Caldararu, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 22, 1781–1807, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1781-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1781-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change has the potential to influence the carbon sequestration potential of terrestrial ecosystems, and here the nitrogen cycle is also important. We used the terrestrial biosphere model QUINCY (QUantifying Interactions between terrestrial Nutrient CYcles and the climate system) in a mixed deciduous forest in Canada. We investigated the usefulness of using the leaf area index and leaf chlorophyll content to improve the parameterization of the model. This work paves the way for using spaceborne observations in model parameterizations, also including information on the nitrogen cycle.
Wolfgang Knorr, Matthew Williams, Tea Thum, Thomas Kaminski, Michael Voßbeck, Marko Scholze, Tristan Quaife, T. Luke Smallman, Susan C. Steele-Dunne, Mariette Vreugdenhil, Tim Green, Sönke Zaehle, Mika Aurela, Alexandre Bouvet, Emanuel Bueechi, Wouter Dorigo, Tarek S. El-Madany, Mirco Migliavacca, Marika Honkanen, Yann H. Kerr, Anna Kontu, Juha Lemmetyinen, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, Arnaud Mialon, Tuuli Miinalainen, Gaétan Pique, Amanda Ojasalo, Shaun Quegan, Peter J. Rayner, Pablo Reyes-Muñoz, Nemesio Rodríguez-Fernández, Mike Schwank, Jochem Verrelst, Songyan Zhu, Dirk Schüttemeyer, and Matthias Drusch
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2137–2159, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
When it comes to climate change, the land surface is where the vast majority of impacts happen. The task of monitoring those impacts across the globe is formidable and must necessarily rely on satellites – at a significant cost: the measurements are only indirect and require comprehensive physical understanding. We have created a comprehensive modelling system that we offer to the research community to explore how satellite data can be better exploited to help us capture the changes that happen on our lands.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Alexander Norton, Sönke Zaehle, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2193–2230, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We studied carbon–nitrogen coupling in Earth system models by developing a global carbon–nitrogen cycle model (CNit v1.0) within the widely used emulator MAGICC. CNit effectively reproduced the global carbon–nitrogen cycle dynamics observed in complex models. Our results show persistent nitrogen limitations on plant growth (net primary production) from 1850 to 2100, suggesting that nitrogen deficiency may constrain future land carbon sequestration.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Chris Jones, Thomas Gasser, Alexander Norton, Tilo Ziehn, Alejandro Romero-Prieto, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2111–2136, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We analyzed carbon and nitrogen mass conservation in data from various Earth system models. Our findings reveal significant discrepancies between flux and pool size data, where cumulative imbalances can reach hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen. These imbalances appear primarily due to missing or inconsistently reported fluxes – especially for land-use and fire emissions. To enhance data quality, we recommend that future climate data protocols address this issue at the reporting stage.
Carlos A. Sierra, Ingrid Chanca, Meinrat Andreae, Alessandro Carioca de Araújo, Hella van Asperen, Lars Borchardt, Santiago Botía, Luiz Antonio Candido, Caio S. C. Correa, Cléo Quaresma Dias-Junior, Markus Eritt, Annica Fröhlich, Luciana V. Gatti, Marcus Guderle, Samuel Hammer, Martin Heimann, Viviana Horna, Armin Jordan, Steffen Knabe, Richard Kneißl, Jost Valentin Lavric, Ingeborg Levin, Kita Macario, Juliana Menger, Heiko Moossen, Carlos Alberto Quesada, Michael Rothe, Christian Rödenbeck, Yago Santos, Axel Steinhof, Bruno Takeshi, Susan Trumbore, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-151, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-151, 2025
Revised manuscript under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
We present here a unique dataset of atmospheric observations of greenhouse gases and isotopes that provide key information on land-atmosphere interactions for the Amazon forests of central Brazil. The data show a relatively large level of variability, but also important trends in greenhouse gases, and signals from fires as well as seasonal biological activity.
Richard G. Williams, Philip Goodwin, Paulo Ceppi, Chris D. Jones, and Andrew MacDougall
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-800, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-800, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
How the climate system responds when carbon emissions cease is an open question: some climate models reveal a slight warming, whereas most models reveal a slight cooling. Their climate response is affected by how the planet takes up heat and radiates heat back to space, and how the land and ocean sequester carbon from the atmosphere. A framework is developed to connect the temperature response of the climate models to competing and opposing-signed thermal and carbon contributions.
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.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present PRIME (Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions), which is designed to take new emissions scenarios and rapidly provide regional impact information. PRIME allows large ensembles to be run on multi-centennial timescales, including the analysis of many important variables for impact assessments. Our evaluation shows that PRIME reproduces the climate response for known scenarios, providing confidence in using PRIME for novel scenarios.
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.
Marcos B. Sanches, Manoel Cardoso, Celso von Randow, Chris Jones, and Mathew Williams
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-942, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-942, 2025
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines South America's role in the global carbon cycle using flux and stock analyses from CMIP6 Earth System Models. We discuss the continent’s relevance, model-observation agreement, and the impacts of dry and wet years on major biomes. Additionally, we assess model results indicating that parts of South America could shift from carbon sinks to emitters, significantly affecting the global carbon balance.
Axel Lauer, Lisa Bock, Birgit Hassler, Patrick Jöckel, Lukas Ruhe, and Manuel Schlund
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1169–1188, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models are important tools to improve our understanding of current climate and to project climate change. Thus, it is crucial to understand possible shortcomings in the models. New features of the ESMValTool software package allow one to compare and visualize a model's performance with respect to reproducing observations in the context of other climate models in an easy and user-friendly way. We aim to help model developers assess and monitor climate simulations more efficiently.
Detlef van Vuuren, Brian O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Louise Chini, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tomoko Hasegawa, Keywan Riahi, Benjamin Sanderson, Bala Govindasamy, Nico Bauer, Veronika Eyring, Cheikh Fall, Katja Frieler, Matthew Gidden, Laila Gohar, Andrew Jones, Andrew King, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Peter Lawrence, Chris Lennard, Jason Lowe, Camila Mathison, Shahbaz Mehmood, Luciana Prado, Qiang Zhang, Steven Rose, Alexander Ruane, Carl-Friederich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Jana Sillmann, Chris Smith, Anna Sörensson, Swapna Panickal, Kaoru Tachiiri, Naomi Vaughan, Saritha Vishwanathan, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a set of six plausible 21st century emission scenarios, and their multi-century extensions, that will be used by the international community of climate modeling centers to produce the next generation of climate projections. These projections will support climate, impact and mitigation researchers, provide information to practitioners to address future risks from climate change, and contribute to policymakers’ considerations of the trade-offs among various levels of mitigation.
Daniele Peano, Deborah Hemming, Christine Delire, Yuanchao Fan, Hanna Lee, Stefano Materia, Julia E. M .S. Nabel, Taejin Park, David Wårlind, Andy Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4114, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4114, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth System Models are the principal tools for scientists to study past, present, and future climate changes. This work investigates the ability of a set of them to represent the observed changes in vegetation, which are vital to estimating the impact of future climate mitigation and adaptation strategies. This study highlights the main limitations in correctly representing vegetation variability. These tools still need further development to improve our understanding of future changes.
Tuula Aalto, Aki Tsuruta, Jarmo Mäkelä, Jurek Müller, Maria Tenkanen, Eleanor Burke, Sarah Chadburn, Yao Gao, Vilma Mannisenaho, Thomas Kleinen, Hanna Lee, Antti Leppänen, Tiina Markkanen, Stefano Materia, Paul A. Miller, Daniele Peano, Olli Peltola, Benjamin Poulter, Maarit Raivonen, Marielle Saunois, David Wårlind, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 22, 323–340, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-323-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-323-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Wetland methane responses to temperature and precipitation were studied in a boreal wetland-rich region in northern Europe using ecosystem models, atmospheric inversions, and upscaled flux observations. The ecosystem models differed in their responses to temperature and precipitation and in their seasonality. However, multi-model means, inversions, and upscaled fluxes had similar seasonality, and they suggested co-limitation by temperature and precipitation.
Paul J. Durack, Karl E. Taylor, Peter J. Gleckler, Gerald A. Meehl, Bryan N. Lawrence, Curt Covey, Ronald J. Stouffer, Guillaume Levavasseur, Atef Ben-Nasser, Sebastien Denvil, Martina Stockhause, Jonathan M. Gregory, Martin Juckes, Sasha K. Ames, Fabrizio Antonio, David C. Bader, John P. Dunne, Daniel Ellis, Veronika Eyring, Sandro L. Fiore, Sylvie Joussaume, Philip Kershaw, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael Lautenschlager, Jiwoo Lee, Chris F. Mauzey, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Alessandra Nuzzo, Eleanor O’Rourke, Jeffrey Painter, Gerald L. Potter, Sven Rodriguez, and Dean N. Williams
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CMIP6 was the most expansive and ambitious Model Intercomparison Project (MIP), the latest in a history, extending four decades. CMIP engaged a growing community focused on improving climate understanding, and quantifying and attributing observed climate change being experienced today. The project's profound impact is due to the combining the latest climate science and technology, enabling the latest-generation climate simulations and increasing community attention in every successive phase.
Fortunat Joos, Sebastian Lienert, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 22, 19–39, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-19-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-19-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
How plants regulate their exchange of CO2 and water with the atmosphere under global warming is critical for their carbon uptake and their cooling influence. We analyze the isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2 and detect no significant decadal trends in the seasonal cycle amplitude. The data are consistent with the regulation towards leaf CO2 and intrinsic water use efficiency growing proportionally to atmospheric CO2, in contrast to recent suggestions of downregulation of CO2 and water fluxes.
Yona Silvy, Thomas L. Frölicher, Jens Terhaar, Fortunat Joos, Friedrich A. Burger, Fabrice Lacroix, Myles Allen, Raffaele Bernardello, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, Jonathan R. Buzan, Patricia Cadule, Martin Dix, John Dunne, Pierre Friedlingstein, Goran Georgievski, Tomohiro Hajima, Stuart Jenkins, Michio Kawamiya, Nancy Y. Kiang, Vladimir Lapin, Donghyun Lee, Paul Lerner, Nadine Mengis, Estela A. Monteiro, David Paynter, Glen P. Peters, Anastasia Romanou, Jörg Schwinger, Sarah Sparrow, Eric Stofferahn, Jerry Tjiputra, Etienne Tourigny, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1591–1628, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The adaptive emission reduction approach is applied with Earth system models to generate temperature stabilization simulations. These simulations provide compatible emission pathways and budgets for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges previously missing in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project scenarios. These target-based emission-driven simulations offer a more coherent assessment across models for studying both the carbon cycle and its impacts under climate stabilization.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Benjamin Mark Sanderson, Victor Brovkin, Rosie Fisher, David Hohn, Tatiana Ilyina, Chris Jones, Torben Koenigk, Charles Koven, Hongmei Li, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Spencer Liddicoat, Andrew Macdougall, Nadine Mengis, Zebedee Nicholls, Eleanor O'Rourke, Anastasia Romanou, Marit Sandstad, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Seferian, Lori Sentman, Isla Simpson, Chris Smith, Norman Steinert, Abigail Swann, Jerry Tjiputra, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how climate models warm in response to simplified carbon emissions trajectories, refining understanding of climate reversibility and commitment. Metrics are defined for warming response to cumulative emissions and for the cessation or ramp-down to net-zero and net-negative levels. Results indicate that previous concentration-driven experiments may have overstated zero emissions commitment due to emissions rates exceeding historical levels.
Colin G. Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben B. B. Booth, Peter M. Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene T. Hewitt, Hazel A. Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm J. Roberts, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Frölicher, Neven S. Fučkar, Matthew J. Gidden, Helge F. Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, José M. Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris D. Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Mélia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard A. Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1319–1351, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming decade. Advances in these areas will both increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, and deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as future IPCC assessments and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake.
Gabriela Sophia, Silvia Caldararu, Benjamin David Stocker, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 21, 4169–4193, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4169-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4169-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Through an extensive global dataset of leaf nutrient resorption and a multifactorial analysis, we show that the majority of spatial variation in nutrient resorption may be driven by leaf habit and type, with thicker, longer-lived leaves having lower resorption efficiencies. Climate, soil fertility and soil-related factors emerge as strong drivers with an additional effect on its role. These results are essential for comprehending plant nutrient status, plant productivity and nutrient cycling.
Dieu Anh Tran, Christoph Gerbig, Christian Rödenbeck, and Sönke Zaehle
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8413–8440, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8413-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8413-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The analysis of the atmospheric CO2 record from the Zotino Tall Tower Observatory (ZOTTO) in central Siberia shows significant increases in the length and amplitude of the CO2 uptake and release in the 2010–2021 period. The trend shows a stronger increase in carbon release amplitude compared to the uptake, suggesting that, despite enhanced growing season uptake, during this period climate warming did not elevate the annual net CO2 uptake as cold-season respirations also responded to the warming.
Arndt Kaps, Axel Lauer, Rémi Kazeroni, Martin Stengel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 3001–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3001-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3001-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
CCClim displays observations of clouds in terms of cloud classes that have been in use for a long time. CCClim is a machine-learning-powered product based on multiple existing observational products from different satellites. We show that the cloud classes in CCClim are physically meaningful and can be used to study cloud characteristics in more detail. The goal of this is to make real-world clouds more easily understandable to eventually improve the simulation of clouds in climate models.
Rebecca M. Varney, Pierre Friedlingstein, Sarah E. Chadburn, Eleanor J. Burke, and Peter M. Cox
Biogeosciences, 21, 2759–2776, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2759-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2759-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Soil carbon is the largest store of carbon on the land surface of Earth and is known to be particularly sensitive to climate change. Understanding this future response is vital to successfully meeting Paris Agreement targets, which rely heavily on carbon uptake by the land surface. In this study, the individual responses of soil carbon are quantified and compared amongst CMIP6 Earth system models used within the most recent IPCC report, and the role of soils in the land response is highlighted.
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Gerald A. Meehl, Jakob Runge, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 689–715, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-689-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-689-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores Atlantic–Pacific interactions and their response to external factors. Causal analysis of 1950–2014 data reveals a shift from a Pacific- to an Atlantic-driven regime. Contrasting impacts between El Niño and tropical Atlantic temperatures are highlighted, along with different pathways connecting the two oceans. The findings also suggest increasing remote contributions of forced Atlantic responses in modulating local Pacific responses during the most recent analyzed decades.
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.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Bradley Hall, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan P. Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Blair Trewin, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Carlo Buontempo, Samantha Burgess, Chiara Cagnazzo, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Andrew Gettelman, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Jan C. Minx, Gunnar Myhre, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Mahesh V. M. Kovilakam, Elisa Majamäki, Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Margreet van Marle, Rachel M. Hoesly, Robert Rohde, Dominik Schumacher, Guido van der Werf, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Xuebin Zhang, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2625–2658, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper tracks some key indicators of global warming through time, from 1850 through to the end of 2023. It is designed to give an authoritative estimate of global warming to date and its causes. We find that in 2023, global warming reached 1.3 °C and is increasing at over 0.2 °C per decade. This is caused by all-time-high greenhouse gas emissions.
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change.
Melanie A. Thurner, Silvia Caldararu, Jan Engel, Anja Rammig, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 21, 1391–1410, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1391-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1391-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Due to their crucial role in terrestrial ecosystems, we implemented mycorrhizal fungi into the QUINCY terrestrial biosphere model. Fungi interact with mineral and organic soil to support plant N uptake and, thus, plant growth. Our results suggest that the effect of mycorrhizal interactions on simulated ecosystem dynamics is minor under constant environmental conditions but necessary to reproduce and understand observed patterns under changing conditions, such as rising atmospheric CO2.
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.
Christian Rödenbeck, Karina E. Adcock, Markus Eritt, Maksym Gachkivskyi, Christoph Gerbig, Samuel Hammer, Armin Jordan, Ralph F. Keeling, Ingeborg Levin, Fabian Maier, Andrew C. Manning, Heiko Moossen, Saqr Munassar, Penelope A. Pickers, Michael Rothe, Yasunori Tohjima, and Sönke Zaehle
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 15767–15782, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15767-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15767-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The carbon dioxide content of the Earth atmosphere is increasing due to human emissions from burning of fossil fuels, causing global climate change. The strength of the fossil-fuel emissions is estimated by inventories based on energy data, but independent validation of these inventories has been recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Here we investigate the potential to validate inventories based on measurements of small changes in the atmospheric oxygen content.
Lee de Mora, Ranjini Swaminathan, Richard P. Allan, Jerry C. Blackford, Douglas I. Kelley, Phil Harris, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Spencer Liddicoat, Robert J. Parker, Tristan Quaife, Jeremy Walton, and Andrew Yool
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1295–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the flux of carbon from the atmosphere into the land surface and ocean for multiple models and over a range of future scenarios. We did this by comparing simulations after the same change in the global-mean near-surface temperature. Using this method, we show that the choice of scenario can impact the carbon allocation to the land, ocean, and atmosphere. Scenarios with higher emissions reach the same warming levels sooner, but also with relatively more carbon in the atmosphere.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2023). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Chenwei Xiao, Sönke Zaehle, Hui Yang, Jean-Pierre Wigneron, Christiane Schmullius, and Ana Bastos
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1211–1237, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1211-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1211-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ecosystem resistance reflects their susceptibility during adverse conditions and can be changed by land management. We estimate ecosystem resistance to drought and temperature globally. We find a higher resistance to drought in forests compared to croplands and an evident loss of resistance to drought when primary forests are converted to secondary forests or they are harvested. Old-growth trees tend to be more resistant in some forests and crops benefit from irrigation during drought periods.
Zi Huang, Jiaoyue Wang, Longfei Bing, Yijiao Qiu, Rui Guo, Ying Yu, Mingjing Ma, Le Niu, Dan Tong, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Josep G. Canadell, Fengming Xi, and Zhu Liu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4947–4958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4947-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4947-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This is about global and regional cement process carbon emissions and CO2 uptake calculations from 1930 to 2019. The global cement production is rising to 4.4 Gt, causing processing carbon emission of 1.81 Gt (95% CI: 1.75–1.88 Gt CO2) in 2021. Plus, in 2021, cement’s carbon accumulated uptake (22.9 Gt, 95% CI: 19.6–22.6 Gt CO2) has offset 55.2% of cement process CO2 emissions (41.5 Gt, 95% CI: 38.7–47.1 Gt CO2) since 1930.
Matthew J. McGrath, Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Philippe Peylin, Robbie M. Andrew, Bradley Matthews, Frank Dentener, Juraj Balkovič, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Gregoire Broquet, Philippe Ciais, Audrey Fortems-Cheiney, Raphael Ganzenmüller, Giacomo Grassi, Ian Harris, Matthew Jones, Jürgen Knauer, Matthias Kuhnert, Guillaume Monteil, Saqr Munassar, Paul I. Palmer, Glen P. Peters, Chunjing Qiu, Mart-Jan Schelhaas, Oksana Tarasova, Matteo Vizzarri, Karina Winkler, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Antoine Berchet, Peter Briggs, Patrick Brockmann, Frédéric Chevallier, Giulia Conchedda, Monica Crippa, Stijn N. C. Dellaert, Hugo A. C. Denier van der Gon, Sara Filipek, Pierre Friedlingstein, Richard Fuchs, Michael Gauss, Christoph Gerbig, Diego Guizzardi, Dirk Günther, Richard A. Houghton, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Ronny Lauerwald, Bas Lerink, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Géraud Moulas, Marilena Muntean, Gert-Jan Nabuurs, Aurélie Paquirissamy, Lucia Perugini, Wouter Peters, Roberto Pilli, Julia Pongratz, Pierre Regnier, Marko Scholze, Yusuf Serengil, Pete Smith, Efisio Solazzo, Rona L. Thompson, Francesco N. Tubiello, Timo Vesala, and Sophia Walther
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4295–4370, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate estimation of fluxes of carbon dioxide from the land surface is essential for understanding future impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the climate system. A wide variety of methods currently exist to estimate these sources and sinks. We are continuing work to develop annual comparisons of these diverse methods in order to clarify what they all actually calculate and to resolve apparent disagreement, in addition to highlighting opportunities for increased understanding.
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.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor Burke, Andrew J. Hartley, Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle Burton, Eddy Robertson, Nicola Gedney, Karina Williams, Andy Wiltshire, Richard J. Ellis, Alistair A. Sellar, and Chris D. Jones
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4249–4264, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4249-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4249-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes and evaluates a new modelling methodology to quantify the impacts of climate change on water, biomes and the carbon cycle. We have created a new configuration and set-up for the JULES-ES land surface model, driven by bias-corrected historical and future climate model output provided by the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP). This allows us to compare projections of the impacts of climate change across multiple impact models and multiple sectors.
Piers M. Forster, Christopher J. Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Blair Trewin, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Arlene Birt, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Lijing Cheng, Frank Dentener, Pierre Friedlingstein, José M. Gutiérrez, Johannes Gütschow, Bradley Hall, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, June-Yi Lee, Colin Morice, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel Killick, Jan C. Minx, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Robert Rohde, Maisa Rojas Corradi, Dominik Schumacher, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2295–2327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This is a critical decade for climate action, but there is no annual tracking of the level of human-induced warming. We build on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports that are authoritative but published infrequently to create a set of key global climate indicators that can be tracked through time. Our hope is that this becomes an important annual publication that policymakers, media, scientists and the public can refer to.
Aparnna Ravi, Dhanyalekshmi Pillai, Christoph Gerbig, Stephen Sitch, Sönke Zaehle, Vishnu Thilakan, and Chandra Shekhar Jha
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-817, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-817, 2023
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
We derive high-resolution terrestrial CO2 fluxes over India from 2012 to 2020. This is achieved by utilizing satellite-based vegetation indices and meteorological data in a data-driven biospheric model. The model simulations are improved by incorporating soil variables and SIF retrievals from satellite instruments and relate them to ecosystem productivity across different biomes. The derived flux products better explain the flux variability compared to other existing model estimates.
Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Chunjing Qiu, Matthew J. McGrath, Philippe Peylin, Glen P. Peters, Philippe Ciais, Rona L. Thompson, Aki Tsuruta, Dominik Brunner, Matthias Kuhnert, Bradley Matthews, Paul I. Palmer, Oksana Tarasova, Pierre Regnier, Ronny Lauerwald, David Bastviken, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Wilfried Winiwarter, Giuseppe Etiope, Tuula Aalto, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Vladislav Bastrikov, Antoine Berchet, Patrick Brockmann, Giancarlo Ciotoli, Giulia Conchedda, Monica Crippa, Frank Dentener, Christine D. Groot Zwaaftink, Diego Guizzardi, Dirk Günther, Jean-Matthieu Haussaire, Sander Houweling, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Massaer Kouyate, Adrian Leip, Antti Leppänen, Emanuele Lugato, Manon Maisonnier, Alistair J. Manning, Tiina Markkanen, Joe McNorton, Marilena Muntean, Gabriel D. Oreggioni, Prabir K. Patra, Lucia Perugini, Isabelle Pison, Maarit T. Raivonen, Marielle Saunois, Arjo J. Segers, Pete Smith, Efisio Solazzo, Hanqin Tian, Francesco N. Tubiello, Timo Vesala, Guido R. van der Werf, Chris Wilson, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1197–1268, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study updates the state-of-the-art scientific overview of CH4 and N2O emissions in the EU27 and UK in Petrescu et al. (2021a). Yearly updates are needed to improve the different respective approaches and to inform on the development of formal verification systems. It integrates the most recent emission inventories, process-based model and regional/global inversions, comparing them with UNFCCC national GHG inventories, in support to policy to facilitate real-time verification procedures.
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Jakob Runge, Gerald A. Meehl, Adam S. Phillips, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 309–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a causal discovery method to evaluate the ability of climate models to represent the interactions between the Atlantic multidecadal variability (AMV) and the Pacific decadal variability (PDV). The approach and findings in this study present a powerful methodology that can be applied to a number of environment-related topics, offering tremendous insights to improve the understanding of the complex Earth system and the state of the art of climate modeling.
Jane P. Mulcahy, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Till Kuhlbrodt, Andrea J. Dittus, Edward W. Blockley, Andrew Yool, Jeremy Walton, Catherine Hardacre, Timothy Andrews, Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo, Marc Stringer, Lee de Mora, Phil Harris, Richard Hill, Doug Kelley, Eddy Robertson, and Yongming Tang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1569–1600, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1569-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1569-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Recent global climate models simulate historical global mean surface temperatures which are too cold, possibly to due to excessive aerosol cooling. This raises questions about the models' ability to simulate important climate processes and reduces confidence in future climate predictions. We present a new version of the UK Earth System Model, which has an improved aerosols simulation and a historical temperature record. Interestingly, the long-term response to CO2 remains largely unchanged.
Giacomo Grassi, Clemens Schwingshackl, Thomas Gasser, Richard A. Houghton, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Alessandro Cescatti, Philippe Ciais, Sandro Federici, Pierre Friedlingstein, Werner A. Kurz, Maria J. Sanz Sanchez, Raúl Abad Viñas, Ramdane Alkama, Selma Bultan, Guido Ceccherini, Stefanie Falk, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Jürgen Knauer, Anu Korosuo, Joana Melo, Matthew J. McGrath, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Benjamin Poulter, Anna A. Romanovskaya, Simone Rossi, Hanqin Tian, Anthony P. Walker, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1093–1114, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1093-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1093-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Striking differences exist in estimates of land-use CO2 fluxes between the national greenhouse gas inventories and the IPCC assessment reports. These differences hamper an accurate assessment of the collective progress under the Paris Agreement. By implementing an approach that conceptually reconciles land-use CO2 flux from national inventories and the global models used by the IPCC, our study is an important step forward for increasing confidence in land-use CO2 flux estimates.
Manuel Schlund, Birgit Hassler, Axel Lauer, Bouwe Andela, Patrick Jöckel, Rémi Kazeroni, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Brian Medeiros, Valeriu Predoi, Stéphane Sénési, Jérôme Servonnat, Tobias Stacke, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Klaus Zimmermann, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models. Originally, ESMValTool was designed to process reformatted output provided by large model intercomparison projects like the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Here, we describe a new extension of ESMValTool that allows for reading and processing native climate model output, i.e., data that have not been reformatted before.
Lin Yu, Silvia Caldararu, Bernhard Ahrens, Thomas Wutzler, Marion Schrumpf, Julian Helfenstein, Chiara Pistocchi, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 20, 57–73, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-57-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-57-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we addressed a key weakness in current ecosystem models regarding the phosphorus exchange in the soil and developed a new scheme to describe this process. We showed that the new scheme improved the model performance for plant productivity, soil organic carbon, and soil phosphorus content at five beech forest sites in Germany. We claim that this new model could be used as a better tool to study ecosystems under future climate change, particularly phosphorus-limited systems.
Thomas Wutzler, Lin Yu, Marion Schrumpf, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8377–8393, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8377-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8377-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Soil microbes process soil organic matter and affect carbon storage and plant nutrition at the ecosystem scale. We hypothesized that decadal dynamics is constrained by the ratios of elements in litter inputs, microbes, and matter and that microbial community optimizes growth. This allowed the SESAM model to descibe decadal-term carbon sequestration in soils and other biogeochemical processes explicitly accounting for microbial processes but without its problematic fine-scale parameterization.
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.
Antony Siahaan, Robin S. Smith, Paul R. Holland, Adrian Jenkins, Jonathan M. Gregory, Victoria Lee, Pierre Mathiot, Antony J. Payne, Jeff K. Ridley, and Colin G. Jones
The Cryosphere, 16, 4053–4086, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4053-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4053-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The UK Earth System Model is the first to fully include interactions of the atmosphere and ocean with the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Under the low-greenhouse-gas SSP1–1.9 (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway) scenario, the ice sheet remains stable over the 21st century. Under the strong-greenhouse-gas SSP5–8.5 scenario, the model predicts strong increases in melting of large ice shelves and snow accumulation on the surface. The dominance of accumulation leads to a sea level fall at the end of the century.
Taraka Davies-Barnard, Sönke Zaehle, and Pierre Friedlingstein
Biogeosciences, 19, 3491–3503, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-3491-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-3491-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Biological nitrogen fixation is the largest natural input of new nitrogen onto land. Earth system models mainly represent global total terrestrial biological nitrogen fixation within observational uncertainties but overestimate tropical fixation. The model range of increase in biological nitrogen fixation in the SSP3-7.0 scenario is 3 % to 87 %. While biological nitrogen fixation is a key source of new nitrogen, its predictive power for net primary productivity in models is limited.
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.
Shakirudeen Lawal, Stephen Sitch, Danica Lombardozzi, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Hao-Wei Wey, Pierre Friedlingstein, Hanqin Tian, and Bruce Hewitson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2045–2071, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2045-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2045-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To investigate the impacts of drought on vegetation, which few studies have done due to various limitations, we used the leaf area index as proxy and dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) to simulate drought impacts because the models use observationally derived climate. We found that the semi-desert biome responds strongly to drought in the summer season, while the tropical forest biome shows a weak response. This study could help target areas to improve drought monitoring and simulation.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Rob B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Laurent Bopp, Thi Tuyet Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Kim I. Currie, Bertrand Decharme, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Wiley Evans, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Thomas Gasser, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Atul Jain, Steve D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Junjie Liu, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Clemens Schwingshackl, Roland Séférian, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2021 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Catherine Hardacre, Jane P. Mulcahy, Richard J. Pope, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Can Li, Colin Johnson, and Steven T. Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18465–18497, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate UKESM1's ability to represent the sulfur (S) cycle in the recent historical period. The S cycle is a key driver of historical radiative forcing. Earth system models such as UKESM1 should represent the S cycle well so that we can have confidence in their projections of future climate. We compare UKESM1 to observations of sulfur compounds, finding that the model generally performs well. We also identify areas for UKESM1’s development, focussing on how SO2 is removed from the air.
István Dunkl, Aaron Spring, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Victor Brovkin
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1413–1426, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1413-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1413-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The variability in atmospheric CO2 is largely controlled by terrestrial carbon fluxes. These land–atmosphere fluxes are predictable for around 2 years, but the mechanisms providing the predictability are not well understood. By decomposing the predictability of carbon fluxes into individual contributors we were able to explain the spatial and seasonal patterns and the interannual variability of CO2 flux predictability.
Lina Teckentrup, Martin G. De Kauwe, Andrew J. Pitman, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Anthony P. Walker, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 5639–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5639-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Australian continent is included in global assessments of the carbon cycle such as the global carbon budget, yet the performance of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) over Australia has rarely been evaluated. We assessed simulations by an ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models over Australia and highlighted a number of key areas that lead to model divergence on both short (inter-annual) and long (decadal) timescales.
Ana Bastos, René Orth, Markus Reichstein, Philippe Ciais, Nicolas Viovy, Sönke Zaehle, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Pierre Gentine, Emilie Joetzjer, Sebastian Lienert, Tammas Loughran, Patrick C. McGuire, Sungmin O, Julia Pongratz, and Stephen Sitch
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1015–1035, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1015-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1015-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Temperate biomes in Europe are not prone to recurrent dry and hot conditions in summer. However, these conditions may become more frequent in the coming decades. Because stress conditions can leave legacies for many years, this may result in reduced ecosystem resilience under recurrent stress. We assess vegetation vulnerability to the hot and dry summers in 2018 and 2019 in Europe and find the important role of inter-annual legacy effects from 2018 in modulating the impacts of the 2019 event.
Alexander J. Winkler, Ranga B. Myneni, Alexis Hannart, Stephen Sitch, Vanessa Haverd, Danica Lombardozzi, Vivek K. Arora, Julia Pongratz, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Daniel S. Goll, Etsushi Kato, Hanqin Tian, Almut Arneth, Pierre Friedlingstein, Atul K. Jain, Sönke Zaehle, and Victor Brovkin
Biogeosciences, 18, 4985–5010, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-4985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-4985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations since the early 1980s show that Earth's greening trend is slowing down and that browning clusters have been emerging, especially in the last 2 decades. A collection of model simulations in conjunction with causal theory points at climatic changes as a key driver of vegetation changes in natural ecosystems. Most models underestimate the observed vegetation browning, especially in tropical rainforests, which could be due to an excessive CO2 fertilization effect in models.
Robin D. Lamboll, Chris D. Jones, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Stephanie Fiedler, Bjørn H. Samset, Nathan P. Gillett, Joeri Rogelj, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3683–3695, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3683-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3683-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Lockdowns to avoid the spread of COVID-19 have created an unprecedented reduction in human emissions. We can estimate the changes in emissions at a country level, but to make predictions about how this will affect our climate, we need more precise information about where the emissions happen. Here we combine older estimates of where emissions normally occur with very recent estimates of sector activity levels to enable different groups to make simulations of the climatic effects of lockdown.
Andrew Yool, Julien Palmiéri, Colin G. Jones, Lee de Mora, Till Kuhlbrodt, Ekatarina E. Popova, A. J. George Nurser, Joel Hirschi, Adam T. Blaker, Andrew C. Coward, Edward W. Blockley, and Alistair A. Sellar
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3437–3472, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The ocean plays a key role in modulating the Earth’s climate. Understanding this role is critical when using models to project future climate change. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate their realism against the ocean's observed state. Here we validate UKESM1, a new Earth system model, focusing on the realism of its ocean physics and circulation, as well as its biological cycles and productivity. While we identify biases, generally the model performs well over a wide range of properties.
Katja Weigel, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Kemisola Adeniyi, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Peter Berg, Louis-Philippe Caron, Irene Cionni, Susanna Corti, Niels Drost, Alasdair Hunter, Llorenç Lledó, Christian Wilhelm Mohr, Aytaç Paçal, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Valeriu Predoi, Marit Sandstad, Jana Sillmann, Andreas Sterl, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents new diagnostics for the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 on the hydrological cycle, extreme events, impact assessment, regional evaluations, and ensemble member selection. The ESMValTool v2.0 diagnostics are developed by a large community of scientists aiming to facilitate the evaluation and comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with a focus on the ESMs participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).
Martina Franz and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 3219–3241, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3219-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3219-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The combined effects of ozone and nitrogen deposition on the terrestrial carbon uptake and storage has been unclear. Our simulations, from 1850 to 2099, show that ozone-related damage considerably reduced gross primary production and carbon storage in the past. The growth-stimulating effect induced by nitrogen deposition is offset until the 2050s. Accounting for nitrogen deposition without considering ozone effects might lead to an overestimation of terrestrial carbon uptake and storage.
Wolfgang A. Obermeier, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Tammas Loughran, Kerstin Hartung, Ana Bastos, Felix Havermann, Peter Anthoni, Almut Arneth, Daniel S. Goll, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Benjamin Poulter, Stephen Sitch, Michael O. Sullivan, Hanqin Tian, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Soenke Zaehle, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 635–670, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-635-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first spatio-temporally explicit comparison of different model-derived fluxes from land use and land cover changes (fLULCCs) by using the TRENDY v8 dynamic global vegetation models used in the 2019 global carbon budget. We find huge regional fLULCC differences resulting from environmental assumptions, simulated periods, and the timing of land use and land cover changes, and we argue for a method consistent across time and space and for carefully choosing the accounting period.
Zichong Chen, Junjie Liu, Daven K. Henze, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Kelley C. Wells, Stephen Sitch, Pierre Friedlingstein, Emilie Joetzjer, Vladislav Bastrikov, Daniel S. Goll, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Benjamin Poulter, Hanqin Tian, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Scot M. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6663–6680, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6663-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) satellite observes atmospheric CO2 globally. We use a multiple regression and inverse model to quantify the relationships between OCO-2 and environmental drivers within individual years for 2015–2018 and within seven global biomes. Our results point to limitations of current space-based observations for inferring environmental relationships but also indicate the potential to inform key relationships that are very uncertain in process-based models.
Andrew J. Wiltshire, Eleanor J. Burke, Sarah E. Chadburn, Chris D. Jones, Peter M. Cox, Taraka Davies-Barnard, Pierre Friedlingstein, Anna B. Harper, Spencer Liddicoat, Stephen Sitch, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2161–2186, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2161-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2161-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Limited nitrogen availbility can restrict the growth of plants and their ability to assimilate carbon. It is important to include the impact of this process on the global land carbon cycle. This paper presents a model of the coupled land carbon and nitrogen cycle, which is included within the UK Earth System model to improve projections of climate change and impacts on ecosystems.
Daniele Peano, Deborah Hemming, Stefano Materia, Christine Delire, Yuanchao Fan, Emilie Joetzjer, Hanna Lee, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Taejin Park, Philippe Peylin, David Wårlind, Andy Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 18, 2405–2428, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2405-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2405-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Global climate models are the scientist’s tools used for studying past, present, and future climate conditions. This work examines the ability of a group of our tools in reproducing and capturing the right timing and length of the season when plants show their green leaves. This season, indeed, is fundamental for CO2 exchanges between land, atmosphere, and climate. This work shows that discrepancies compared to observations remain, demanding further polishing of these tools.
James Keeble, Birgit Hassler, Antara Banerjee, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Gabriel Chiodo, Sean Davis, Veronika Eyring, Paul T. Griffiths, Olaf Morgenstern, Peer Nowack, Guang Zeng, Jiankai Zhang, Greg Bodeker, Susannah Burrows, Philip Cameron-Smith, David Cugnet, Christopher Danek, Makoto Deushi, Larry W. Horowitz, Anne Kubin, Lijuan Li, Gerrit Lohmann, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Sungsu Park, Øyvind Seland, Jens Stoll, Karl-Hermann Wieners, and Tongwen Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5015–5061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric ozone and water vapour are key components of the Earth system; changes to both have important impacts on global and regional climate. We evaluate changes to these species from 1850 to 2100 in the new generation of CMIP6 models. There is good agreement between the multi-model mean and observations, although there is substantial variation between the individual models. The future evolution of both ozone and water vapour is strongly dependent on the assumed future emissions scenario.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Jane P. Mulcahy, Colin Johnson, Colin G. Jones, Adam C. Povey, Catherine E. Scott, Alistair Sellar, Steven T. Turnock, Matthew T. Woodhouse, Nathan Luke Abraham, Martin B. Andrews, Nicolas Bellouin, Jo Browse, Ken S. Carslaw, Mohit Dalvi, Gerd A. Folberth, Matthew Glover, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Catherine Hardacre, Richard Hill, Ben Johnson, Andy Jones, Zak Kipling, Graham Mann, James Mollard, Fiona M. O'Connor, Julien Palmiéri, Carly Reddington, Steven T. Rumbold, Mark Richardson, Nick A. J. Schutgens, Philip Stier, Marc Stringer, Yongming Tang, Jeremy Walton, Stephanie Woodward, and Andrew Yool
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6383–6423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are an important component of the Earth system. Here, we comprehensively document and evaluate the aerosol schemes as implemented in the physical and Earth system models, HadGEM3-GC3.1 and UKESM1. This study provides a useful characterisation of the aerosol climatology in both models, facilitating the understanding of the numerous aerosol–climate interaction studies that will be conducted for CMIP6 and beyond.
Manuel Schlund, Axel Lauer, Pierre Gentine, Steven C. Sherwood, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 1233–1258, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1233-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1233-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
As an important measure of climate change, the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) describes the change in surface temperature after a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration. Climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) show a wide range in ECS. Emergent constraints are a technique to reduce uncertainties in ECS with observational data. Emergent constraints developed with data from CMIP phase 5 show reduced skill and higher ECS ranges when applied to CMIP6 data.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone Alin, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Alice Benoit-Cattin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Selma Bultan, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Wiley Evans, Liesbeth Florentie, Piers M. Forster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Ian Harris, Kerstin Hartung, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Vassilis Kitidis, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Adam J. P. Smith, Adrienne J. Sutton, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Guido van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2020 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Bettina K. Gier, Michael Buchwitz, Maximilian Reuter, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 17, 6115–6144, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Models from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) phases 5 and 6 are compared to a satellite data product of column-averaged CO2 mole fractions (XCO2). The previously believed discrepancy of the negative trend in seasonal cycle amplitude in the satellite product, which is not seen in in situ data nor in the models, is attributed to a sampling characteristic. Furthermore, CMIP6 models are shown to have made progress in reproducing the observed XCO2 time series compared to CMIP5.
Tea Thum, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Aki Tsuruta, Tuula Aalto, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Jari Liski, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Tiina Markkanen, Julia Pongratz, Yukio Yoshida, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 17, 5721–5743, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5721-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5721-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Global vegetation models are important tools in estimating the impacts of global climate change. The fate of soil carbon is of the upmost importance as its emissions will enhance the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. To evaluate the skill of global vegetation models to model the soil carbon and its responses to environmental factors, it is important to use different data sources. We evaluated two different soil carbon models by using atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations.
Taraka Davies-Barnard, Johannes Meyerholt, Sönke Zaehle, Pierre Friedlingstein, Victor Brovkin, Yuanchao Fan, Rosie A. Fisher, Chris D. Jones, Hanna Lee, Daniele Peano, Benjamin Smith, David Wårlind, and Andy J. Wiltshire
Biogeosciences, 17, 5129–5148, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5129-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5129-2020, 2020
Lee de Mora, Alistair A. Sellar, Andrew Yool, Julien Palmieri, Robin S. Smith, Till Kuhlbrodt, Robert J. Parker, Jeremy Walton, Jeremy C. Blackford, and Colin G. Jones
Geosci. Commun., 3, 263–278, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-263-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-263-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We use time series data from the first United Kingdom Earth System Model (UKESM1) to create six procedurally generated musical pieces for piano. Each of the six pieces help to explain either a scientific principle or a practical aspect of Earth system modelling. We describe the methods that were used to create these pieces, discuss the limitations of this pilot study and list several approaches to extend and expand upon this work.
Axel Lauer, Veronika Eyring, Omar Bellprat, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Alasdair Hunter, Ruth Lorenz, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Daniel Senftleben, Katja Weigel, and Sabrina Zechlau
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4205–4228, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool is a community software tool designed for evaluation and analysis of climate models. New features of version 2.0 include analysis scripts for important large-scale features in climate models, diagnostics for extreme events, regional model and impact evaluation. In this paper, newly implemented climate metrics, emergent constraints for climate-relevant feedbacks and diagnostics for future model projections are described and illustrated with examples.
Arthur P. K. Argles, Jonathan R. Moore, Chris Huntingford, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Anna B. Harper, Chris D. Jones, and Peter M. Cox
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4067–4089, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4067-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4067-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Robust Ecosystem Demography (RED) model simulates cohorts of vegetation through mass classes. RED establishes a framework for representing demographic changes through competition, growth, and mortality across the size distribution of a forest. The steady state of the model can be solved analytically, enabling initialization. When driven by mean growth rates from a land-surface model, RED is able to fit the observed global vegetation map, giving a map of implicit mortality rates.
Vivek K. Arora, Anna Katavouta, Richard G. Williams, Chris D. Jones, Victor Brovkin, Pierre Friedlingstein, Jörg Schwinger, Laurent Bopp, Olivier Boucher, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, James R. Christian, Christine Delire, Rosie A. Fisher, Tomohiro Hajima, Tatiana Ilyina, Emilie Joetzjer, Michio Kawamiya, Charles D. Koven, John P. Krasting, Rachel M. Law, David M. Lawrence, Andrew Lenton, Keith Lindsay, Julia Pongratz, Thomas Raddatz, Roland Séférian, Kaoru Tachiiri, Jerry F. Tjiputra, Andy Wiltshire, Tongwen Wu, and Tilo Ziehn
Biogeosciences, 17, 4173–4222, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4173-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4173-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Since the preindustrial period, land and ocean have taken up about half of the carbon emitted into the atmosphere by humans. Comparison of different earth system models with the carbon cycle allows us to assess how carbon uptake by land and ocean differs among models. This yields an estimate of uncertainty in our understanding of how land and ocean respond to increasing atmospheric CO2. This paper summarizes results from two such model intercomparison projects that use an idealized scenario.
Veronika Eyring, Lisa Bock, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Omar Bellprat, Björn Brötz, Louis-Philippe Caron, Nuno Carvalhais, Irene Cionni, Nicola Cortesi, Bas Crezee, Edouard L. Davin, Paolo Davini, Kevin Debeire, Lee de Mora, Clara Deser, David Docquier, Paul Earnshaw, Carsten Ehbrecht, Bettina K. Gier, Nube Gonzalez-Reviriego, Paul Goodman, Stefan Hagemann, Steven Hardiman, Birgit Hassler, Alasdair Hunter, Christopher Kadow, Stephan Kindermann, Sujan Koirala, Nikolay Koldunov, Quentin Lejeune, Valerio Lembo, Tomas Lovato, Valerio Lucarini, François Massonnet, Benjamin Müller, Amarjiit Pandde, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Adam Phillips, Valeriu Predoi, Joellen Russell, Alistair Sellar, Federico Serva, Tobias Stacke, Ranjini Swaminathan, Verónica Torralba, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, Katja Weigel, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3383–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool designed to improve comprehensive and routine evaluation of earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). It has undergone rapid development since the first release in 2016 and is now a well-tested tool that provides end-to-end provenance tracking to ensure reproducibility.
Duane Waliser, Peter J. Gleckler, Robert Ferraro, Karl E. Taylor, Sasha Ames, James Biard, Michael G. Bosilovich, Otis Brown, Helene Chepfer, Luca Cinquini, Paul J. Durack, Veronika Eyring, Pierre-Philippe Mathieu, Tsengdar Lee, Simon Pinnock, Gerald L. Potter, Michel Rixen, Roger Saunders, Jörg Schulz, Jean-Noël Thépaut, and Matthias Tuma
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2945–2958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2945-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2945-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides an update to an international research activity whose objective is to facilitate access to satellite and other types of regional and global datasets for evaluating global models used to produce 21st century climate projections.
Andrew H. MacDougall, Thomas L. Frölicher, Chris D. Jones, Joeri Rogelj, H. Damon Matthews, Kirsten Zickfeld, Vivek K. Arora, Noah J. Barrett, Victor Brovkin, Friedrich A. Burger, Micheal Eby, Alexey V. Eliseev, Tomohiro Hajima, Philip B. Holden, Aurich Jeltsch-Thömmes, Charles Koven, Nadine Mengis, Laurie Menviel, Martine Michou, Igor I. Mokhov, Akira Oka, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Gary Shaffer, Andrei Sokolov, Kaoru Tachiiri, Jerry Tjiputra, Andrew Wiltshire, and Tilo Ziehn
Biogeosciences, 17, 2987–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-2987-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-2987-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Zero Emissions Commitment (ZEC) is the change in global temperature expected to occur following the complete cessation of CO2 emissions. Here we use 18 climate models to assess the value of ZEC. For our experiment we find that ZEC 50 years after emissions cease is between −0.36 to +0.29 °C. The most likely value of ZEC is assessed to be close to zero. However, substantial continued warming for decades or centuries following cessation of CO2 emission cannot be ruled out.
Minchao Wu, Grigory Nikulin, Erik Kjellström, Danijel Belušić, Colin Jones, and David Lindstedt
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 377–394, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-377-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-377-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Regional Climate Models constitute a downscaling tool to provide high-resolution data for impact and adaptation studies. However, there is no unique definition of the added value of downscaling as it depends on many factors. We investigate the impact of spatial resolution and model formulation on downscaled rainfall in Africa. Our results show that improvements in downscaled rainfall compared to the driving reanalysis are often related to model formulation and not always to higher resolution.
Shufen Pan, Naiqing Pan, Hanqin Tian, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Hao Shi, Vivek K. Arora, Vanessa Haverd, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Catherine Ottlé, Benjamin Poulter, Sönke Zaehle, and Steven W. Running
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1485–1509, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1485-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1485-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Evapotranspiration (ET) links global water, carbon and energy cycles. We used 4 remote sensing models, 2 machine-learning algorithms and 14 land surface models to analyze the changes in global terrestrial ET. These three categories of approaches agreed well in terms of ET intensity. For 1982–2011, all models showed that Earth greening enhanced terrestrial ET. The small interannual variability of global terrestrial ET suggests it has a potential planetary boundary of around 600 mm yr-1.
Mattia Righi, Bouwe Andela, Veronika Eyring, Axel Lauer, Valeriu Predoi, Manuel Schlund, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Lisa Bock, Björn Brötz, Lee de Mora, Faruk Diblen, Laura Dreyer, Niels Drost, Paul Earnshaw, Birgit Hassler, Nikolay Koldunov, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1179–1199, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the second major release of ESMValTool, a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models. This new version features a brand new design, with an improved interface and a revised preprocessor. It takes advantage of state-of-the-art computational libraries and methods to deploy efficient and user-friendly data processing, improving the performance over its predecessor by more than a factor of 30.
Lin Yu, Bernhard Ahrens, Thomas Wutzler, Marion Schrumpf, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 783–803, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-783-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-783-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we have developed a new soil organic carbon model that describes the formation and turnover of soil organic matter in a more mechanistic manner. With this model, we are able to better represent how microorganisms and nutrient processes influence the below-ground carbon storage and better explain some observed features of soil organic matter. We hope this model can increase our confidence in predictions of future climate change, particularly on how soil can mitigate the process.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Laurent Bopp, Erik Buitenhuis, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Kim I. Currie, Richard A. Feely, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Nicolas Gruber, Sören Gutekunst, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Jed O. Kaplan, Etsushi Kato, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Anna Peregon, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger, Naomi Smith, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1783–1838, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2019 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Nicolas Vuichard, Palmira Messina, Sebastiaan Luyssaert, Bertrand Guenet, Sönke Zaehle, Josefine Ghattas, Vladislav Bastrikov, and Philippe Peylin
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4751–4779, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4751-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4751-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
In this research, we present a new version of the global terrestrial ecosystem model ORCHIDEE in which carbon and nitrogen cycles are coupled. We evaluate its skills at simulating primary production at 78 sites and at a global scale. Based on a set of additional simulations in which carbon and nitrogen cycles are coupled and uncoupled, we show that the functional responses of the model with carbon–nitrogen interactions better agree with our current understanding of photosynthesis.
Tea Thum, Silvia Caldararu, Jan Engel, Melanie Kern, Marleen Pallandt, Reiner Schnur, Lin Yu, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4781–4802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4781-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4781-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
To predict the response of the vegetation to climate change, we need global models that describe the relevant processes taking place in the vegetation. Recently, we have obtained more in-depth understanding of vegetation processes and the role of nutrients in the biogeochemical cycles. We have developed a new global vegetation model that includes carbon, water, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycles. We show that the model is successful in evaluation against a wide range of observations.
Chris D. Jones, Thomas L. Frölicher, Charles Koven, Andrew H. MacDougall, H. Damon Matthews, Kirsten Zickfeld, Joeri Rogelj, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, Nathan P. Gillett, Tatiana Ilyina, Malte Meinshausen, Nadine Mengis, Roland Séférian, Michael Eby, and Friedrich A. Burger
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4375–4385, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4375-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4375-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Global warming is simply related to the total emission of CO2 allowing us to define a carbon budget. However, information on the Zero Emissions Commitment is a key missing link to assess remaining carbon budgets to achieve the climate targets of the Paris Agreement. It was therefore decided that a small targeted MIP activity to fill this knowledge gap would be extremely valuable. This article formalises the experimental design alongside the other CMIP6 documentation papers.
Ana Bastos, Philippe Ciais, Frédéric Chevallier, Christian Rödenbeck, Ashley P. Ballantyne, Fabienne Maignan, Yi Yin, Marcos Fernández-Martínez, Pierre Friedlingstein, Josep Peñuelas, Shilong L. Piao, Stephen Sitch, William K. Smith, Xuhui Wang, Zaichun Zhu, Vanessa Haverd, Etsushi Kato, Atul K. Jain, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Philippe Peylin, Benjamin Poulter, and Dan Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12361–12375, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12361-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12361-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Here we show that land-surface models improved their ability to simulate the increase in the amplitude of seasonal CO2-cycle exchange (SCANBP) by ecosystems compared to estimates by two atmospheric inversions. We find a dominant role of vegetation growth over boreal Eurasia to the observed increase in SCANBP, strongly driven by CO2 fertilization, and an overall negative effect of temperature on SCANBP. Biases can be explained by the sensitivity of simulated microbial respiration to temperature.
Jarmo Mäkelä, Jürgen Knauer, Mika Aurela, Andrew Black, Martin Heimann, Hideki Kobayashi, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Hank Margolis, Tiina Markkanen, Jouni Susiluoto, Tea Thum, Toni Viskari, Sönke Zaehle, and Tuula Aalto
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4075–4098, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4075-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4075-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We assess the differences of six stomatal conductance formulations, embedded into a land–vegetation model JSBACH, on 10 boreal coniferous evergreen forest sites. We calibrate the model parameters using all six functions in a multi-year experiment, as well as for a separate drought event at one of the sites, using the adaptive population importance sampler. The analysis reveals weaknesses in the stomatal conductance formulation-dependent model behaviour that we are able to partially amend.
Karel Castro-Morales, Gregor Schürmann, Christoph Köstler, Christian Rödenbeck, Martin Heimann, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 16, 3009–3032, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-3009-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-3009-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
To obtain nearly 30 years of global terrestrial carbon fluxes, we simultaneously incorporated in a land surface model three different time periods of two observational data sets: absorbed photosynthetic active radiation and atmospheric CO2 concentrations. One decade of data is enough to improve the modeled long-term trends and seasonal amplitudes of the assimilated variables, particularly in boreal regions. This model has the potential to provide short-term predictions of land carbon fluxes.
Christoph Heinze, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Colin Jones, Yves Balkanski, William Collins, Thierry Fichefet, Shuang Gao, Alex Hall, Detelina Ivanova, Wolfgang Knorr, Reto Knutti, Alexander Löw, Michael Ponater, Martin G. Schultz, Michael Schulz, Pier Siebesma, Joao Teixeira, George Tselioudis, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 10, 379–452, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-379-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-379-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models for producing climate projections under given forcings include additional processes and feedbacks that traditional physical climate models do not consider. We present an overview of climate feedbacks for key Earth system components and discuss the evaluation of these feedbacks. The target group for this article includes generalists with a background in natural sciences and an interest in climate change as well as experts working in interdisciplinary climate research.
Mingkai Jiang, Sönke Zaehle, Martin G. De Kauwe, Anthony P. Walker, Silvia Caldararu, David S. Ellsworth, and Belinda E. Medlyn
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2069–2089, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2069-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2069-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Here we used a simple analytical framework developed by Comins and McMurtrie (1993) to investigate how different model assumptions affected plant responses to elevated CO2. This framework is useful in revealing both the consequences and the mechanisms through which different assumptions affect predictions. We therefore recommend the use of this framework to analyze the likely outcomes of new assumptions before introducing them to complex model structures.
David Walters, Anthony J. Baran, Ian Boutle, Malcolm Brooks, Paul Earnshaw, John Edwards, Kalli Furtado, Peter Hill, Adrian Lock, James Manners, Cyril Morcrette, Jane Mulcahy, Claudio Sanchez, Chris Smith, Rachel Stratton, Warren Tennant, Lorenzo Tomassini, Kwinten Van Weverberg, Simon Vosper, Martin Willett, Jo Browse, Andrew Bushell, Kenneth Carslaw, Mohit Dalvi, Richard Essery, Nicola Gedney, Steven Hardiman, Ben Johnson, Colin Johnson, Andy Jones, Colin Jones, Graham Mann, Sean Milton, Heather Rumbold, Alistair Sellar, Masashi Ujiie, Michael Whitall, Keith Williams, and Mohamed Zerroukat
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1909–1963, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1909-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1909-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Global Atmosphere (GA) configurations of the Unified Model (UM) and Global Land (GL) configurations of JULES are developed for use in any global atmospheric modelling application. We describe a recent iteration of these configurations, GA7/GL7, which includes new aerosol and snow schemes and addresses the four critical errors identified in GA6. GA7/GL7 will underpin the UK's contributions to CMIP6, and hence their documentation is important.
Chantelle Burton, Richard Betts, Manoel Cardoso, Ted R. Feldpausch, Anna Harper, Chris D. Jones, Douglas I. Kelley, Eddy Robertson, and Andy Wiltshire
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 179–193, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-179-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-179-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Fire and land-use change are important disturbances within the Earth system, and their inclusion in models is critical to enable the correct simulation of vegetation cover. Here we describe developments to the land surface model JULES to represent explicit land-use change and fire and to assess the effects of each process on present day vegetation compared to observations. Using historical land-use data and the fire model INFERNO, overall model results are improved by the developments.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Judith Hauck, Julia Pongratz, Penelope A. Pickers, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Josep G. Canadell, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Scott C. Doney, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Forrest M. Hoffman, Mario Hoppema, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Truls Johannessen, Chris D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Are Olsen, Tsueno Ono, Prabir Patra, Anna Peregon, Wouter Peters, Philippe Peylin, Benjamin Pfeil, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Matthias Rocher, Christian Rödenbeck, Ute Schuster, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Adrienne Sutton, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Viovy, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Rebecca Wright, Sönke Zaehle, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 2141–2194, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2018 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Martina Franz, Rocio Alonso, Almut Arneth, Patrick Büker, Susana Elvira, Giacomo Gerosa, Lisa Emberson, Zhaozhong Feng, Didier Le Thiec, Riccardo Marzuoli, Elina Oksanen, Johan Uddling, Matthew Wilkinson, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 15, 6941–6957, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-6941-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-6941-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Four published ozone damage functions previously used in terrestrial biosphere models were evaluated regarding their ability to simulate observed biomass dose–response relationships using the O-CN model. Neither damage function was able to reproduce the observed ozone-induced biomass reductions. Calibrating a plant-functional-type-specific relationship between accumulated ozone uptake and leaf-level photosynthesis did lead to a good agreement between observed and modelled ozone damage.
Lee de Mora, Andrew Yool, Julien Palmieri, Alistair Sellar, Till Kuhlbrodt, Ekaterina Popova, Colin Jones, and J. Icarus Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4215–4240, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4215-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4215-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change is expected to have a significant impact on the Earth's weather, ice caps, land surface, and ocean. Computer models of the Earth system are the only tools available to make predictions about how the climate may change in the future. However, in order to trust the model predictions, we must first demonstrate that the models have a realistic description of the past. The BGC-val toolkit was built to rapidly and simply evaluate the behaviour of models of the Earth's oceans.
Yilong Wang, Philippe Ciais, Daniel Goll, Yuanyuan Huang, Yiqi Luo, Ying-Ping Wang, A. Anthony Bloom, Grégoire Broquet, Jens Hartmann, Shushi Peng, Josep Penuelas, Shilong Piao, Jordi Sardans, Benjamin D. Stocker, Rong Wang, Sönke Zaehle, and Sophie Zechmeister-Boltenstern
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3903–3928, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3903-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3903-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new modeling framework called Global Observation-based Land-ecosystems Utilization Model of Carbon, Nitrogen and Phosphorus (GOLUM-CNP) that combines a data-constrained C-cycle analysis with data-driven estimates of N and P inputs and losses and with observed stoichiometric ratios. GOLUM-CNP provides a traceable tool, where a consistency between different datasets of global C, N, and P cycles has been achieved.
Johannes Meyerholt and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 15, 5677–5698, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5677-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5677-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial biosphere models employ various representations of ecosystem nitrogen loss, some based on soil N availability, some based on net N mineralization. We show in local and global simulations that this variety leads to pronounced uncertainty in the predicted magnitude and sign of ecosystem N loss change under elevated CO2. Suprisingly, this uncertainty barely affects predicted carbon storage responses to elevated CO2, illustrating the need for new benchmarks especially in the boreal zone.
Jun Wang, Ning Zeng, Meirong Wang, Fei Jiang, Jingming Chen, Pierre Friedlingstein, Atul K. Jain, Ziqiang Jiang, Weimin Ju, Sebastian Lienert, Julia Nabel, Stephen Sitch, Nicolas Viovy, Hengmao Wang, and Andrew J. Wiltshire
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 10333–10345, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-10333-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-10333-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Based on the Mauna Loa CO2 records and TRENDY multi-model historical simulations, we investigate the different impacts of EP and CP El Niños on interannual carbon cycle variability. Composite analysis indicates that the evolutions of CO2 growth rate anomalies have three clear differences in terms of precursors (negative and neutral), amplitudes (strong and weak), and durations of peak (Dec–Apr and Oct–Jan) during EP and CP El Niños, respectively. We further discuss their terrestrial mechanisms.
Anna B. Harper, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Lina M. Mercado, Stephen Sitch, Karina Williams, and Carolina Duran-Rojas
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2857–2873, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2857-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2857-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Dynamic global vegetation models are used for studying historical and future changes to vegetation and the terrestrial carbon cycle. JULES is a DGVM that represents the land surface in the UK Earth System Model. We compared simulated gross and net primary productivity of vegetation, vegetation distribution, and aspects of the transient carbon cycle to observational datasets. JULES was able to accurately reproduce many aspects of the terrestrial carbon cycle with the recent improvements.
Werner von Bloh, Sibyll Schaphoff, Christoph Müller, Susanne Rolinski, Katharina Waha, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2789–2812, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2789-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2789-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The dynamics of the terrestrial carbon cycle are of central importance for Earth system science. Nutrient limitations, especially from nitrogen, are important constraints on vegetation growth and the terrestrial carbon cycle. We extended the well-established global vegetation, hydrology, and crop model LPJmL with a nitrogen cycle. We find significant improvement in global patterns of crop productivity. Regional differences in crop productivity can now be largely reproduced by the model.
Karel Castro-Morales, Thomas Kleinen, Sonja Kaiser, Sönke Zaehle, Fanny Kittler, Min Jung Kwon, Christian Beer, and Mathias Göckede
Biogeosciences, 15, 2691–2722, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-2691-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-2691-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We present year-round methane emissions from wetlands in Northeast Siberia that were simulated with a land surface model. Ground-based flux measurements from the same area were used for evaluation of the model results, finding a best agreement with the observations in the summertime emissions that take place in this region predominantly through plants. During winter, methane emissions through the snow contribute 4 % of the total annual methane budget, but these are still underestimated.
Klaus-Dirk Gottschaldt, Hans Schlager, Robert Baumann, Duy Sinh Cai, Veronika Eyring, Phoebe Graf, Volker Grewe, Patrick Jöckel, Tina Jurkat-Witschas, Christiane Voigt, Andreas Zahn, and Helmut Ziereis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 5655–5675, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5655-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5655-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This study places aircraft trace gas measurements from within the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone into the context of regional, intra- and interannual variability. We find that the processes reflected in the measurements are present throughout multiple simulated monsoon seasons. Dynamical instabilities, photochemical ozone production, lightning and entrainments from the lower troposphere and from the tropopause region determine the distinct composition of the anticyclone and its outflow.
Christian Rödenbeck, Sönke Zaehle, Ralph Keeling, and Martin Heimann
Biogeosciences, 15, 2481–2498, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-2481-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-2481-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we investigate how the CO2 exchange between the land vegetation and the atmosphere varies from year to year. We quantify the relation between variations in the CO2 exchange and variations in air temperature. For this quantification, we use long-term measurements of CO2 in the air at many locations, a simulation code for the transport of carbon dioxide through the atmosphere, and a data set of air temperature. The results help us to understand the mechanisms of CO2 exchange.
David P. Keller, Andrew Lenton, Vivian Scott, Naomi E. Vaughan, Nico Bauer, Duoying Ji, Chris D. Jones, Ben Kravitz, Helene Muri, and Kirsten Zickfeld
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1133–1160, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1133-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1133-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
There is little consensus on the impacts and efficacy of proposed carbon dioxide removal (CDR) methods as a potential means of mitigating climate change. To address this need, the Carbon Dioxide Removal Model Intercomparison Project (or CDR-MIP) has been initiated. This project brings together models of the Earth system in a common framework to explore the potential, impacts, and challenges of CDR. Here, we describe the first set of CDR-MIP experiments.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Julia Pongratz, Andrew C. Manning, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Thomas A. Boden, Pieter P. Tans, Oliver D. Andrews, Vivek K. Arora, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Leticia Barbero, Meike Becker, Richard A. Betts, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Catherine E. Cosca, Jessica Cross, Kim Currie, Thomas Gasser, Ian Harris, Judith Hauck, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Christopher W. Hunt, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Markus Kautz, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Ivan Lima, Danica Lombardozzi, Nicolas Metzl, Frank Millero, Pedro M. S. Monteiro, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Yukihiro Nojiri, X. Antonio Padin, Anna Peregon, Benjamin Pfeil, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Janet Reimer, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Benjamin D. Stocker, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Steven van Heuven, Nicolas Viovy, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Watson, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Sönke Zaehle, and Dan Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 405–448, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2017 describes data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. It is the 12th annual update and the 6th published in this journal.
Mahdi Nakhavali, Pierre Friedlingstein, Ronny Lauerwald, Jing Tang, Sarah Chadburn, Marta Camino-Serrano, Bertrand Guenet, Anna Harper, David Walmsley, Matthias Peichl, and Bert Gielen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 593–609, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-593-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-593-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
In order to provide a better understanding of the Earth's carbon cycle, we need a model that represents the whole continuum from atmosphere to land and into the ocean. In this study we include in JULES a representation of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) processes. Our results show that the model is able to reproduce the DOC concentration and controlling processes, including leaching to the riverine system, which is fundamental for integrating the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem.
Axel Lauer, Colin Jones, Veronika Eyring, Martin Evaldsson, Stefan Hagemann, Jarmo Mäkelä, Gill Martin, Romain Roehrig, and Shiyu Wang
Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 33–67, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-33-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-33-2018, 2018
Katja Frieler, Stefan Lange, Franziska Piontek, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Jacob Schewe, Lila Warszawski, Fang Zhao, Louise Chini, Sebastien Denvil, Kerry Emanuel, Tobias Geiger, Kate Halladay, George Hurtt, Matthias Mengel, Daisuke Murakami, Sebastian Ostberg, Alexander Popp, Riccardo Riva, Miodrag Stevanovic, Tatsuo Suzuki, Jan Volkholz, Eleanor Burke, Philippe Ciais, Kristie Ebi, Tyler D. Eddy, Joshua Elliott, Eric Galbraith, Simon N. Gosling, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Jochen Hinkel, Christian Hof, Veronika Huber, Jonas Jägermeyr, Valentina Krysanova, Rafael Marcé, Hannes Müller Schmied, Ioanna Mouratiadou, Don Pierson, Derek P. Tittensor, Robert Vautard, Michelle van Vliet, Matthias F. Biber, Richard A. Betts, Benjamin Leon Bodirsky, Delphine Deryng, Steve Frolking, Chris D. Jones, Heike K. Lotze, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Ritvik Sahajpal, Kirsten Thonicke, Hanqin Tian, and Yoshiki Yamagata
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4321–4345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the simulation scenario design for the next phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP), which is designed to facilitate a contribution to the scientific basis for the IPCC Special Report on the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming. ISIMIP brings together over 80 climate-impact models, covering impacts on hydrology, biomes, forests, heat-related mortality, permafrost, tropical cyclones, fisheries, agiculture, energy, and coastal infrastructure.
Wei Li, Philippe Ciais, Shushi Peng, Chao Yue, Yilong Wang, Martin Thurner, Sassan S. Saatchi, Almut Arneth, Valerio Avitabile, Nuno Carvalhais, Anna B. Harper, Etsushi Kato, Charles Koven, Yi Y. Liu, Julia E.M.S. Nabel, Yude Pan, Julia Pongratz, Benjamin Poulter, Thomas A. M. Pugh, Maurizio Santoro, Stephen Sitch, Benjamin D. Stocker, Nicolas Viovy, Andy Wiltshire, Rasoul Yousefpour, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 14, 5053–5067, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-5053-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-5053-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We used several observation-based biomass datasets to constrain the historical land-use change carbon emissions simulated by models. Compared to the range of the original modeled emissions (from 94 to 273 Pg C), the observationally constrained global cumulative emission estimate is 155 ± 50 Pg C (1σ Gaussian error) from 1901 to 2012. Our approach can also be applied to evaluate the LULCC impact of land-based climate mitigation policies.
Daniel S. Goll, Nicolas Vuichard, Fabienne Maignan, Albert Jornet-Puig, Jordi Sardans, Aurelie Violette, Shushi Peng, Yan Sun, Marko Kvakic, Matthieu Guimberteau, Bertrand Guenet, Soenke Zaehle, Josep Penuelas, Ivan Janssens, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3745–3770, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3745-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3745-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We describe a representation of the terrestrial phosphorus cycle for the ORCHIDEE land surface model. The model is able to reproduce the observed shift from nitrogen to phosphorus limited net primary productivity along a soil formation chronosequence in Hawaii, as well as the contrasting responses of net primary productivity to nutrient addition. However, the simulated nutrient use efficiencies are lower, as observed primarily due to biases in the nutrient content and turnover of woody biomass.
Eleanor J. Burke, Altug Ekici, Ye Huang, Sarah E. Chadburn, Chris Huntingford, Philippe Ciais, Pierre Friedlingstein, Shushi Peng, and Gerhard Krinner
Biogeosciences, 14, 3051–3066, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-3051-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-3051-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
There are large reserves of carbon within the permafrost which might be released to the atmosphere under global warming. Our models suggest this release may cause an additional global temperature increase of 0.005 to 0.2°C by the year 2100 and 0.01 to 0.34°C by the year 2300. Under climate mitigation scenarios this is between 1.5 and 9 % (by 2100) and between 6 and 16 % (by 2300) of the global mean temperature change. There is a large uncertainty associated with these results.
Richard J. Millar, Zebedee R. Nicholls, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Myles R. Allen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7213–7228, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7213-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7213-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Simple representations of the global coupled climate–carbon-cycle system are required for climate policy analysis. Existing models have often failed to capture important physical dependencies of the climate response to carbon dioxide emissions. In this paper we propose a simple but novel modification to impulse-response climate–carbon-cycle models to capture these physical dependencies. This simple model creates an important tool for both climate policy and climate science analysis.
Klaus-D. Gottschaldt, Hans Schlager, Robert Baumann, Heiko Bozem, Veronika Eyring, Peter Hoor, Patrick Jöckel, Tina Jurkat, Christiane Voigt, Andreas Zahn, and Helmut Ziereis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6091–6111, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6091-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6091-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We present upper-tropospheric trace gas measurements in the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone, obtained with the HALO research aircraft in September 2012. The anticyclone is one of the largest atmospheric features on Earth, but many aspects of it are not well understood. With the help of model simulations we find that entrainments from the tropopause region and the lower troposphere, combined with photochemistry and dynamical instabilities, can explain the observations.
Tea Thum, Sönke Zaehle, Philipp Köhler, Tuula Aalto, Mika Aurela, Luis Guanter, Pasi Kolari, Tuomas Laurila, Annalea Lohila, Federico Magnani, Christiaan Van Der Tol, and Tiina Markkanen
Biogeosciences, 14, 1969–1987, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1969-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1969-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Modelling seasonal cycle at the coniferous forests poses a challenge. We implemented a model for sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) to a land surface model JSBACH. It was used to study the seasonality of the carbon cycle in the Fenno-Scandinavian region. Comparison was made to direct CO2 flux measurements and satellite observations of SIF. SIF proved to be a better proxy for photosynthesis than the fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation.
William J. Collins, Jean-François Lamarque, Michael Schulz, Olivier Boucher, Veronika Eyring, Michaela I. Hegglin, Amanda Maycock, Gunnar Myhre, Michael Prather, Drew Shindell, and Steven J. Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We have designed a set of climate model experiments called the Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP). These are designed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically reactive gases in the climate models that are used to simulate past and future climate. We hope that many climate modelling centres will choose to run these experiments to help understand the contribution of aerosols and chemistry to climate change.
Martina Franz, David Simpson, Almut Arneth, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 14, 45–71, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-45-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-45-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Ozone is a toxic air pollutant that can damage plant leaves and impact their carbon uptake from the atmosphere. We extend a terrestrial biosphere model to account for ozone damage of plants and investigate the impact on the terrestrial carbon cycle. Our approach accounts for ozone transport from the free troposphere to leaf level. We find that this substantially affects simulated ozone uptake into the plants. Simulations indicate that ozone damages plants less than expected from previous studies
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Josep G. Canadell, Stephen Sitch, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Andrew C. Manning, Thomas A. Boden, Pieter P. Tans, Richard A. Houghton, Ralph F. Keeling, Simone Alin, Oliver D. Andrews, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Kim Currie, Christine Delire, Scott C. Doney, Pierre Friedlingstein, Thanos Gkritzalis, Ian Harris, Judith Hauck, Vanessa Haverd, Mario Hoppema, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Atul K. Jain, Etsushi Kato, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, Frank Millero, Pedro M. S. Monteiro, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Kevin O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Christian Rödenbeck, Joe Salisbury, Ute Schuster, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Benjamin D. Stocker, Adrienne J. Sutton, Taro Takahashi, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Viovy, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 605–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2016 is the 11th annual update of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. This data synthesis brings together measurements, statistical information, and analyses of model results in order to provide an assessment of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties for years 1959 to 2015, with a projection for year 2016.
Veronika Eyring, Peter J. Gleckler, Christoph Heinze, Ronald J. Stouffer, Karl E. Taylor, V. Balaji, Eric Guilyardi, Sylvie Joussaume, Stephan Kindermann, Bryan N. Lawrence, Gerald A. Meehl, Mattia Righi, and Dean N. Williams
Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 813–830, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We argue that the CMIP community has reached a critical juncture at which many baseline aspects of model evaluation need to be performed much more efficiently to enable a systematic and rapid performance assessment of the large number of models participating in CMIP, and we announce our intention to implement such a system for CMIP6. At the same time, continuous scientific research is required to develop innovative metrics and diagnostics that help narrowing the spread in climate projections.
Brian C. O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, George Hurtt, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Jason Lowe, Gerald A. Meehl, Richard Moss, Keywan Riahi, and Benjamin M. Sanderson
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3461–3482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) will provide multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use changes produced with integrated assessment models. The design consists of eight alternative 21st century scenarios plus one large initial condition ensemble and a set of long-term extensions. Climate model projections will facilitate integrated studies of climate change as well as address targeted scientific questions.
Fang Zhao, Ning Zeng, Ghassem Asrar, Pierre Friedlingstein, Akihiko Ito, Atul Jain, Eugenia Kalnay, Etsushi Kato, Charles D. Koven, Ben Poulter, Rashid Rafique, Stephen Sitch, Shijie Shu, Beni Stocker, Nicolas Viovy, Andy Wiltshire, and Sonke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 13, 5121–5137, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-5121-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-5121-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The increasing seasonality of atmospheric CO2 is strongly linked with enhanced land vegetation activities in the last 5 decades, for which the importance of increasing CO2, climate and land use/cover change was evaluated in single model studies (Zeng et al., 2014; Forkel et al., 2016). Here we examine the relative importance of these factors in multiple models. Our results highlight models can show similar results in some benchmarks with different underlying regional dynamics.
Gregor J. Schürmann, Thomas Kaminski, Christoph Köstler, Nuno Carvalhais, Michael Voßbeck, Jens Kattge, Ralf Giering, Christian Rödenbeck, Martin Heimann, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2999–3026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2999-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2999-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We describe the Max Planck Institute Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (MPI-CCDAS). The system improves the modelled carbon cycle of the terrestrial biosphere by systematically confronting (or assimilating) the model with observations of atmospheric CO2 and fractions of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation. Jointly assimilating both data streams outperforms the single-data stream experiments, thus showing the value of a multi-data stream assimilation.
David M. Lawrence, George C. Hurtt, Almut Arneth, Victor Brovkin, Kate V. Calvin, Andrew D. Jones, Chris D. Jones, Peter J. Lawrence, Nathalie de Noblet-Ducoudré, Julia Pongratz, Sonia I. Seneviratne, and Elena Shevliakova
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2973–2998, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2973-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2973-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Human land-use activities have resulted in large changes to the Earth's surface, with resulting implications for climate. In the future, land-use activities are likely to expand and intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. The goal of LUMIP is to take the next steps in land-use change science, and enable, coordinate, and ultimately address the most important land-use science questions in more depth and sophistication than possible in a multi-model context to date.
Chris D. Jones, Vivek Arora, Pierre Friedlingstein, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, John Dunne, Heather Graven, Forrest Hoffman, Tatiana Ilyina, Jasmin G. John, Martin Jung, Michio Kawamiya, Charlie Koven, Julia Pongratz, Thomas Raddatz, James T. Randerson, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2853–2880, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2853-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2853-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
How the carbon cycle interacts with climate will affect future climate change and how society plans emissions reductions to achieve climate targets. The Coupled Climate Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project (C4MIP) is an endorsed activity of CMIP6 and aims to quantify these interactions and feedbacks in state-of-the-art climate models. This paper lays out the experimental protocol for modelling groups to follow to contribute to C4MIP. It is a contribution to the CMIP6 GMD Special Issue.
Raquel A. Silva, J. Jason West, Jean-François Lamarque, Drew T. Shindell, William J. Collins, Stig Dalsoren, Greg Faluvegi, Gerd Folberth, Larry W. Horowitz, Tatsuya Nagashima, Vaishali Naik, Steven T. Rumbold, Kengo Sudo, Toshihiko Takemura, Daniel Bergmann, Philip Cameron-Smith, Irene Cionni, Ruth M. Doherty, Veronika Eyring, Beatrice Josse, Ian A. MacKenzie, David Plummer, Mattia Righi, David S. Stevenson, Sarah Strode, Sophie Szopa, and Guang Zengast
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9847–9862, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Using ozone and PM2.5 concentrations from the ACCMIP ensemble of chemistry-climate models for the four Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCPs), together with projections of future population and baseline mortality rates, we quantify the human premature mortality impacts of future ambient air pollution in 2030, 2050 and 2100, relative to 2000 concentrations. We also estimate the global mortality burden of ozone and PM2.5 in 2000 and each future period.
Anna B. Harper, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris D. Jones, Stephen Sitch, Lina M. Mercado, Margriet Groenendijk, Eddy Robertson, Jens Kattge, Gerhard Bönisch, Owen K. Atkin, Michael Bahn, Johannes Cornelissen, Ülo Niinemets, Vladimir Onipchenko, Josep Peñuelas, Lourens Poorter, Peter B. Reich, Nadjeda A. Soudzilovskaia, and Peter van Bodegom
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2415–2440, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2415-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2415-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) are used to predict the response of vegetation to climate change. We improved the representation of carbon uptake by ecosystems in a DGVM by including a wider range of trade-offs between nutrient allocation to photosynthetic capacity and leaf structure, based on observed plant traits from a worldwide data base. The improved model has higher rates of photosynthesis and net C uptake by plants, and more closely matches observations at site and global scales.
Stijn Hantson, Almut Arneth, Sandy P. Harrison, Douglas I. Kelley, I. Colin Prentice, Sam S. Rabin, Sally Archibald, Florent Mouillot, Steve R. Arnold, Paulo Artaxo, Dominique Bachelet, Philippe Ciais, Matthew Forrest, Pierre Friedlingstein, Thomas Hickler, Jed O. Kaplan, Silvia Kloster, Wolfgang Knorr, Gitta Lasslop, Fang Li, Stephane Mangeon, Joe R. Melton, Andrea Meyn, Stephen Sitch, Allan Spessa, Guido R. van der Werf, Apostolos Voulgarakis, and Chao Yue
Biogeosciences, 13, 3359–3375, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-3359-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-3359-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of past and future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes. A large variety of models exist, and it is unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. In this paper we summarize the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling and model evaluation, and outline what lessons may be learned from the Fire Model Intercomparison Project – FireMIP.
Veronika Eyring, Sandrine Bony, Gerald A. Meehl, Catherine A. Senior, Bjorn Stevens, Ronald J. Stouffer, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The objective of CMIP is to better understand past, present, and future climate change in a multi-model context. CMIP's increasing importance and scope is a tremendous success story, but the need to address an ever-expanding range of scientific questions arising from more and more research communities has made it necessary to revise the organization of CMIP. In response to these challenges, we have adopted a more federated structure for the sixth phase of CMIP (i.e. CMIP6) and subsequent phases.
Veronika Eyring, Mattia Righi, Axel Lauer, Martin Evaldsson, Sabrina Wenzel, Colin Jones, Alessandro Anav, Oliver Andrews, Irene Cionni, Edouard L. Davin, Clara Deser, Carsten Ehbrecht, Pierre Friedlingstein, Peter Gleckler, Klaus-Dirk Gottschaldt, Stefan Hagemann, Martin Juckes, Stephan Kindermann, John Krasting, Dominik Kunert, Richard Levine, Alexander Loew, Jarmo Mäkelä, Gill Martin, Erik Mason, Adam S. Phillips, Simon Read, Catherine Rio, Romain Roehrig, Daniel Senftleben, Andreas Sterl, Lambertus H. van Ulft, Jeremy Walton, Shiyu Wang, and Keith D. Williams
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1747–1802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
A community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models (ESMs) in CMIP has been developed that allows for routine comparison of single or multiple models, either against predecessor versions or against observations.
Johannes Meyerholt, Sönke Zaehle, and Matthew J. Smith
Biogeosciences, 13, 1491–1518, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-1491-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-1491-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated how today's state-of-the-art terrestrial biosphere models represent biological nitrogen fixation and what the consequences of varying representation are for model predictions under ambient conditions and under scenarios of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We found that varying global nitrogen fixation rates are simulated under ambient conditions and that the responses of the simulated carbon and nitrogen cycles are significantly affected under perturbation.
G. Murray-Tortarolo, P. Friedlingstein, S. Sitch, V. J. Jaramillo, F. Murguía-Flores, A. Anav, Y. Liu, A. Arneth, A. Arvanitis, A. Harper, A. Jain, E. Kato, C. Koven, B. Poulter, B. D. Stocker, A. Wiltshire, S. Zaehle, and N. Zeng
Biogeosciences, 13, 223–238, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-223-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-223-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We modelled the carbon (C) cycle in Mexico for three different time periods: past (20th century), present (2000-2005) and future (2006-2100). We used different available products to estimate C stocks and fluxes in the country. Contrary to other current estimates, our results showed that Mexico was a C sink and this is likely to continue in the next century (unless the most extreme climate-change scenarios are reached).
D. Fowler, C. E. Steadman, D. Stevenson, M. Coyle, R. M. Rees, U. M. Skiba, M. A. Sutton, J. N. Cape, A. J. Dore, M. Vieno, D. Simpson, S. Zaehle, B. D. Stocker, M. Rinaldi, M. C. Facchini, C. R. Flechard, E. Nemitz, M. Twigg, J. W. Erisman, K. Butterbach-Bahl, and J. N. Galloway
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 13849–13893, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-13849-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-13849-2015, 2015
C. Le Quéré, R. Moriarty, R. M. Andrew, J. G. Canadell, S. Sitch, J. I. Korsbakken, P. Friedlingstein, G. P. Peters, R. J. Andres, T. A. Boden, R. A. Houghton, J. I. House, R. F. Keeling, P. Tans, A. Arneth, D. C. E. Bakker, L. Barbero, L. Bopp, J. Chang, F. Chevallier, L. P. Chini, P. Ciais, M. Fader, R. A. Feely, T. Gkritzalis, I. Harris, J. Hauck, T. Ilyina, A. K. Jain, E. Kato, V. Kitidis, K. Klein Goldewijk, C. Koven, P. Landschützer, S. K. Lauvset, N. Lefèvre, A. Lenton, I. D. Lima, N. Metzl, F. Millero, D. R. Munro, A. Murata, J. E. M. S. Nabel, S. Nakaoka, Y. Nojiri, K. O'Brien, A. Olsen, T. Ono, F. F. Pérez, B. Pfeil, D. Pierrot, B. Poulter, G. Rehder, C. Rödenbeck, S. Saito, U. Schuster, J. Schwinger, R. Séférian, T. Steinhoff, B. D. Stocker, A. J. Sutton, T. Takahashi, B. Tilbrook, I. T. van der Laan-Luijkx, G. R. van der Werf, S. van Heuven, D. Vandemark, N. Viovy, A. Wiltshire, S. Zaehle, and N. Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 349–396, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. We describe data sets and a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on a range of data and models and their interpretation by a broad scientific community.
S. Olin, M. Lindeskog, T. A. M. Pugh, G. Schurgers, D. Wårlind, M. Mishurov, S. Zaehle, B. D. Stocker, B. Smith, and A. Arneth
Earth Syst. Dynam., 6, 745–768, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-6-745-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-6-745-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Croplands are vital ecosystems for human well-being. Properly managed they can supply food, store carbon and even sequester carbon from the atmosphere. Conversely, if poorly managed, croplands can be a source of nitrogen to inland and coastal waters, causing algal blooms, and a source of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, accentuating climate change. Here we studied cropland management types for their potential to store carbon and minimize nitrogen losses while maintaining crop yields.
C. D. Koven, J. Q. Chambers, K. Georgiou, R. Knox, R. Negron-Juarez, W. J. Riley, V. K. Arora, V. Brovkin, P. Friedlingstein, and C. D. Jones
Biogeosciences, 12, 5211–5228, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-5211-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-5211-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Terrestrial carbon feedbacks are a large uncertainty in climate change. We separate modeled feedback responses into those governed by changed carbon inputs (productivity) and changed outputs (turnover). The disaggregated responses show that both are important in controlling inter-model uncertainty. Interactions between productivity and turnover are also important, and research must focus on these interactions for more accurate projections of carbon cycle feedbacks.
S. E. Chadburn, E. J. Burke, R. L. H. Essery, J. Boike, M. Langer, M. Heikenfeld, P. M. Cox, and P. Friedlingstein
The Cryosphere, 9, 1505–1521, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1505-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1505-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we use a global land-surface model to study the dynamics of Arctic permafrost. We examine the impact of new and improved processes in the model, namely soil depth and resolution, organic soils, moss and the representation of snow. These improvements make the simulated soil temperatures and thaw depth significantly more realistic. Simulations under future climate scenarios show that permafrost thaws more slowly in the new model version, but still a large amount is lost by 2100.
P. R. Halloran, B. B. B. Booth, C. D. Jones, F. H. Lambert, D. J. McNeall, I. J. Totterdell, and C. Völker
Biogeosciences, 12, 4497–4508, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-4497-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-4497-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The oceans currently take up around a quarter of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted by human activity. While stored in the ocean, this CO2 is not causing global warming. Here we explore high latitude North Atlantic CO2 uptake across a set of climate model simulations, and find that the models show a peak in ocean CO2 uptake around the middle of the century after which time CO2 uptake begins to decline. We identify the causes of this long-term change and interannual variability in the models.
M. A. Thomas, M. Kahnert, C. Andersson, H. Kokkola, U. Hansson, C. Jones, J. Langner, and A. Devasthale
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1885–1898, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1885-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1885-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We have showed that a coupled modelling system is beneficial in the sense that more complex processes can be included to better represent the aerosol processes starting from their formation, their interactions with clouds and provide better estimate of radiative forcing. Using this model set up, we estimated an annual mean 'indirect' radiative forcing of -0.64W/m2. This means that aerosols, solely by their capability of altering the microphysical properties of clouds can cool the Earth system.
S. Chadburn, E. Burke, R. Essery, J. Boike, M. Langer, M. Heikenfeld, P. Cox, and P. Friedlingstein
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1493–1508, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1493-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1493-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Permafrost, ground that is frozen for 2 or more years, is found extensively in the Arctic. It stores large quantities of carbon, which may be released under climate warming, so it is important to include it in climate models. Here we improve the representation of permafrost in a climate model land-surface scheme, both in the numerical representation of soil and snow, and by adding the effects of organic soils and moss. Site simulations show significantly improved soil temperature and thaw depth.
C. Le Quéré, R. Moriarty, R. M. Andrew, G. P. Peters, P. Ciais, P. Friedlingstein, S. D. Jones, S. Sitch, P. Tans, A. Arneth, T. A. Boden, L. Bopp, Y. Bozec, J. G. Canadell, L. P. Chini, F. Chevallier, C. E. Cosca, I. Harris, M. Hoppema, R. A. Houghton, J. I. House, A. K. Jain, T. Johannessen, E. Kato, R. F. Keeling, V. Kitidis, K. Klein Goldewijk, C. Koven, C. S. Landa, P. Landschützer, A. Lenton, I. D. Lima, G. Marland, J. T. Mathis, N. Metzl, Y. Nojiri, A. Olsen, T. Ono, S. Peng, W. Peters, B. Pfeil, B. Poulter, M. R. Raupach, P. Regnier, C. Rödenbeck, S. Saito, J. E. Salisbury, U. Schuster, J. Schwinger, R. Séférian, J. Segschneider, T. Steinhoff, B. D. Stocker, A. J. Sutton, T. Takahashi, B. Tilbrook, G. R. van der Werf, N. Viovy, Y.-P. Wang, R. Wanninkhof, A. Wiltshire, and N. Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 47–85, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-47-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-47-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activities (burning fossil fuels and cement production, deforestation and other land-use change) are set to rise again in 2014.
This study (updated yearly) makes an accurate assessment of anthropogenic CO2 emissions and their redistribution between the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in order to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change.
M. Righi, V. Eyring, K.-D. Gottschaldt, C. Klinger, F. Frank, P. Jöckel, and I. Cionni
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 733–768, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-733-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-733-2015, 2015
S. Sitch, P. Friedlingstein, N. Gruber, S. D. Jones, G. Murray-Tortarolo, A. Ahlström, S. C. Doney, H. Graven, C. Heinze, C. Huntingford, S. Levis, P. E. Levy, M. Lomas, B. Poulter, N. Viovy, S. Zaehle, N. Zeng, A. Arneth, G. Bonan, L. Bopp, J. G. Canadell, F. Chevallier, P. Ciais, R. Ellis, M. Gloor, P. Peylin, S. L. Piao, C. Le Quéré, B. Smith, Z. Zhu, and R. Myneni
Biogeosciences, 12, 653–679, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-653-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-653-2015, 2015
C. Yue, P. Ciais, P. Cadule, K. Thonicke, S. Archibald, B. Poulter, W. M. Hao, S. Hantson, F. Mouillot, P. Friedlingstein, F. Maignan, and N. Viovy
Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2747–2767, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2747-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2747-2014, 2014
Short summary
Short summary
ORCHIDEE-SPITFIRE model could moderately capture the decadal trend and variation of burned area during the 20th century, and the spatial and temporal patterns of contemporary vegetation fires. The model has a better performance in simulating fires for regions dominated by climate-driven fires, such as boreal forests. However, it has limited capability to reproduce the infrequent but important large fires in different ecosystems, where urgent model improvement is needed in the future.
C. Le Quéré, G. P. Peters, R. J. Andres, R. M. Andrew, T. A. Boden, P. Ciais, P. Friedlingstein, R. A. Houghton, G. Marland, R. Moriarty, S. Sitch, P. Tans, A. Arneth, A. Arvanitis, D. C. E. Bakker, L. Bopp, J. G. Canadell, L. P. Chini, S. C. Doney, A. Harper, I. Harris, J. I. House, A. K. Jain, S. D. Jones, E. Kato, R. F. Keeling, K. Klein Goldewijk, A. Körtzinger, C. Koven, N. Lefèvre, F. Maignan, A. Omar, T. Ono, G.-H. Park, B. Pfeil, B. Poulter, M. R. Raupach, P. Regnier, C. Rödenbeck, S. Saito, J. Schwinger, J. Segschneider, B. D. Stocker, T. Takahashi, B. Tilbrook, S. van Heuven, N. Viovy, R. Wanninkhof, A. Wiltshire, and S. Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 6, 235–263, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-6-235-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-6-235-2014, 2014
K. E. O. Todd-Brown, J. T. Randerson, F. Hopkins, V. Arora, T. Hajima, C. Jones, E. Shevliakova, J. Tjiputra, E. Volodin, T. Wu, Q. Zhang, and S. D. Allison
Biogeosciences, 11, 2341–2356, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2341-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2341-2014, 2014
B. Smith, D. Wårlind, A. Arneth, T. Hickler, P. Leadley, J. Siltberg, and S. Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 11, 2027–2054, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014, 2014
I. N. Fletcher, L. E. O. C. Aragão, A. Lima, Y. Shimabukuro, and P. Friedlingstein
Biogeosciences, 11, 1449–1459, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-1449-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-1449-2014, 2014
D. Dalmonech, A. M. Foley, A. Anav, P. Friedlingstein, A. D. Friend, M. Kidston, M. Willeit, and S. Zaehle
Biogeosciences Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/bgd-11-2083-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bgd-11-2083-2014, 2014
Revised manuscript has not been submitted
B. Guenet, F. E. Moyano, N. Vuichard, G. J. D. Kirk, P. H. Bellamy, S. Zaehle, and P. Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 2153–2163, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-2153-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-2153-2013, 2013
A. M. Foley, D. Dalmonech, A. D. Friend, F. Aires, A. T. Archibald, P. Bartlein, L. Bopp, J. Chappellaz, P. Cox, N. R. Edwards, G. Feulner, P. Friedlingstein, S. P. Harrison, P. O. Hopcroft, C. D. Jones, J. Kolassa, J. G. Levine, I. C. Prentice, J. Pyle, N. Vázquez Riveiros, E. W. Wolff, and S. Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 10, 8305–8328, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-8305-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-8305-2013, 2013
D. Dalmonech and S. Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 10, 4189–4210, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-4189-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-4189-2013, 2013
V. Naik, A. Voulgarakis, A. M. Fiore, L. W. Horowitz, J.-F. Lamarque, M. Lin, M. J. Prather, P. J. Young, D. Bergmann, P. J. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, G. A. Folberth, B. Josse, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, T. P. C. van Noije, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, R. Skeie, D. T. Shindell, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5277–5298, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5277-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5277-2013, 2013
C. Le Quéré, R. J. Andres, T. Boden, T. Conway, R. A. Houghton, J. I. House, G. Marland, G. P. Peters, G. R. van der Werf, A. Ahlström, R. M. Andrew, L. Bopp, J. G. Canadell, P. Ciais, S. C. Doney, C. Enright, P. Friedlingstein, C. Huntingford, A. K. Jain, C. Jourdain, E. Kato, R. F. Keeling, K. Klein Goldewijk, S. Levis, P. Levy, M. Lomas, B. Poulter, M. R. Raupach, J. Schwinger, S. Sitch, B. D. Stocker, N. Viovy, S. Zaehle, and N. Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 5, 165–185, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-5-165-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-5-165-2013, 2013
B. B. B. Booth, D. Bernie, D. McNeall, E. Hawkins, J. Caesar, C. Boulton, P. Friedlingstein, and D. M. H. Sexton
Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 95–108, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-95-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-95-2013, 2013
D. S. Stevenson, P. J. Young, V. Naik, J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, A. Voulgarakis, R. B. Skeie, S. B. Dalsoren, G. Myhre, T. K. Berntsen, G. A. Folberth, S. T. Rumbold, W. J. Collins, I. A. MacKenzie, R. M. Doherty, G. Zeng, T. P. C. van Noije, A. Strunk, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, D. A. Plummer, S. A. Strode, L. Horowitz, Y. H. Lee, S. Szopa, K. Sudo, T. Nagashima, B. Josse, I. Cionni, M. Righi, V. Eyring, A. Conley, K. W. Bowman, O. Wild, and A. Archibald
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3063–3085, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013, 2013
F. Joos, R. Roth, J. S. Fuglestvedt, G. P. Peters, I. G. Enting, W. von Bloh, V. Brovkin, E. J. Burke, M. Eby, N. R. Edwards, T. Friedrich, T. L. Frölicher, P. R. Halloran, P. B. Holden, C. Jones, T. Kleinen, F. T. Mackenzie, K. Matsumoto, M. Meinshausen, G.-K. Plattner, A. Reisinger, J. Segschneider, G. Shaffer, M. Steinacher, K. Strassmann, K. Tanaka, A. Timmermann, and A. J. Weaver
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2793–2825, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2793-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2793-2013, 2013
A. Voulgarakis, V. Naik, J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, P. J. Young, M. J. Prather, O. Wild, R. D. Field, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. M. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, G. A. Folberth, L. W. Horowitz, B. Josse, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, D. S. Stevenson, S. A. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2563–2587, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013, 2013
P. J. Young, A. T. Archibald, K. W. Bowman, J.-F. Lamarque, V. Naik, D. S. Stevenson, S. Tilmes, A. Voulgarakis, O. Wild, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. M. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, L. W. Horowitz, B. Josse, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, R. B. Skeie, D. T. Shindell, S. A. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2063–2090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2063-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2063-2013, 2013
J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, B. Josse, P. J. Young, I. Cionni, V. Eyring, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, W. J. Collins, R. Doherty, S. Dalsoren, G. Faluvegi, G. Folberth, S. J. Ghan, L. W. Horowitz, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, V. Naik, D. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, M. Schulz, R. B. Skeie, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, A. Voulgarakis, and G. Zeng
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 179–206, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Biogeochemistry: Modelling, Terrestrial
Evaluation of long-term carbon dynamics in a drained forested peatland using the ForSAFE-Peat model
Technical note: A modified formulation of dynamic energy budget theory for faster computation of biological growth
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
Development of the DO3SE-Crop model to assess ozone effects on crop phenology, biomass, and yield
Future methane fluxes of peatlands are controlled by management practices and fluctuations in hydrological conditions due to climatic variability
Understanding and simulating cropland and non-cropland burning in Europe using the BASE (Burnt Area Simulator for Europe) model
Does dynamically modeled leaf area improve predictions of land surface water and carbon fluxes? Insights into dynamic vegetation modules
Observational benchmarks inform representation of soil organic carbon dynamics in land surface models
X-BASE: the first terrestrial carbon and water flux products from an extended data-driven scaling framework, FLUXCOM-X
A 2001–2022 global gross primary productivity dataset using an ensemble model based on the random forest method
Future projections of Siberian wildfire and aerosol emissions
Mechanisms of soil organic carbon and nitrogen stabilization in mineral-associated organic matter – insights from modeling in phase space
Optimizing the terrestrial ecosystem gross primary productivity using carbonyl sulfide (COS) within a two-leaf modeling framework
Modeling integrated soil fertility management for maize production in Kenya using a Bayesian calibration of the DayCent model
When and why microbial-explicit soil organic carbon models can be unstable
The impacts of modelling prescribed vs. dynamic land cover in a high-CO2 future scenario – greening of the Arctic and Amazonian dieback
Climate-based prediction of carbon fluxes from deadwood in Australia
Integration of tree hydraulic processes and functional impairment to capture the drought resilience of a semiarid pine forest
The effect of temperature on photosystem II efficiency across plant functional types and climate
Modeling microbial carbon fluxes and stocks in global soils from 1901 to 2016
Elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration and vegetation structural changes contributed to gross primary productivity increase more than climate and forest cover changes in subtropical forests of China
Non-steady-state stomatal conductance modeling and its implications: from leaf to ecosystem
Modelled forest ecosystem carbon–nitrogen dynamics with integrated mycorrhizal processes under elevated CO2
A chemical kinetics theory for interpreting the non-monotonic temperature dependence of enzymatic reactions
Using Free Air CO2 Enrichment data to constrain land surface model projections of the terrestrial carbon cycle
Multiscale assessment of North American terrestrial carbon balance
Simulating net ecosystem exchange under seasonal snow cover at an Arctic tundra site
Spatial biases reduce the ability of Earth system models to simulate soil heterotrophic respiration fluxes
Tropical dry forest response to nutrient fertilization: a model validation and sensitivity analysis
Connecting competitor, stress-tolerator and ruderal (CSR) theory and Lund Potsdam Jena managed Land 5 (LPJmL 5) to assess the role of environmental conditions, management and functional diversity for grassland ecosystem functions
A global fuel characteristic model and dataset for wildfire prediction
Can models adequately reflect how long-term nitrogen enrichment alters the forest soil carbon cycle?
Temporal variability of observed and simulated gross primary productivity, modulated by vegetation state and hydrometeorological drivers
Empirical upscaling of OzFlux eddy covariance for high-resolution monitoring of terrestrial carbon uptake in Australia
A modeling approach to investigate drivers, variability and uncertainties in O2 fluxes and O2 : CO2 exchange ratios in a temperate forest
Modeling coupled nitrification–denitrification in soil with an organic hotspot
A new method for estimating carbon dioxide emissions from drained peatland forest soils for the greenhouse gas inventory of Finland
Enabling a process-oriented hydro-biogeochemical model to simulate soil erosion and nutrient losses
Potassium limitation of forest productivity – Part 1: A mechanistic model simulating the effects of potassium availability on canopy carbon and water fluxes in tropical eucalypt stands
Potassium limitation of forest productivity – Part 2: CASTANEA-MAESPA-K shows a reduction in photosynthesis rather than a stoichiometric limitation of tissue formation
Global evaluation of terrestrial biogeochemistry in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) and the role of the phosphorus cycle in the historical terrestrial carbon balance
Assessing carbon storage capacity and saturation across six central US grasslands using data–model integration
Optimizing the carbonic anhydrase temperature response and stomatal conductance of carbonyl sulfide leaf uptake in the Simple Biosphere model (SiB4)
Exploring environmental and physiological drivers of the annual carbon budget of biocrusts from various climatic zones with a mechanistic data-driven model
Improved process representation of leaf phenology significantly shifts climate sensitivity of ecosystem carbon balance
Mapping of ESA's Climate Change Initiative land cover data to plant functional types for use in the CLASSIC land model
Exploring the impacts of unprecedented climate extremes on forest ecosystems: hypotheses to guide modeling and experimental studies
Effect of droughts and climate change on future soil weathering rates in Sweden
Information content in time series of litter decomposition studies and the transit time of litter in arid lands
Long-term changes of nitrogen leaching and the contributions of terrestrial nutrient sources to lake eutrophication dynamics on the Yangtze Plain of China
Daniel Escobar, Stefano Manzoni, Jeimar Tapasco, Patrik Vestin, and Salim Belyazid
Biogeosciences, 22, 2023–2047, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-2023-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-2023-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We studied carbon dynamics in afforested, drained peatlands using the ForSAFE-Peat model over two forest rotations. Our simulations showed that, while trees store carbon, significant soil carbon losses occur, particularly early on, indicating that forest growth may not fully offset these losses once carbon time dynamics are considered. This emphasises the need to consider both soil and harvested wood products when evaluating the climate impact of such systems.
Jinyun Tang and William J. Riley
Biogeosciences, 22, 1809–1819, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1809-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1809-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A new mathematical formulation of the dynamic energy budget model is presented for the growth of biological organisms. This new formulation combines mass conservation law and chemical kinetics theory and is computationally faster than the standard formulation of dynamic energy budget models. In simulating the growth of Thalassiosira weissflogii in a nitrogen-limiting chemostat, the new model is as good as the standard dynamic energy budget model using almost the same parameter values.
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
Short summary
Deposition from sulfur and nitrogen pollution can harm ecosystems, and recovery from this type of pollution can take decades or longer. To identify risk to Canadian soils, we created maps showing sensitivity to sulfur and nitrogen pollution. Results show that some ecosystems are at risk from acid and nutrient nitrogen deposition: 10 % of protected areas are receiving acid deposition beyond their damage threshold, and 70 % may be receiving nitrogen deposition that could cause biodiversity loss.
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
Short summary
The DO3SE-Crop model extends the DO3SE to simulate ozone's impact on crops with modules for ozone uptake, damage, and crop growth from JULES-crop. It's versatile, suits China's varied agriculture, and improves yield predictions under ozone stress. It is essential for policy, water management, and climate response, and it integrates into Earth system models for a comprehensive understanding of agriculture's interaction with global systems.
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
Short summary
Drainage of boreal peatlands strongly influences soil methane fluxes, with important implications for climatic impacts. Here we simulate methane fluxes in forestry-drained and restored peatlands during the 21st century. We found that restoration turned peatlands into a source of methane, but the magnitude varied regionally. In forests, changes in the water table level influenced methane fluxes, and in general, the sink was weaker under rotational forestry compared to continuous cover forestry.
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
Short summary
Climate change is causing an increase in extreme wildfires in Europe, but drivers of fire are not well understood, especially across different land cover types. We used statistical models with satellite data, climate data, and socioeconomic data to determine what affects burning in cropland and non-cropland areas of Europe. We found different drivers of burning in cropland burning vs. non-cropland to the point that some variables, e.g. population density, had the complete opposite effects.
Sven Armin Westermann, Anke Hildebrandt, Souhail Bousetta, and Stephan Thober
Biogeosciences, 21, 5277–5303, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Plants at the land surface mediate between soil and the atmosphere regarding water and carbon transport. Since plant growth is a dynamic process, models need to consider these dynamics. Two models that predict water and carbon fluxes by considering plant temporal evolution were tested against observational data. Currently, dynamizing plants in these models did not enhance their representativeness, which is caused by a mismatch between implemented physical relations and observable connections.
Kamal Nyaupane, Umakant Mishra, Feng Tao, Kyongmin Yeo, William J. Riley, Forrest M. Hoffman, and Sagar Gautam
Biogeosciences, 21, 5173–5183, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Representing soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics in Earth system models (ESMs) is a key source of uncertainty in predicting carbon–climate feedbacks. Using machine learning, we develop and compare predictive relationships in observations (Obs) and ESMs. We find different relationships between environmental factors and SOC stocks in Obs and ESMs. SOC prediction in ESMs may be improved by representing the functional relationships of environmental controllers in a way consistent with observations.
Jacob A. Nelson, Sophia Walther, Fabian Gans, Basil Kraft, Ulrich Weber, Kimberly Novick, Nina Buchmann, Mirco Migliavacca, Georg Wohlfahrt, Ladislav Šigut, Andreas Ibrom, Dario Papale, Mathias Göckede, Gregory Duveiller, Alexander Knohl, Lukas Hörtnagl, Russell L. Scott, Jiří Dušek, Weijie Zhang, Zayd Mahmoud Hamdi, Markus Reichstein, Sergio Aranda-Barranco, Jonas Ardö, Maarten Op de Beeck, Dave Billesbach, David Bowling, Rosvel Bracho, Christian Brümmer, Gustau Camps-Valls, Shiping Chen, Jamie Rose Cleverly, Ankur Desai, Gang Dong, Tarek S. El-Madany, Eugenie Susanne Euskirchen, Iris Feigenwinter, Marta Galvagno, Giacomo A. Gerosa, Bert Gielen, Ignacio Goded, Sarah Goslee, Christopher Michael Gough, Bernard Heinesch, Kazuhito Ichii, Marcin Antoni Jackowicz-Korczynski, Anne Klosterhalfen, Sara Knox, Hideki Kobayashi, Kukka-Maaria Kohonen, Mika Korkiakoski, Ivan Mammarella, Mana Gharun, Riccardo Marzuoli, Roser Matamala, Stefan Metzger, Leonardo Montagnani, Giacomo Nicolini, Thomas O'Halloran, Jean-Marc Ourcival, Matthias Peichl, Elise Pendall, Borja Ruiz Reverter, Marilyn Roland, Simone Sabbatini, Torsten Sachs, Marius Schmidt, Christopher R. Schwalm, Ankit Shekhar, Richard Silberstein, Maria Lucia Silveira, Donatella Spano, Torbern Tagesson, Gianluca Tramontana, Carlo Trotta, Fabio Turco, Timo Vesala, Caroline Vincke, Domenico Vitale, Enrique R. Vivoni, Yi Wang, William Woodgate, Enrico A. Yepez, Junhui Zhang, Donatella Zona, and Martin Jung
Biogeosciences, 21, 5079–5115, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5079-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5079-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The movement of water, carbon, and energy from the Earth's surface to the atmosphere, or flux, is an important process to understand because it impacts our lives. Here, we outline a method called FLUXCOM-X to estimate global water and CO2 fluxes based on direct measurements from sites around the world. We go on to demonstrate how these new estimates of net CO2 uptake/loss, gross CO2 uptake, total water evaporation, and transpiration from plants compare to previous and independent estimates.
Xin Chen, Tiexi Chen, Xiaodong Li, Yuanfang Chai, Shengjie Zhou, Renjie Guo, and Jie Dai
Biogeosciences, 21, 4285–4300, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4285-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4285-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We provide an ensemble-model-based GPP dataset (ERF_GPP) that explains 85.1 % of the monthly variation in GPP across 170 sites, which is higher than other GPP estimate models. In addition, ERF_GPP improves the phenomenon of “high-value underestimation and low-value overestimation” in GPP estimation to some extent. Overall, ERF_GPP provides a more reliable estimate of global GPP and will facilitate further development of carbon cycle research.
Reza Kusuma Nurrohman, Tomomichi Kato, Hideki Ninomiya, Lea Végh, Nicolas Delbart, Tatsuya Miyauchi, Hisashi Sato, Tomohiro Shiraishi, and Ryuichi Hirata
Biogeosciences, 21, 4195–4227, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4195-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4195-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
SPITFIRE (SPread and InTensity of FIRE) was integrated into a spatially explicit individual-based dynamic global vegetation model to improve the accuracy of depicting Siberian forest fire frequency, intensity, and extent. Fires showed increased greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions in 2006–2100 for Representative Concentration Pathways. This study contributes to understanding fire dynamics, land ecosystem–climate interactions, and global material cycles under the threat of escalating fires.
Stefano Manzoni and M. Francesca Cotrufo
Biogeosciences, 21, 4077–4098, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4077-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-4077-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Organic carbon and nitrogen are stabilized in soils via microbial assimilation and stabilization of necromass (in vivo pathway) or via adsorption of the products of extracellular decomposition (ex vivo pathway). Here we use a diagnostic model to quantify which stabilization pathway is prevalent using data on residue-derived carbon and nitrogen incorporation in mineral-associated organic matter. We find that the in vivo pathway is dominant in fine-textured soils with low organic matter content.
Huajie Zhu, Xiuli Xing, Mousong Wu, Weimin Ju, and Fei Jiang
Biogeosciences, 21, 3735–3760, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3735-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3735-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ecosystem carbonyl sulfide (COS) fluxes were employed to optimize GPP estimation across ecosystems with the Biosphere-atmosphere Exchange Process Simulator (BEPS), which was developed for simulating the canopy COS uptake under its state-of-the-art two-leaf modeling framework. Our results showcased the efficacy of COS in improving model prediction and reducing prediction uncertainty of GPP and enhanced insights into the sensitivity, identifiability, and interactions of parameters related to COS.
Moritz Laub, Magdalena Necpalova, Marijn Van de Broek, Marc Corbeels, Samuel Mathu Ndungu, Monicah Wanjiku Mucheru-Muna, Daniel Mugendi, Rebecca Yegon, Wycliffe Waswa, Bernard Vanlauwe, and Johan Six
Biogeosciences, 21, 3691–3716, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3691-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3691-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We used the DayCent model to assess the potential impact of integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) on maize production, soil fertility, and greenhouse gas emission in Kenya. After adjustments, DayCent represented measured mean yields and soil carbon stock changes well and N2O emissions acceptably. Our results showed that soil fertility losses could be reduced but not completely eliminated with ISFM and that, while N2O emissions increased with ISFM, emissions per kilogram yield decreased.
Erik Schwarz, Samia Ghersheen, Salim Belyazid, and Stefano Manzoni
Biogeosciences, 21, 3441–3461, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3441-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3441-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The occurrence of unstable equilibrium points (EPs) could impede the applicability of microbial-explicit soil organic carbon models. For archetypal model versions we identify when instability can occur and describe mathematical conditions to avoid such unstable EPs. We discuss implications for further model development, highlighting the important role of considering basic ecological principles to ensure biologically meaningful models.
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.
Elizabeth S. Duan, Luciana Chavez Rodriguez, Nicole Hemming-Schroeder, Baptiste Wijas, Habacuc Flores-Moreno, Alexander W. Cheesman, Lucas A. Cernusak, Michael J. Liddell, Paul Eggleton, Amy E. Zanne, and Steven D. Allison
Biogeosciences, 21, 3321–3338, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3321-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-3321-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding the link between climate and carbon fluxes is crucial for predicting how climate change will impact carbon sinks. We estimated carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes from deadwood in tropical Australia using wood moisture content and temperature. Our model predicted that the majority of deadwood carbon is released as CO2, except when termite activity is detected. Future models should also incorporate wood traits, like species and chemical composition, to better predict fluxes.
Daniel Nadal-Sala, Rüdiger Grote, David Kraus, Uri Hochberg, Tamir Klein, Yael Wagner, Fedor Tatarinov, Dan Yakir, and Nadine K. Ruehr
Biogeosciences, 21, 2973–2994, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2973-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2973-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A hydraulic model approach is presented that can be added to any physiologically based ecosystem model. Simulated plant water potential triggers stomatal closure, photosynthesis decline, root–soil resistance increases, and sapwood and foliage senescence. The model has been evaluated at an extremely dry site stocked with Aleppo pine and was able to represent gas exchange, soil water content, and plant water potential. The model also responded realistically regarding leaf senescence.
Patrick Neri, Lianhong Gu, and Yang Song
Biogeosciences, 21, 2731–2758, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2731-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2731-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A first-of-its-kind global-scale model of temperature resilience and tolerance of photosystem II maximum quantum yield informs how plants maintain their efficiency of converting light energy to chemical energy for photosynthesis under temperature changes. Our finding explores this variation across plant functional types and habitat climatology, highlighting diverse temperature response strategies and a method to improve global-scale photosynthesis modeling under climate change.
Liyuan He, Jorge L. Mazza Rodrigues, Melanie A. Mayes, Chun-Ta Lai, David A. Lipson, and Xiaofeng Xu
Biogeosciences, 21, 2313–2333, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2313-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2313-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Soil microbes are the driving engine for biogeochemical cycles of carbon and nutrients. This study applies a microbial-explicit model to quantify bacteria and fungal biomass carbon in soils from 1901 to 2016. Results showed substantial increases in bacterial and fungal biomass carbon over the past century, jointly influenced by vegetation growth and soil temperature and moisture. This pioneering century-long estimation offers crucial insights into soil microbial roles in global carbon cycling.
Tao Chen, Félicien Meunier, Marc Peaucelle, Guoping Tang, Ye Yuan, and Hans Verbeeck
Biogeosciences, 21, 2253–2272, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2253-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2253-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Chinese subtropical forest ecosystems are an extremely important component of global forest ecosystems and hence crucial for the global carbon cycle and regional climate change. However, there is still great uncertainty in the relationship between subtropical forest carbon sequestration and its drivers. We provide first quantitative estimates of the individual and interactive effects of different drivers on the gross primary productivity changes of various subtropical forest types in China.
Ke Liu, Yujie Wang, Troy S. Magney, and Christian Frankenberg
Biogeosciences, 21, 1501–1516, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1501-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1501-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Stomata are pores on leaves that regulate gas exchange between plants and the atmosphere. Existing land models unrealistically assume stomata can jump between steady states when the environment changes. We implemented dynamic modeling to predict gradual stomatal responses at different scales. Results suggested that considering this effect on plant behavior patterns in diurnal cycles was important. Our framework also simplified simulations and can contribute to further efficiency improvements.
Melanie A. Thurner, Silvia Caldararu, Jan Engel, Anja Rammig, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 21, 1391–1410, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1391-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1391-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Due to their crucial role in terrestrial ecosystems, we implemented mycorrhizal fungi into the QUINCY terrestrial biosphere model. Fungi interact with mineral and organic soil to support plant N uptake and, thus, plant growth. Our results suggest that the effect of mycorrhizal interactions on simulated ecosystem dynamics is minor under constant environmental conditions but necessary to reproduce and understand observed patterns under changing conditions, such as rising atmospheric CO2.
Jinyun Tang and William J. Riley
Biogeosciences, 21, 1061–1070, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1061-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1061-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A chemical kinetics theory is proposed to explain the non-monotonic relationship between temperature and biochemical rates. It incorporates the observed thermally reversible enzyme denaturation that is ensured by the ceaseless thermal motion of molecules and ions in an enzyme solution and three well-established theories: (1) law of mass action, (2) diffusion-limited chemical reaction theory, and (3) transition state theory.
Nina Raoult, Louis-Axel Edouard-Rambaut, Nicolas Vuichard, Vladislav Bastrikov, Anne Sofie Lansø, Bertrand Guenet, and Philippe Peylin
Biogeosciences, 21, 1017–1036, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1017-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-1017-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Observations are used to reduce uncertainty in land surface models (LSMs) by optimising poorly constraining parameters. However, optimising against current conditions does not necessarily ensure that the parameters treated as invariant will be robust in a changing climate. Manipulation experiments offer us a unique chance to optimise our models under different (here atmospheric CO2) conditions. By using these data in optimisations, we gain confidence in the future projections of LSMs.
Kelsey T. Foster, Wu Sun, Yoichi P. Shiga, Jiafu Mao, and Anna M. Michalak
Biogeosciences, 21, 869–891, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing agreement between bottom-up and top-down methods across spatial scales can provide insights into the relationship between ensemble spread (difference across models) and model accuracy (difference between model estimates and reality). We find that ensemble spread is unlikely to be a good indicator of actual uncertainty in the North American carbon balance. However, models that are consistent with atmospheric constraints show stronger agreement between top-down and bottom-up estimates.
Victoria R. Dutch, Nick Rutter, Leanne Wake, Oliver Sonnentag, Gabriel Hould Gosselin, Melody Sandells, Chris Derksen, Branden Walker, Gesa Meyer, Richard Essery, Richard Kelly, Phillip Marsh, Julia Boike, and Matteo Detto
Biogeosciences, 21, 825–841, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-825-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-825-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We undertake a sensitivity study of three different parameters on the simulation of net ecosystem exchange (NEE) during the snow-covered non-growing season at an Arctic tundra site. Simulations are compared to eddy covariance measurements, with near-zero NEE simulated despite observed CO2 release. We then consider how to parameterise the model better in Arctic tundra environments on both sub-seasonal timescales and cumulatively throughout the snow-covered non-growing season.
Bertrand Guenet, Jérémie Orliac, Lauric Cécillon, Olivier Torres, Laura Sereni, Philip A. Martin, Pierre Barré, and Laurent Bopp
Biogeosciences, 21, 657–669, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-657-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-657-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Heterotrophic respiration fluxes are a major flux between surfaces and the atmosphere, but Earth system models do not yet represent them correctly. Here we benchmarked Earth system models against observation-based products, and we identified the important mechanisms that need to be improved in the next-generation Earth system models.
Shuyue Li, Bonnie Waring, Jennifer Powers, and David Medvigy
Biogeosciences, 21, 455–471, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-455-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-455-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We used an ecosystem model to simulate primary production of a tropical forest subjected to 3 years of nutrient fertilization. Simulations parameterized such that relative allocation to fine roots increased with increasing soil phosphorus had leaf, wood, and fine root production consistent with observations. However, these simulations seemed to over-allocate to fine roots on multidecadal timescales, affecting aboveground biomass. Additional observations across timescales would benefit models.
Stephen Björn Wirth, Arne Poyda, Friedhelm Taube, Britta Tietjen, Christoph Müller, Kirsten Thonicke, Anja Linstädter, Kai Behn, Sibyll Schaphoff, Werner von Bloh, and Susanne Rolinski
Biogeosciences, 21, 381–410, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-381-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-381-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs), the role of functional diversity in forage supply and soil organic carbon storage of grasslands is not explicitly taken into account. We introduced functional diversity into the Lund Potsdam Jena managed Land (LPJmL) DGVM using CSR theory. The new model reproduced well-known trade-offs between plant traits and can be used to quantify the role of functional diversity in climate change mitigation using different functional diversity scenarios.
Joe R. McNorton and Francesca Di Giuseppe
Biogeosciences, 21, 279–300, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-279-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-279-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfires have wide-ranging consequences for local communities, air quality and ecosystems. Vegetation amount and moisture state are key components to forecast wildfires. We developed a combined model and satellite framework to characterise vegetation, including the type of fuel, whether it is alive or dead, and its moisture content. The daily data is at high resolution globally (~9 km). Our characteristics correlate with active fire data and can inform fire danger and spread modelling efforts.
Brooke A. Eastman, William R. Wieder, Melannie D. Hartman, Edward R. Brzostek, and William T. Peterjohn
Biogeosciences, 21, 201–221, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-201-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-201-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We compared soil model performance to data from a long-term nitrogen addition experiment in a forested ecosystem. We found that in order for soil carbon models to accurately predict future forest carbon sequestration, two key processes must respond dynamically to nitrogen availability: (1) plant allocation of carbon to wood versus roots and (2) rates of soil organic matter decomposition. Long-term experiments can help improve our predictions of the land carbon sink and its climate impact.
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
Biogeosciences, 20, 4795–4818, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4795-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4795-2023, 2023
Short summary
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.
Chad A. Burton, Luigi J. Renzullo, Sami W. Rifai, and Albert I. J. M. Van Dijk
Biogeosciences, 20, 4109–4134, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4109-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4109-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Australia's land-based ecosystems play a critical role in controlling the variability in the global land carbon sink. However, uncertainties in the methods used for quantifying carbon fluxes limit our understanding. We develop high-resolution estimates of Australia's land carbon fluxes using machine learning methods and find that Australia is, on average, a stronger carbon sink than previously thought and that the seasonal dynamics of the fluxes differ from those described by other methods.
Yuan Yan, Anne Klosterhalfen, Fernando Moyano, Matthias Cuntz, Andrew C. Manning, and Alexander Knohl
Biogeosciences, 20, 4087–4107, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4087-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4087-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
A better understanding of O2 fluxes, their exchange ratios with CO2 and their interrelations with environmental conditions would provide further insights into biogeochemical ecosystem processes. We, therefore, used the multilayer canopy model CANVEG to simulate and analyze the flux exchange for our forest study site for 2012–2016. Based on these simulations, we further successfully tested the application of various micrometeorological methods and the prospects of real O2 flux measurements.
Jie Zhang, Elisabeth Larsen Kolstad, Wenxin Zhang, Iris Vogeler, and Søren O. Petersen
Biogeosciences, 20, 3895–3917, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3895-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3895-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Manure application to agricultural land often results in large and variable N2O emissions. We propose a model with a parsimonious structure to investigate N transformations around such N2O hotspots. The model allows for new detailed insights into the interactions between transport and microbial activities regarding N2O emissions in heterogeneous soil environments. It highlights the importance of solute diffusion to N2O emissions from such hotspots which are often ignored by process-based models.
Jukka Alm, Antti Wall, Jukka-Pekka Myllykangas, Paavo Ojanen, Juha Heikkinen, Helena M. Henttonen, Raija Laiho, Kari Minkkinen, Tarja Tuomainen, and Juha Mikola
Biogeosciences, 20, 3827–3855, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3827-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3827-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In Finland peatlands cover one-third of land area. For half of those, with 4.3 Mha being drained for forestry, Finland reports sinks and sources of greenhouse gases in forest lands on organic soils following its UNFCCC commitment. We describe a new method for compiling soil CO2 balance that follows changes in tree volume, tree harvests and temperature. An increasing trend of emissions from 1.4 to 7.9 Mt CO2 was calculated for drained peatland forest soils in Finland for 1990–2021.
Siqi Li, Bo Zhu, Xunhua Zheng, Pengcheng Hu, Shenghui Han, Jihui Fan, Tao Wang, Rui Wang, Kai Wang, Zhisheng Yao, Chunyan Liu, Wei Zhang, and Yong Li
Biogeosciences, 20, 3555–3572, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3555-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3555-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Physical soil erosion and particulate carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus loss modules were incorporated into the process-oriented hydro-biogeochemical model CNMM-DNDC to realize the accurate simulation of water-induced erosion and subsequent particulate nutrient losses at high spatiotemporal resolution.
Ivan Cornut, Nicolas Delpierre, Jean-Paul Laclau, Joannès Guillemot, Yann Nouvellon, Otavio Campoe, Jose Luiz Stape, Vitoria Fernanda Santos, and Guerric le Maire
Biogeosciences, 20, 3093–3117, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3093-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3093-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Potassium is an essential element for living organisms. Trees are dependent upon this element for certain functions that allow them to build their trunks using carbon dioxide. Using data from experiments in eucalypt plantations in Brazil and a simplified computer model of the plantations, we were able to investigate the effect that a lack of potassium can have on the production of wood. Understanding nutrient cycles is useful to understand the response of forests to environmental change.
Ivan Cornut, Guerric le Maire, Jean-Paul Laclau, Joannès Guillemot, Yann Nouvellon, and Nicolas Delpierre
Biogeosciences, 20, 3119–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3119-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3119-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
After simulating the effects of low levels of potassium on the canopy of trees and the uptake of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by leaves in Part 1, here we tried to simulate the way the trees use the carbon they have acquired and the interaction with the potassium cycle in the tree. We show that the effect of low potassium on the efficiency of the trees in acquiring carbon is enough to explain why they produce less wood when they are in soils with low levels of potassium.
Xiaojuan Yang, Peter Thornton, Daniel Ricciuto, Yilong Wang, and Forrest Hoffman
Biogeosciences, 20, 2813–2836, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2813-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2813-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluated the performance of a land surface model (ELMv1-CNP) that includes both nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) limitation on carbon cycle processes. We show that ELMv1-CNP produces realistic estimates of present-day carbon pools and fluxes. We show that global C sources and sinks are significantly affected by P limitation. Our study suggests that introduction of P limitation in land surface models is likely to have substantial consequences for projections of future carbon uptake.
Kevin R. Wilcox, Scott L. Collins, Alan K. Knapp, William Pockman, Zheng Shi, Melinda D. Smith, and Yiqi Luo
Biogeosciences, 20, 2707–2725, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2707-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2707-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The capacity for carbon storage (C capacity) is an attribute that determines how ecosystems store carbon in the future. Here, we employ novel data–model integration techniques to identify the carbon capacity of six grassland sites spanning the US Great Plains. Hot and dry sites had low C capacity due to less plant growth and high turnover of soil C, so they may be a C source in the future. Alternately, cooler and wetter ecosystems had high C capacity, so these systems may be a future C sink.
Ara Cho, Linda M. J. Kooijmans, Kukka-Maaria Kohonen, Richard Wehr, and Maarten C. Krol
Biogeosciences, 20, 2573–2594, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2573-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2573-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Carbonyl sulfide (COS) is a useful constraint for estimating photosynthesis. To simulate COS leaf flux better in the SiB4 model, we propose a novel temperature function for enzyme carbonic anhydrase (CA) activity and optimize conductances using observations. The optimal activity of CA occurs below 40 °C, and Ball–Woodrow–Berry parameters are slightly changed. These reduce/increase uptakes in the tropics/higher latitudes and contribute to resolving discrepancies in the COS global budget.
Yunyao Ma, Bettina Weber, Alexandra Kratz, José Raggio, Claudia Colesie, Maik Veste, Maaike Y. Bader, and Philipp Porada
Biogeosciences, 20, 2553–2572, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2553-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2553-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We found that the modelled annual carbon balance of biocrusts is strongly affected by both the environment (mostly air temperature and CO2 concentration) and physiology, such as temperature response of respiration. However, the relative impacts of these drivers vary across regions with different climates. Uncertainty in driving factors may lead to unrealistic carbon balance estimates, particularly in temperate climates, and may be explained by seasonal variation of physiology due to acclimation.
Alexander J. Norton, A. Anthony Bloom, Nicholas C. Parazoo, Paul A. Levine, Shuang Ma, Renato K. Braghiere, and T. Luke Smallman
Biogeosciences, 20, 2455–2484, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2455-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2455-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores how the representation of leaf phenology affects our ability to predict changes to the carbon balance of land ecosystems. We calibrate a new leaf phenology model against a diverse range of observations at six forest sites, showing that it improves the predictive capability of the processes underlying the ecosystem carbon balance. We then show how changes in temperature and rainfall affect the ecosystem carbon balance with this new model.
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.
Jennifer A. Holm, David M. Medvigy, Benjamin Smith, Jeffrey S. Dukes, Claus Beier, Mikhail Mishurov, Xiangtao Xu, Jeremy W. Lichstein, Craig D. Allen, Klaus S. Larsen, Yiqi Luo, Cari Ficken, William T. Pockman, William R. L. Anderegg, and Anja Rammig
Biogeosciences, 20, 2117–2142, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2117-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2117-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Unprecedented climate extremes (UCEs) are expected to have dramatic impacts on ecosystems. We present a road map of how dynamic vegetation models can explore extreme drought and climate change and assess ecological processes to measure and reduce model uncertainties. The models predict strong nonlinear responses to UCEs. Due to different model representations, the models differ in magnitude and trajectory of forest loss. Therefore, we explore specific plant responses that reflect knowledge gaps.
Veronika Kronnäs, Klas Lucander, Giuliana Zanchi, Nadja Stadlinger, Salim Belyazid, and Cecilia Akselsson
Biogeosciences, 20, 1879–1899, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In a future climate, extreme droughts might become more common. Climate change and droughts can have negative effects on soil weathering and plant health.
In this study, climate change effects on weathering were studied on sites in Sweden using the model ForSAFE, a climate change scenario and an extreme drought scenario. The modelling shows that weathering is higher during summer and increases with global warming but that weathering during drought summers can become as low as winter weathering.
Agustín Sarquis and Carlos A. Sierra
Biogeosciences, 20, 1759–1771, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1759-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1759-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Although plant litter is chemically and physically heterogenous and undergoes multiple transformations, models that represent litter dynamics often ignore this complexity. We used a multi-model inference framework to include information content in litter decomposition datasets and studied the time it takes for litter to decompose as measured by the transit time. In arid lands, the median transit time of litter is about 3 years and has a negative correlation with mean annual temperature.
Qi Guan, Jing Tang, Lian Feng, Stefan Olin, and Guy Schurgers
Biogeosciences, 20, 1635–1648, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1635-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1635-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding terrestrial sources of nitrogen is vital to examine lake eutrophication changes. Combining process-based ecosystem modeling and satellite observations, we found that land-leached nitrogen in the Yangtze Plain significantly increased from 1979 to 2018, and terrestrial nutrient sources were positively correlated with eutrophication trends observed in most lakes, demonstrating the necessity of sustainable nitrogen management to control eutrophication.
Cited articles
Ali, A. A., Xu, C., Rogers, A., Fisher, R. A., Wullschleger, S. D., Massoud, E. C., Vrugt, J. A., Muss, J. D., McDowell, N. G., Fisher, J. B., Reich, P. B., and Wilson, C. J.: A global scale mechanistic model of photosynthetic capacity (LUNA V1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 587–606, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-587-2016, 2016. a
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Kidston, M., Bopp, L., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Jones, C., Jung, M., Myneni, R., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluating the Land and Ocean Components of the Global Carbon Cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models, J. Clim., 26, 6801–6843, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00417.1, 2013a. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Anav, A., Murray-Tortarolo, G., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Piao, S., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluation of Land Surface Models in Reproducing Satellite Derived Leaf Area Index over the High-Latitude Northern Hemisphere, Part II: Earth System Models, Remote Sens., 5, 3637–3661, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5083637, 2013b. a, b, c
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 Zhao, M.: Spatiotemporal patterns of terrestrial gross primary production: A review, Rev. Geophys., 53, 785–818, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000483, 2015. a, b
Andela, B., Broetz, B., de Mora, L., Drost, N., Eyring, V., Koldunov, N., Lauer, A., Mueller, B., Predoi, V., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Vegas-Regidor, J., Zimmermann, K., Adeniyi, K., Arnone, E., Bellprat, O., Berg, P., Bock, L., Caron, L.-P., Carvalhais, N., Cionni, I., Cortesi, N., Corti, S., Crezee, B., Davin, E. L., Davini, P., Deser, C., Diblen, F., Docquier, D., Dreyer, L., Ehbrecht, C., Earnshaw, P., Gier, B., Gonzalez-Reviriego, N., Goodman, P., Hagemann, S., von Hardenberg, J., Hassler, B., Hunter, A., Kadow, C., Kindermann, S., Koirala, S., Lledó, L., Lejeune, Q., Lembo, V., Little, B., Loosveldt-Tomas, S., Lorenz, R., Lovato, T., Lucarini, V., Massonnet, F., Mohr, C. W., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Amarjiit, P., Pérez-Zanón, N., Phillips, A., Russell, J., Sandstad, M., Sellar, A., Senftleben, D., Serva, F., Sillmann, J., Stacke, T., Swaminathan, R., Torralba, V., Weigel, K., Roberts, C., Kalverla, P., Alidoost, S., Verhoeven, S., Vreede, B., Smeets, S., Soares Siqueira, A., and Kazeroni, R.: ESMValTool, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8120970, 2023a. a
Andela, B., Broetz, B., de Mora, L., Drost, N., Eyring, V., Koldunov, N., Lauer, A., Predoi, V., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Vegas-Regidor, J., Zimmermann, K., Bock, L., Diblen, F., Dreyer, L., Earnshaw, P., Hassler, B., Little, B., Loosveldt-Tomas, S., Smeets, S., Camphuijsen, J., Gier, B. K., Weigel, K., Hauser, M., Kalverla, P., Galytska, E., Cos-Espuña, P., Pelupessy, I., Koirala, S., Stacke, T., Alidoost, S., Jury, M., Sénési, S., Crocker, T., Vreede, B., Soares Siqueira, A., Kazeroni, R., and Bauer, J.: ESMValCore, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8112684, 2023b. a
Anderson, J., Balaji, V., Broccoli, A., Cooke, W., Delworth, T., Dixon, K., Donner, L., Dunne, K., Freidenreich, S., Garner, S., Gudgel, R., Gordon, C., Held, I., Hemler, R., Horowitz, L., Klein, S., Knutson, T., Kushner, P., Langenhost, A., Lau, N., Liang, Z., Malyshev, S., Milly, P., Nath, M., Ploshay, J., Ramaswamy, V., Schwarzkopf, M., Shevliakova, E., Sirutis, J., Soden, B., Stern, W., Thompson, L., Wilson, R., Wittenberg, A., and Wyman, B.: The new GFDL global atmosphere and land model AM2-LM2: Evaluation with prescribed SST simulations, J. Clim., 17, 4641–4673, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-3223.1, 2004. a
Arora, V. K.: Simulating energy and carbon fluxes over winter wheat using coupled land surface and terrestrial ecosystem models, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 118, 21–47, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(03)00073-X, 2003. a
Arora, V. K. and Boer, G. J.: A Representation of Variable Root Distribution in Dynamic Vegetation Models, Earth Interact., 7, 1 – 19, https://doi.org/10.1175/1087-3562(2003)007<0001:AROVRD>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
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. a
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. a, b
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. a
Balsamo, G., Beljaars, A., Scipal, K., Viterbo, P., van den Hurk, B., Hirschi, M., and Betts, A. K.: A Revised Hydrology for the ECMWF Model: Verification from Field Site to Terrestrial Water Storage and Impact in the Integrated Forecast System, J. Hydrometeorol., 10, 623–643, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JHM1068.1, 2009. a
Bao, Y., Qiao, F.-L., and Song, Z.: The historical global carbon cycle simulation of FIO-ESM, Geophys. Res. Abstr., EGU2012-6834, EGU General Assembly 2012, Vienna, Austria, 2012. a
Bentsen, M., Oliviè, D. J. L., Seland, y., Toniazzo, T., Gjermundsen, A., Graff, L. S., Debernard, J. B., Gupta, A. K., He, Y., Kirkevåg, A., Schwinger, J., Tjiputra, J., Aas, K. S., Bethke, I., Fan, Y., Griesfeller, J., Grini, A., Guo, C., Ilicak, M., Karset, I. H. H., Landgren, O. A., Liakka, J., Moseid, K. O., Nummelin, A., Spensberger, C., Tang, H., Zhang, Z., Heinze, C., Iversen, T., and Schulz, M.: NCC NorESM2-MM model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8040, 2019. a
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011. a
Bock, L., Lauer, A., Schlund, M., Barreiro, M., Bellouin, N., Jones, C., Meehl, G. A., Predoi, V., Roberts, M. J., and Eyring, V.: Quantifying Progress Across Different CMIP Phases With the ESMValTool, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD032321, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD032321, e2019JD032321 2019JD032321, 2020. a, b, c
Boucher, O., Denvil, S., Levavasseur, G., Cozic, A., Caubel, A., Foujols, M.-A., Meurdesoif, Y., Cadule, P., Devilliers, M., Ghattas, J., Lebas, N., Lurton, T., Mellul, L.,Musat, I.,Mignot, J., and Cheruy, F.: IPSL IPSL-CM6A-LR model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5195, 2018. a
Boucher, O., Servonnat, J., Albright, A. L., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y., Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bonnet, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Caubel, A., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A., Cugnet, D., D'Andrea, F., Davini, P., de Lavergne, C., Denvil, S., Deshayes, J., Devilliers, M., Ducharne, A., Dufresne, J.-L., Dupont, E., Éthé, C., Fairhead, L., Falletti, L., Flavoni, S., Foujols, M.-A., Gardoll, S., Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Guenet, B., Guez, Lionel, E., Guilyardi, E., Guimberteau, M., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A., Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Krinner, G., Lebas, N., Levavasseur, G., Lévy, C., Li, L., Lott, F., Lurton, T., Luyssaert, S., Madec, G., Madeleine, J.-B., Maignan, F., Marchand, M., Marti, O., Mellul, L., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P., Planton, Y., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Rochetin, N., Rousset, C., Sepulchre, P., Sima, A., Swingedouw, D., Thiéblemont, R., Traore, A. K., Vancoppenolle, M., Vial, J., Vialard, J., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Presentation and Evaluation of the IPSL-CM6A-LR Climate Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002010, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010, 2020. a, b
Canadell, J., Monteiro, P., Costa, M., Cotrim da Cunha, L., Cox, P., Eliseev, A., Henson, S., Ishii, M., Jaccard, S., Koven, C., Lohila, A., Patra, P., Piao, S., Rogelj, J., Syampungani, S., Zaehle, S., and Zickfeld, K.: Global Carbon and other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks, 673–816, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.007, 2021. a, b, c, d, e
Cao, S., Li, M., Zhu, Z., Wang, Z., Zha, J., Zhao, W., Duanmu, Z., Chen, J., Zheng, Y., Chen, Y., Myneni, R. B., and Piao, S.: Spatiotemporally consistent global dataset of the GIMMS leaf area index (GIMMS LAI4g) from 1982 to 2020, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4877–4899, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4877-2023, 2023. a, b
Carvalhais, N., Forkel, M., Khomik, M., Bellarby, J., Jung, M., Migliavacca, M., Μu, M., Saatchi, S., Santoro, M., Thurner, M., Weber, U., Ahrens, B., Beer, C., Cescatti, A., Randerson, J. T., and Reichstein, M.: Global covariation of carbon turnover times with climate in terrestrial ecosystems, Nature, 514, 213–217, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13731, 2014. a
Cherchi, A., Fogli, P. G., Lovato, T., Peano, D., Iovino, D., Gualdi, S., Masina, S., Scoccimarro, E., Materia, S., Bellucci, A., and Navarra, A.: Global Mean Climate and Main Patterns of Variability in the CMCC-CM2 Coupled Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 185–209, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001369, 2019. a
Chevallier, F.: On the parallelization of atmospheric inversions of CO2 surface fluxes within a variational framework, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 783–790, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-783-2013, 2013. a, b
Chevallier, F., Fisher, M., Peylin, P., Serrar, S., Bousquet, P., Bréon, F.-M., Chédin, A., and Ciais, P.: Inferring CO2 sources and sinks from satellite observations: Method and application to TOVS data, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D24309, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006390, 2005. a, b
Chevallier, F., Ciais, P., Conway, T. J., Aalto, T., Anderson, B. E., Bousquet, P., Brunke, E. G., Ciattaglia, L., Esaki, Y., Fröhlich, M., Gomez, A., Gomez-Pelaez, A. J., Haszpra, L., Krummel, P. B., Langenfelds, R. L., Leuenberger, M., Machida, T., Maignan, F., Matsueda, H., Morguí, J. A., Mukai, H., Nakazawa, T., Peylin, P., Ramonet, M., Rivier, L., Sawa, Y., Schmidt, M., Steele, L. P., Vay, S. A., Vermeulen, A. T., Wofsy, S., and Worthy, D.: CO2 surface fluxes at grid point scale estimated from a global 21 year reanalysis of atmospheric measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D21307, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD013887, 2010. a, b
Christiansen, B.: Ensemble Averaging and the Curse of Dimensionality, J. Clim., 31, 1587–1596, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0197.1, 2018. a
Ciais, P., Sabine, C., Bala, G., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Canadell, J., Chhabra, A., DeFries, R., Galloway, J., Heimann, M., Jones, C., Le Quéré, C., Myneni, R., Piao, S., and Thornton, P.: Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P., book section 6, 465–570, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, ISBN ISBN 978-1-107-66182-0, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.015, 2013. a
Clark, D. B., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Jones, C. D., Gedney, N., Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Harding, R. J., Huntingford, C., and Cox, P. M.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-701-2011, 2011. a
Collins, W. J., Bellouin, N., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Gedney, N., Halloran, P., Hinton, T., Hughes, J., Jones, C. D., Joshi, M., Liddicoat, S., Martin, G., O'Connor, F., Rae, J., Senior, C., Sitch, S., Totterdell, I., Wiltshire, A., and Woodward, S.: Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model – HadGEM2, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 1051–1075, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-1051-2011, 2011. a, b
Cox, P. M.: Description of the TRIFFID Dynamic Global Vegetation Model, in: Hadley Centre technical note, vol. 24, Hadley Centre, Met Office, UK, 2001. a
Dai, Y., Zeng, X., Dickinson, R. E., Baker, I., Bonan, G. B., Bosilovich, M. G., Denning, A. S., Dirmeyer, P. A., Houser, P. R., Niu, G., Oleson, K. W., Schlosser, C. A., and Yang, Z.-L.: The Common Land Model, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 84, 1013–1024, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-84-8-1013, 2003. a
Danabasoglu, G.: NCAR CESM2-WACCM model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10071, 2019a. a
Danabasoglu, G.: NCAR CESM2 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.7627, 2019b. a
Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier, A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J., Garcia, R., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R., Oleson, K. W., Otto-Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S., van Kampenhout, L., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C., Fischer, C., Fox-Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J., Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E., Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001916, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms001916, 2020. a, b, c, d, e, f
Davies-Barnard, T., Meyerholt, J., Zaehle, S., Friedlingstein, P., Brovkin, V., Fan, Y., Fisher, R. A., Jones, C. D., Lee, H., Peano, D., Smith, B., Wårlind, D., and Wiltshire, A. J.: Nitrogen cycling in CMIP6 land surface models: progress and limitations, Biogeosciences, 17, 5129–5148, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5129-2020, 2020. a
Decharme, B., Delire, C., Minvielle, M., Colin, J., Vergnes, J.-P., Alias, A., Saint-Martin, D., Séférian, R., Sénési, S., and Voldoire, A.: Recent Changes in the ISBA-CTRIP Land Surface System for Use in the CNRM-CM6 Climate Model and in Global Off-Line Hydrological Applications, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 1207–1252, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001545, 2019. a
Delire, C., Séférian, R., Decharme, B., Alkama, R., Calvet, J.-C., Carrer, D., Gibelin, A.-L., Joetzjer, E., Morel, X., Rocher, M., and Tzanos, D.: The global land carbon cycle simulated with ISBA-CTRIP: improvements over the last decade, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001886, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms001886, 2020. a, b, c
Döscher, R., Acosta, M., Alessandri, A., Anthoni, P., Arsouze, T., Bergman, T., Bernardello, R., Boussetta, S., Caron, L.-P., Carver, G., Castrillo, M., Catalano, F., Cvijanovic, I., Davini, P., Dekker, E., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Docquier, D., Echevarria, P., Fladrich, U., Fuentes-Franco, R., Gröger, M., v. Hardenberg, J., Hieronymus, J., Karami, M. P., Keskinen, J.-P., Koenigk, T., Makkonen, R., Massonnet, F., Ménégoz, M., Miller, P. A., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Nieradzik, L., van Noije, T., Nolan, P., O'Donnell, D., Ollinaho, P., van den Oord, G., Ortega, P., Prims, O. T., Ramos, A., Reerink, T., Rousset, C., Ruprich-Robert, Y., Le Sager, P., Schmith, T., Schrödner, R., Serva, F., Sicardi, V., Sloth Madsen, M., Smith, B., Tian, T., Tourigny, E., Uotila, P., Vancoppenolle, M., Wang, S., Wårlind, D., Willén, U., Wyser, K., Yang, S., Yepes-Arbós, X., and Zhang, Q.: The EC-Earth3 Earth system model for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022. a, b, c, d, e
Du, E., Terrer, C., Pellegrini, A. F., Ahlström, A., van Lissa, C. J., Zhao, X., Xia, N., Wu, X., and Jackson, R. B.: Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation, Nat. Geosci., 13, 221–226, 2020. a
Dufresne, J. L., Foujols, M. A., Denvil, S., Caubel, A., Marti, O., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y., Bekki, S., Bellenger, H., Benshila, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A., Cugnet, D., de Noblet, N., Duvel, J. P., Ethé, C., Fairhead, L., Fichefet, T., Flavoni, S., Friedlingstein, P., Grandpeix, J. Y., Guez, L., Guilyardi, E., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A., Ghattas, J., Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Krinner, G., Labetoulle, S., Lahellec, A., Lefebvre, M. P., Lefevre, F., Levy, C., Li, Z. X., Lloyd, J., Lott, F., Madec, G., Mancip, M., Marchand, M., Masson, S., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Parouty, S., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Schulz, M., Swingedouw, D., Szopa, S., Talandier, C., Terray, P., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5, Clim. Dynam., 40, 2123–2165, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1636-1, 2013. a, b
Dunne, J. P., John, J. G., Adcroft, A. J., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R. W., Shevliakova, E., Stouffer, R. J., Cooke, W., Dunne, K. A., Harrison, M. J., Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S. L., Milly, P. C. D., Phillipps, P. J., Sentman, L. T., Samuels, B. L., Spelman, M. J., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., and Zadeh, N.: GFDL's ESM2 Global Coupled Climate-Carbon Earth System Models, Part I: Physical Formulation and Baseline Simulation Characteristics, J. Clim., 25, 6646–6665, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-11-00560.1, 2012. a, b, c
Dunne, J. P., John, J. G., Shevliakova, E., Stouffer, R. J., Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S. L., Milly, P. C. D., Sentman, L. T., Adcroft, A. J., Cooke, W., Dunne, K. A., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R. W., Harrison, M. J., Levy, H., Wittenberg, A. T., Phillips, P. J., and Zadeh, N.: GFDL's ESM2 Global Coupled Climate-Carbon Earth System Models, Part II: Carbon System Formulation and Baseline Simulation Characteristics, J. Clim., 26, 2247–2267, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00150.1, 2013. a, b, c
Dunne, J. P., Horowitz, L. W., Adcroft, A. J., Ginoux, P., Held, I. M., John, J. G., Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S., Naik, V., Paulot, F., Shevliakova, E., Stock, C. A., Zadeh, N., Balaji, V., Blanton, C., Dunne, K. A., Dupuis, C., Durachta, J., Dussin, R., Gauthier, P. P. G., Griffies, S. M., Guo, H., Hallberg, R. W., Harrison, M., He, J., Hurlin, W., McHugh, C., Menzel, R., Milly, P. C. D., Nikonov, S., Paynter, D. J., Ploshay, J., Radhakrishnan, A., Rand, K., Reichl, B. G., Robinson, T., Schwarzkopf, D. M., Sentman, L. T., Underwood, S., Vahlenkamp, H., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., Wyman, B., Zeng, Y., and Zhao, M.: The GFDL Earth System Model Version 4.1 (GFDL‐ESM 4.1): Overall Coupled Model Description and Simulation Characteristics, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002015, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms002015, 2020. a, b
EC-Earth Consortium: EC-Earth-Consortium EC-Earth3-Veg model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4706, 2019. a, b
EC-Earth Consortium: EC-Earth-Consortium EC-Earth-3-CC model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4608, 2021a. a
EC-Earth Consortium: EC-Earth-Consortium EC-Earth-3-CC model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4702, 2021b. a, b
ESGF: ESGF MetaGrid, https://esgf-metagrid.cloud.dkrz.de/search (last access: 25 November 2024), 2024. a
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, 2016a. a, b, c
Eyring, V., Righi, M., Lauer, A., Evaldsson, M., Wenzel, S., Jones, C., Anav, A., Andrews, O., Cionni, I., Davin, E. L., Deser, C., Ehbrecht, C., Friedlingstein, P., Gleckler, P., Gottschaldt, K. D., Hagemann, S., Juckes, M., Kindermann, S., Krasting, J., Kunert, D., Levine, R., Loew, A., Makela, J., Martin, G., Mason, E., Phillips, A. S., Read, S., Rio, C., Roehrig, R., Senftleben, D., Sterl, A., van Ulft, L. H., Walton, J., Wang, S. Y., and Williams, K. D.: ESMValTool (v1.0) – a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1747–1802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, 2016b. a
Eyring, V., Cox, P. M., Flato, G. M., Gleckler, P. J., Abramowitz, G., Caldwell, P., Collins, W. D., Gier, B. K., Hall, A. D., Hoffman, F. M., Hurtt, G. C., Jahn, A., Jones, C. D., Klein, S. A., Krasting, J. P., Kwiatkowski, L., Lorenz, R., Maloney, E., Meehl, G. A., Pendergrass, A. G., Pincus, R., Ruane, A. C., Russell, J. L., Sanderson, B. M., Santer, B. D., Sherwood, S. C., Simpson, I. R., Stouffer, R. J., and Williamson, M. S.: Taking climate model evaluation to the next level, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 102–110, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y, 2019. a
Eyring, V., Bock, L., Lauer, A., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Andela, B., Arnone, E., Bellprat, O., Brötz, B., Caron, L. P., Carvalhais, N., Cionni, I., Cortesi, N., Crezee, B., Davin, E. L., Davini, P., Debeire, K., de Mora, L., Deser, C., Docquier, D., Earnshaw, P., Ehbrecht, C., Gier, B. K., Gonzalez-Reviriego, N., Goodman, P., Hagemann, S., Hardiman, S., Hassler, B., Hunter, A., Kadow, C., Kindermann, S., Koirala, S., Koldunov, N., Lejeune, Q., Lembo, V., Lovato, T., Lucarini, V., Massonnet, F., Müller, B., Pandde, A., Pérez-Zanón, N., Phillips, A., Predoi, V., Russell, J., Sellar, A., Serva, F., Stacke, T., Swaminathan, R., Torralba, V., Vegas-Regidor, J., von Hardenberg, J., Weigel, K., and Zimmermann, K.: Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – an extended set of large-scale diagnostics for quasi-operational and comprehensive evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3383–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, 2020. a, b, c
Eyring, V., Gillett, N., Achuta Rao, K., Barimalala, R., Barreiro Parrillo, M., Bellouin, N., Cassou, C., Durack, P., Kosaka, Y., McGregor, S., Min, S., Morgenstern, O., and Sun, Y.: Human Influence on the Climate System, pp. 423–552, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.005, 2021. a, b, c, d
Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S., Collins, W., Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P., Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.: Evaluation of Climate Models, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P., book section 9, 741–866, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.020, 2013. a
Friedlingstein, P., Meinshausen, M., Arora, V. K., Jones, C. D., Anav, A., Liddicoat, S. K., and Knutti, R.: Uncertainties in CMIP5 Climate Projections due to Carbon Cycle Feedbacks, J. Clim., 27, 511–526, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00579.1, 2014. a, b
Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M. W., O'Sullivan, M., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Currie, K. I., Decharme, B., Djeutchouang, L. M., Dou, X., Evans, W., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Gasser, T., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, O., Harris, I., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Luijkx, I. T., Jain, A., Jones, S. D., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lauvset, S. K., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, J., Marland, G., McGuire, P. C., Melton, J. R., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., Ono, T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Schwingshackl, C., Séférian, R., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wada, C., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., and Zeng, J.: Global Carbon Budget 2021, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022. a, b
Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Landschützer, P., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Barbero, L., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Decharme, B., Bopp, L., Brasika, I. B. M., Cadule, P., Chamberlain, M. A., Chandra, N., Chau, T.-T.-T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Dou, X., Enyo, K., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Ford, D. J., Gasser, T., Ghattas, J., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, O., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Heinke, J., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jacobson, A. R., Jain, A., Jarníková, T., Jersild, A., Jiang, F., Jin, Z., Joos, F., Kato, E., Keeling, R. F., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Lan, X., Lefèvre, N., Li, H., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Ma, L., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGuire, P. C., McKinley, G. A., Meyer, G., Morgan, E. J., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O'Brien, K. M., Olsen, A., Omar, A. M., Ono, T., Paulsen, M., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Powis, C. M., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Smallman, T. L., Smith, S. M., Sospedra-Alfonso, R., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., van Ooijen, E., Wanninkhof, R., Watanabe, M., Wimart-Rousseau, C., Yang, D., Yang, X., Yuan, W., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., Zeng, J., and Zheng, B.: Global Carbon Budget 2023, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023. a
Gatti, L. V., Basso, L. S., Miller, J. B., Gloor, M., Gatti Domingues, L., Cassol, H. L. G., Tejada, G., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Nobre, C., Peters, W., Marani, L., Arai, E., Sanches, A. H., Corrêa, S. M., Anderson, L., Von Randow, C., Correia, C. S. C., Crispim, S. P., and Neves, R. A. L.: Amazonia as a carbon source linked to deforestation and climate change, Nature, 595, 388–393, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03629-6, 2021. a
Gibbs, H. K.: Olson's major world ecosystem complexes ranked by carbon in live vegetation: An updated database using the GLC2000 land cover product, ORNL Environmental Sciences Division [data set], https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/LUE.NDP017.2006, 2006. a, b
Gibelin, A.-L., Calvet, J.-C., and Viovy, N.: Modelling energy and CO2 fluxes with an interactive vegetation land surface model-Evaluation at high and middle latitudes, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 148, 1611–1628, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2008.05.013, 2008. a
Gier, B. K., Buchwitz, M., Reuter, M., Cox, P. M., Friedlingstein, P., and Eyring, V.: Spatially resolved evaluation of Earth system models with satellite column-averaged CO2, Biogeosciences, 17, 6115–6144, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, 2020. a, b
Giorgetta, M. A., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C. H., Legutke, S., Bader, J., Bottinger, M., Brovkin, V., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fieg, K., Glushak, K., Gayler, V., Haak, H., Hollweg, H. D., Ilyina, T., Kinne, S., Kornblueh, L., Matei, D., Mauritsen, T., Mikolajewicz, U., Mueller, W., Notz, D., Pithan, F., Raddatz, T., Rast, S., Redler, R., Roeckner, E., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Segschneider, J., Six, K. D., Stockhause, M., Timmreck, C., Wegner, J., Widmann, H., Wieners, K. H., Claussen, M., Marotzke, J., and Stevens, B.: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 5, 572–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038, 2013. a, b
Gleckler, P. J., Taylor, K. E., and Doutriaux, C.: Performance metrics for climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D06104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008972, 2008. a
Global Carbon Project: Supplemental data of Global Carbon Project 2021, Global Carbon Project [data set], https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2021, 2021. a
Goll, D. S., Winkler, A. J., Raddatz, T., Dong, N., Prentice, I. C., Ciais, P., and Brovkin, V.: Carbon–nitrogen interactions in idealized simulations with JSBACH (version 3.10), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2009–2030, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2009-2017, 2017. a
Hajima, T., Abe, M., Arakawa, O., Suzuki, T., Komuro, Y., Ogura, T., Ogochi, K.,Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Tatebe, H., Noguchi, M. A., Ohgaito, R., Ito, A., Yamazaki, D., Ito, A., Takata, K.,Watanabe, S., Kawamiya, M., and Tachiiri, K.: MIROC MIROC-ES2L model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5602, 2019. a, b
Hajima, T., Abe, M., Arakawa, O., Suzuki, T., Komuro, Y., Ogochi, K., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Tatebe, H., Noguchi, M. A., Ohgaito, R., Ito, A., Yamazaki, D., Ito, A., Takata, K.,Watanabe, S., Kawamiya, M., and Tachiiri, K.: MIROC MIROC-ES2L model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5496, 2020a. a
Hajima, T., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Tatebe, H., Noguchi, M. A., Abe, M., Ohgaito, R., Ito, A., Yamazaki, D., Okajima, H., Ito, A., Takata, K., Ogochi, K., Watanabe, S., and Kawamiya, M.: Development of the MIROC-ES2L Earth system model and the evaluation of biogeochemical processes and feedbacks, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2197–2244, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2197-2020, 2020b. a, b
Hosaka, M.: A new MRI land surface model HAL, in: AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, vol. 2011, GC43B-0901, American Geophysical Union, 2011. a
Hugelius, G., Tarnocai, C., Broll, G., Canadell, J. G., Kuhry, P., and Swanson, D. K.: The Northern Circumpolar Soil Carbon Database: spatially distributed datasets of soil coverage and soil carbon storage in the northern permafrost regions, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 5, 3–13, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-5-3-2013, 2013. a, b, c
Hurrell, J. W., Holland, M. M., Gent, P. R., Ghan, S., Kay, J. E., Kushner, P. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Large, W. G., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Long, M. C., Mahowald, N., Marsh, D. R., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P., Vavrus, S., Vertenstein, M., Bader, D., Collins, W. D., Hack, J. J., Kiehl, J., and Marshall, S.: The Community Earth System Model: A Framework for Collaborative Research, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1339–1360, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-12-00121.1, 2013. a
IPCC: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, vol. In Press, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896, 2021. a, b
Ito, A. and Inatomi, M.: Water-Use Efficiency of the Terrestrial Biosphere: A Model Analysis Focusing on Interactions between the Global Carbon and Water Cycles, J. Hydrometeorol., 13, 681–694, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-10-05034.1, 2012. a
Ji, D., Wang, L., Feng, J., Wu, Q., Cheng, H., Zhang, Q., Yang, J., Dong, W., Dai, Y., Gong, D., Zhang, R. H., Wang, X., Liu, J., Moore, J. C., Chen, D., and Zhou, M.: Description and basic evaluation of Beijing Normal University Earth System Model (BNU-ESM) version 1, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2039–2064, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2039-2014, 2014. a, b, c
Jones, C. D.: So What Is in an Earth System Model?, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001967, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms001967, 2020. a
Jones, C. D., Ziehn, T., Anand, J., Bastos, A., Burke, E., Canadell, J. G., Cardoso, M., Ernst, Y., Jain, A. K., Jeong, S., Keller, E. D., Kondo, M., Lauerwald, R., Lin, T.-S., Murray-Tortarolo, G., Nabuurs, G.-J., O’Sullivan, M., Poulter, B., Qin, X., von Randow, C., Sanches, M., Schepaschenko, D., Shvidenko, A., Smallman, T. L., Tian, H., Villalobos, Y., Wang, X., and Yun, J.: RECCAP2 Future Component: Consistency and Potential for Regional Assessment to Constrain Global Projections, AGU Adv., 4, e2023AV001024, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023AV001024, 2023. a
Jung, M., Reichstein, M., Margolis, H. A., Cescatti, A., Richardson, A. D., Arain, M. A., Arneth, A., Bernhofer, C., Bonal, D., Chen, J., Gianelle, D., Gobron, N., Kiely, G., Kutsch, W., Lasslop, G., Law, B. E., Lindroth, A., Merbold, L., Montagnani, L., Moors, E. J., Papale, D., Sottocornola, M., Vaccari, F., and Williams, C.: Global patterns of land-atmosphere fluxes of carbon dioxide, latent heat, and sensible heat derived from eddy covariance, satellite, and meteorological observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 116, G00J07, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jg001566, 2011. a, b
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. a, b
Keenan, T. and Williams, C.: The Terrestrial Carbon Sink, Annu. Rev. Environ. Res., 43, 219–243, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030204, 2018. a
Kou-Giesbrecht, S. and Arora, V. K.: Compensatory Effects Between CO2, Nitrogen Deposition, and Nitrogen Fertilization in Terrestrial Biosphere Models Without Nitrogen Compromise Projections of the Future Terrestrial Carbon Sink, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2022GL102618, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL102618, 2023. a
Kou-Giesbrecht, S., Arora, V. K., Seiler, C., Arneth, A., Falk, S., Jain, A. K., Joos, F., Kennedy, D., Knauer, J., Sitch, S., O'Sullivan, M., Pan, N., Sun, Q., Tian, H., Vuichard, N., and Zaehle, S.: Evaluating nitrogen cycling in terrestrial biosphere models: a disconnect between the carbon and nitrogen cycles, Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 767–795, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-767-2023, 2023. a
Koven, C. D., Riley, W. J., Subin, Z. M., Tang, J. Y., Torn, M. S., Collins, W. D., Bonan, G. B., Lawrence, D. M., and Swenson, S. C.: The effect of vertically resolved soil biogeochemistry and alternate soil C and N models on C dynamics of CLM4, Biogeosciences, 10, 7109–7131, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-7109-2013, 2013. a
Kowalczyk, E., Stevens, L., Law, R., Dix, M., Wang, Y., Harman, I., Haynes, K., Srbinovsky, J., Pak, B., and Ziehn, T.: The land surface model component of ACCESS: Description and impact on the simulated surface climatology, Austr. Meteorol. Oceanogr. J., 63, 65–82, 2013. a
Krasting, J. P., John, J. G., Blanton, C., McHugh, C., Nikonov, S., Radhakrishnan, A., Rand, K., Zadeh, N. T., Balaji, V., Durachta, J., Dupuis, C., Menzel, R., Robinson, T., Underwood, S., Vahlenkamp, H., Dunne, K. A., Gauthier, P. P., Ginoux, P., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R., Harrison, M., Hurlin, W., Malyshev, S., Naik, V., Paulot, F., Paynter, D. J., Ploshay, J., Reichl, B. G., Schwarzkopf, D. M., Seman, C. J., Silvers, L., Wyman, B., Zeng, Y., Adcroft, A., Dunne, J. P., Dussin, R., Guo, H., He, J., Held, I. M., Horowitz, L. W., Lin, P., Milly, P., Shevliakova, E., Stock, C., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., Xie, Y., and Zhao, M.: NOAA-GFDL GFDL-ESM4 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8597, 2018a. a, b
Krasting, J. P., John, J. G., Blanton, C., McHugh, C., Nikonov, S., Radhakrishnan, A., Rand, K., Zadeh, N. T., Balaji, V., Durachta, J., Dupuis, C., Menzel, R., Robinson, T., Underwood, S., Vahlenkamp, H., Dunne, K. A., Gauthier, P. P., Ginoux, P., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R., Harrison, M., Hurlin,W., Malyshev, S., Naik, V., Paulot, F., Paynter, D. J., Ploshay, J., Reichl, B. G., Schwarzkopf, D. M., Seman, C. J., Silvers, L., Wyman, B., Zeng, Y., Adcroft, A., Dunne, J. P., Dussin, R., Guo, H., He, J., Held, I. M., Horowitz, L. W., Lin, P., Milly, P., Shevliakova, E., Stock, C., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A. T., Xie, Y., and Zhao, M.: NOAA-GFDL GFDL-ESM4 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8522, 2018b. a
Krinner, G., Viovy, N., de Noblet-Ducoudré, N., Ogée, J., Polcher, J., Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., Sitch, S., and Prentice, I. C.: A dynamic global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere-biosphere system, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1015, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002199, 2005. a
Lauer, A., Eyring, V., Bellprat, O., Bock, L., Gier, B. K., Hunter, A., Lorenz, R., Pérez-Zanón, N., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Senftleben, D., Weigel, K., and Zechlau, S.: Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – diagnostics for emergent constraints and future projections from Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4205–4228, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, 2020. a, b
Law, R. M., Ziehn, T., Matear, R. J., Lenton, A., Chamberlain, M. A., Stevens, L. E., Wang, Y. P., Srbinovsky, J., Bi, D., Yan, H., and Vohralik, P. F.: The carbon cycle in the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS-ESM1) – Part 1: Model description and pre-industrial simulation, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2567–2590, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2567-2017, 2017. a
Lawrence, D. M., Oleson, K. W., Flanner, M. G., Thornton, P. E., Swenson, S. C., Lawrence, P. J., Zeng, X., Yang, Z.-L., Levis, S., Sakaguchi, K., Bonan, G. B., and Slater, A. G.: Parameterization improvements and functional and structural advances in Version 4 of the Community Land Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 3, M03001, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011ms000045, 2011. a
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C., Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., van Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E., Lawrence, P. J., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Riley, W. J., Sacks, W. J., Shi, M., Vertenstein, M., Wieder, W. R., Xu, C., Ali, A. A., Badger, A. M., Bisht, G., van den Broeke, M., Brunke, M. A., Burns, S. P., Buzan, J., Clark, M., Craig, A., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Fisher, J. B., Flanner, M., Fox, A. M., Gentine, P., Hoffman, F., Keppel-Aleks, G., Knox, R., Kumar, S., Lenaerts, J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W. H., Lu, Y., Pandey, A., Pelletier, J. D., Perket, J., Randerson, J. T., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B. M., Slater, A., Subin, Z. M., Tang, J., Thomas, R. Q., Val Martin, M., and Zeng, X.: The Community Land Model Version 5: Description of New Features, Benchmarking, and Impact of Forcing Uncertainty, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4245–4287, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ms001583, 2019. a, b
Lee, W.-L. and Liang, H.-C.: AS-RCEC TaiESM1.0 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.9755, 2020. a
Lee, E., Felzer, B. S., and Kothavala, Z.: Effects of nitrogen limitation on hydrological processes in CLM4-CN, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 5, 741–754, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20046, 2013. a
Lee, W. L., Wang, Y. C., Shiu, C. J., Tsai, I., Tu, C. Y., Lan, Y. Y., Chen, J. P., Pan, H. L., and Hsu, H. H.: Taiwan Earth System Model Version 1: description and evaluation of mean state, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3887–3904, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3887-2020, 2020. a, b
Li, X., Melaas, E., Carrillo, C. M., Ault, T., Richardson, A. D., Lawrence, P., Friedl, M. A., Seyednasrollah, B., Lawrence, D. M., and Young, A. M.: A Comparison of Land Surface Phenology in the Northern Hemisphere Derived from Satellite Remote Sensing and the Community Land Model, J. Hydrometeorol., 23, 859–873, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-21-0169.1, 2022. a
Liang, S., Cheng, J., Jia, K., Jiang, B., Liu, Q., Xiao, Z., Yao, Y., Yuan, W., Zhang, X., Zhao, X., and Zhou, J.: The Global Land Surface Satellite (GLASS) Product Suite, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E323–E337, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0341.1, 2021. a, b
Lindeskog, M., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Waha, K., Seaquist, J., Olin, S., and Smith, B.: Implications of accounting for land use in simulations of ecosystem carbon cycling in Africa, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 385–407, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-385-2013, 2013. a
Lovato, T. and Peano, D.: CMCC CMCC-CM2-SR5 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3825, 2020. a, b
Lovato, T., Peano, D., and Butenschön, M.: CMCC CMCC-ESM2 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.13195, 2021. a
Lovato, T., Peano, D., Butenschon, M., Materia, S., Iovino, D., Scoccimarro, E., Fogli, P. G., Cherchi, A., Bellucci, A., Gualdi, S., Masina, S., and Navarra, A.: CMIP6 Simulations With the CMCC Earth System Model (CMCC-ESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002814, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002814, 2022. a
Mauritsen, T., Bader, J., Becker, T., Behrens, J., Bittner, M., Brokopf, R., Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fast, I., Fiedler, S., Fläschner, D., Gayler, V., Giorgetta, M., Goll, D. S., Haak, H., Hagemann, S., Hedemann, C., Hohenegger, C., Ilyina, T., Jahns, T., Jimenéz-de-la Cuesta, D., Jungclaus, J., Kleinen, T., Kloster, S., Kracher, D., Kinne, S., Kleberg, D., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke, J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Möbis, B., Müller, W. A., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nam, C. C. W., Notz, D., Nyawira, S.-S., Paulsen, H., Peters, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J., Popp, M., Raddatz, T. J., Rast, S., Redler, R., Reick, C. H., Rohrschneider, T., Schemann, V., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K. D., Stein, L., Stemmler, I., Stevens, B., von Storch, J.-S., Tian, F., Voigt, A., Vrese, P., Wieners, K.-H., Wilkenskjeld, S., Winkler, A., and Roeckner, E.: Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and Its Response to Increasing CO2, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 998–1038, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ms001400, 2019. a, b, c
McInerney, F. A. and Wing, S. L.: The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum: A Perturbation of Carbon Cycle, Climate, and Biosphere with Implications for the Future, Annu. Rev. Earth Pl. Sc., 39, 489–516, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-040610-133431, 2011. a
Meehl, G. A., Boer, G. J., Covey, C., Latif, M., and Stouffer, R. J.: The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 81, 313–318, 2000. a
Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Stier, P., Partridge, D. G., Tegen, I., Bey, I., Stanelle, T., Kokkola, H., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 2: Cloud evaluation, aerosol radiative forcing, and climate sensitivity, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3609–3639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3609-2019, 2019a. a, b
Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Stoll, J., Folini, D. S., Tegen, I., Wieners, K.-H., Mauritsen, T., Stemmler, I., Barthel, S., Bey, I., Daskalakis, N., Heinold, B., Kokkola, H., Partridge, D., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Schutgens, N., Stanelle, T., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., and Lohmann, U.: HAMMOZ-Consortium MPI-ESM1.2-HAM model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5016, 2019b. a
Oleson, K. W., Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Lawrence, D. M., Thornton, P. E., Lawrence, P. J., Stöckli, R., Dickinson, R. E., Bonan, G. B., Levis, S., Dai, A., and Qian, T.: Improvements to the Community Land Model and their impact on the hydrological cycle, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G01021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jg000563, 2008. a
Olson, J. S., Watts, J. A., and Allison, L. J.: Major world ecosystem complexes ranked by carbon in live vegetation: a database, https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6944260 (last access: 18 November 2024), 1985. a
Park, H. and Jeong, S.: Leaf area index in Earth system models: how the key variable of vegetation seasonality works in climate projections, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 034027, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe2cf, 2021. a
Park, S. and Shin, J.: SNU SAM0-UNICON model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.7789, 2019. a
Park, S., Shin, J., Kim, S., Oh, E., and Kim, Y.: Global Climate Simulated by the Seoul National University Atmosphere Model Version 0 with a Unified Convection Scheme (SAM0-UNICON), J. Clim., 32, 2917–2949, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-18-0796.1, 2019. a
Qiao, F. L., Song, Z. Y., Bao, Y., Song, Y. J., Shu, Q., Huang, C. J., and Zhao, W.: Development and evaluation of an Earth System Model with surface gravity waves, J. Geophys. Res.-Ocean., 118, 4514–4524, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20327, 2013. a
Rabin, S. S., Ward, D. S., Malyshev, S. L., Magi, B. I., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: A fire model with distinct crop, pasture, and non-agricultural burning: use of new data and a model-fitting algorithm for FINAL.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 815–842, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-815-2018, 2018. a
Reuter, M., Buchwitz, M., Hilker, M., Heymann, J., Schneising, O., Pillai, D., Bovensmann, H., Burrows, J. P., Bösch, H., Parker, R., Butz, A., Hasekamp, O., O'Dell, C. W., Yoshida, Y., Gerbig, C., Nehrkorn, T., Deutscher, N. M., Warneke, T., Notholt, J., Hase, F., Kivi, R., Sussmann, R., Machida, T., Matsueda, H., and Sawa, Y.: Satellite-inferred European carbon sink larger than expected, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 13739–13753, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-13739-2014, 2014. a
Righi, M., Andela, B., Eyring, V., Lauer, A., Predoi, V., Schlund, M., Vegas-Regidor, J., Bock, L., Brötz, B., de Mora, L., Diblen, F., Dreyer, L., Drost, N., Earnshaw, P., Hassler, B., Koldunov, N., Little, B., Loosveldt Tomas, S., and Zimmermann, K.: Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – technical overview, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1179–1199, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, 2020. a, b
Rödenbeck, C.: Estimating CO2 sources and sinks from atmospheric mixing ratio measurements using a global inversion of atmospheric transport Technical Report 6, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, http://www.bgc-jena.mpg.de/CarboScope/s/tech_report6.pdf (last access: 18 November 2024), 2005. a, b
Sanderson, B. M., Booth, B. B. B., Dunne, J., Eyring, V., Fisher, R. A., Friedlingstein, P., Gidden, M. J., Hajima, T., Jones, C. D., Jones, C. G., King, A., Koven, C. D., Lawrence, D. M., Lowe, J., Mengis, N., Peters, G. P., Rogelj, J., Smith, C., Snyder, A. C., Simpson, I. R., Swann, A. L. S., Tebaldi, C., Ilyina, T., Schleussner, C.-F., Séférian, R., Samset, B. H., van Vuuren, D., and Zaehle, S.: The need for carbon-emissions-driven climate projections in CMIP7, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024. a, b
Sato, H., Itoh, A., and Kohyama, T.: SEIB–DGVM: A new Dynamic Global Vegetation Model using a spatially explicit individual-based approach, Ecol. Model., 200, 279–307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.006, 2007. a
Schlund, M., Hassler, B., Lauer, A., Andela, B., Jöckel, P., Kazeroni, R., Loosveldt Tomas, S., Medeiros, B., Predoi, V., Sénési, S., Servonnat, J., Stacke, T., Vegas-Regidor, J., Zimmermann, K., and Eyring, V.: Evaluation of native Earth system model output with ESMValTool v2.6.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, 2023. a
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 Sy., 14, e2021MS002946, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002946, 2022. a, b
Seland, Ø., Bentsen, M., Oliviè, D. J. L., Toniazzo, T., Gjermundsen, A., Graff, L. S., Debernard, J. B., Gupta, A. K., He, Y., Kirkevåg, A., Schwinger, J., Tjiputra, J., Aas, K. S., Bethke, I., Fan, Y., Griesfeller, J., Grini, A., Guo, C., Ilicak, M., Karset, I. H. H., Landgren, O. A., Liakka, J., Moseid, K. O., Nummelin, A., Spensberger, C., Tang, H., Zhang, Z., Heinze, C., Iversen, T., and Schulz, M.: NCC NorESM2-LM model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.7924, 2019a. a
Seland, Ø., Bentsen, M., Oliviè, D. J. L., Toniazzo, T., Gjermundsen, A., Graff, L. S., Debernard, J. B., Gupta, A. K., He, Y., Kirkevåg, A., Schwinger, J., Tjiputra, J., Aas, K. S., Bethke, I., Fan, Y., Griesfeller, J., Grini, A., Guo, C., Ilicak, M., Karset, I. H. H., Landgren, O. A., Liakka, J., Moseid, K. O., Nummelin, A., Spensberger, C., Tang, H., Zhang, Z., Heinze, C., Iversen, T., and Schulz, M.: NCC NorESM2-LM model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.8036, 2019b. a
Seland, Ø., Bentsen, M., Olivié, D., Toniazzo, T., Gjermundsen, A., Graff, L. S., Debernard, J. B., Gupta, A. K., He, Y.-C., Kirkevåg, A., Schwinger, J., Tjiputra, J., Aas, K. S., Bethke, I., Fan, Y., Griesfeller, J., Grini, A., Guo, C., Ilicak, M., Karset, I. H. H., Landgren, O., Liakka, J., Moseid, K. O., Nummelin, A., Spensberger, C., Tang, H., Zhang, Z., Heinze, C., Iversen, T., and Schulz, M.: Overview of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) and key climate response of CMIP6 DECK, historical, and scenario simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6165–6200, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6165-2020, 2020. a, b
Sellar, A. A., Jones, C. G., Mulcahy, J. P., Tang, Y., Yool, A., Wiltshire, A., O'Connor, F. M., Stringer, M., Hill, R., Palmieri, J., Woodward, S., de Mora, L., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rumbold, S. T., Kelley, D. I., Ellis, R., Johnson, C. E., Walton, J., Abraham, N. L., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald, A. T., Berthou, S., Burke, E., Blockley, E., Carslaw, K., Dalvi, M., Edwards, J., Folberth, G. A., Gedney, N., Griffiths, P. T., Harper, A. B., Hendry, M. A., Hewitt, A. J., Johnson, B., Jones, A., Jones, C. D., Keeble, J., Liddicoat, S., Morgenstern, O., Parker, R. J., Predoi, V., Robertson, E., Siahaan, A., Smith, R. S., Swaminathan, R., Woodhouse, M. T., Zeng, G., and Zerroukat, M.: UKESM1: Description and Evaluation of the UK Earth System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4513–4558, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001739, 2019. a, b
Shi, M., Fisher, J. B., Brzostek, E. R., and Phillips, R. P.: Carbon cost of plant nitrogen acquisition: global carbon cycle impact from an improved plant nitrogen cycle in the Community Land Model, Glob. Change Biol., 22, 1299–1314, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13131, 2016. a
Smith, B., Wårlind, D., Arneth, A., Hickler, T., Leadley, P., Siltberg, J., and Zaehle, S.: Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model, Biogeosciences, 11, 2027–2054, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014, 2014. a
Sulman, B. N., Phillips, R. P., Oishi, A. C., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: Microbe-driven turnover offsets mineral-mediated storage of soil carbon under elevated CO2, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 1099–1102, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2436, 2014. a
Sulman, B. N., Shevliakova, E., Brzostek, E. R., Kivlin, S. N., Malyshev, S., Menge, D. N., and Zhang, X.: Diverse Mycorrhizal Associations Enhance Terrestrial C Storage in a Global Model, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 33, 501–523, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GB005973, 2019. a
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, 2019a. a, b, c
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., Winter, B., and Sigmond, M.: CCCma CanESM5 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3583, 2019b. a
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., Winter, B., and Sigmond, M.: CCCma CanESM5-CanOE model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10232, 2019c. a
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., Winter, B., and Sigmond, M.: CCCma CanESM5-CanOE model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.10260, 2019d. a
Swart, N. C., Cole, J. N., Kharin, V. V., Lazare, M., Scinocca, J. F., Gillett, N. P., Anstey, J., Arora, V., Christian, J. R., Jiao, Y., Lee, W. G., Majaess, F., Saenko, O. A., Seiler, C., Seinen, C., Shao, A., Solheim, L., von Salzen, K., Yang, D., Winter, B., and Sigmond, M.: CCCma CanESM5 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.3610, 2019e. a
Séférian, R.: CNRM-CERFACS CNRM-ESM2-1 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4068, 2018. a
Séférian, R.: CNRM-CERFACS CNRM-ESM2-1 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4003, 2019. a
Séférian, R., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Saint-Martin, D., Voldoire, A., Colin, J., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Berthet, S., Chevallier, M., Sénési, S., Franchisteguy, L., Vial, J., Mallet, M., Joetzjer, E., Geoffroy, O., Guérémy, J.-F., Moine, M.-P., Msadek, R., Ribes, A., Rocher, M., Roehrig, R., Salas-y Mélia, D., Sanchez, E., Terray, L., Valcke, S., Waldman, R., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Deshayes, J., Éthé, C., and Madec, G.: Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM-ESM2-1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present-Day and Future Climate, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4182–4227, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791, 2019. a, b
Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Ellis, R., Kelley, D., Mulcahy, J., Sellar, A., Walton, J., and Jones, C.: MOHC UKESM1.0-LL model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5929, 2019a. a
Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Ellis, R., Kelley, D., Mulcahy, J., Sellar, A., Walton, J., and Jones, C.: MOHC UKESM1.0-LL model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6113, 2019b. a
Takata, K., Emori, S., and Watanabe, T.: Development of the minimal advanced treatments of surface interaction and runoff, Glob. Planet. Change, 38, 209–222, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8181(03)00030-4, 2003. a
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-11-00094.1, 2012. a, b
Team, T. H. D., Martin, G., Bellouin, N., Collins, W. J., Culverwell, I. D., Halloran, P. R., Hardiman, S. C., Hinton, T. J., Jones, C. D., McDonald, R. E., McLaren, A. J., O'Connor, F. M., Roberts, M. J., Rodriguez, J. M., Woodward, S., Best, M. J., Brooks, M. E., Brown, A. R., Butchart, N., Dearden, C., Derbyshire, S. H., Dharssi, I., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Edwards, J. M., Falloon, P. D., Gedney, N., Gray, L. J., Hewitt, H. T., Hobson, M., Huddleston, M. R., Hughes, J., Ineson, S., Ingram, W. J., James, P. M., Johns, T. C., Johnson, C. E., Jones, A., Jones, C. P., Joshi, M. M., Keen, A. B., Liddicoat, S., Lock, A. P., Maidens, A. V., Manners, J. C., Milton, S. F., Rae, J. G. L., Ridley, J. K., Sellar, A., Senior, C. A., Totterdell, I. J., Verhoef, A., Vidale, P. L., and Wiltshire, A.: The HadGEM2 family of Met Office Unified Model climate configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 723–757, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-723-2011, 2011. a, b
Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019, 2019. a, b
Tjiputra, J. F., Roelandt, C., Bentsen, M., Lawrence, D. M., Lorentzen, T., Schwinger, J., Seland, O., and Heinze, C.: Evaluation of the carbon cycle components in the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM), Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 301–325, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-301-2013, 2013. a
Todd-Brown, K. E. O., Randerson, J. T., Hopkins, F., Arora, V., Hajima, T., Jones, C., Shevliakova, E., Tjiputra, J., Volodin, E., Wu, T., Zhang, Q., and Allison, S. D.: Changes in soil organic carbon storage predicted by Earth system models during the 21st century, Biogeosciences, 11, 2341–2356, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2341-2014, 2014. a
Tuomi, M., Laiho, R., Repo, A., and Liski, J.: Wood decomposition model for boreal forests, Ecol. Model., 222, 709–718, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.10.025, 2011. a
UCAR: CLM technical note, https://escomp.github.io/ctsm-docs/versions/release-clm5.0/html/tech_note/ (last access: 18 November 2024), 2020. a
Varney, R. M., Chadburn, S. E., Burke, E. J., and Cox, P. M.: Evaluation of soil carbon simulation in CMIP6 Earth system models, Biogeosciences, 19, 4671–4704, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-4671-2022, 2022. a, b, c, d
Varney, R. M., Chadburn, S. E., Burke, E. J., Jones, S., Wiltshire, A. J., and Cox, P. M.: Simulated responses of soil carbon to climate change in CMIP6 Earth system models: the role of false priming, Biogeosciences, 20, 3767–3790, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3767-2023, 2023. a
Varney, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Chadburn, S. E., Burke, E. J., and Cox, P. M.: Soil carbon-concentration and carbon-climate feedbacks in CMIP6 Earth system models, Biogeosciences, 21, 2759–2776, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-2759-2024, 2024. a
Verseghy, D. L.: Class – A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMS, I. Soil model, Int. J. Climatol., 11, 111–133, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370110202, 1991. a
Verseghy, D. L.: The Canadian land surface scheme (CLASS): Its history and future, Atmos.-Ocean, 38, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2000.9649637, 2000. a
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. Climatol., 13, 347–370, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370130402, 1993. a
Volodin, E. M.: Atmosphere-ocean general circulation model with the carbon cycle, Izvestiya, Atmos. Oceanic Phys., 43, 266–280, https://doi.org/10.1134/s0001433807030024, 2007. a
Volodin, E. M., Dianskii, N. A., and Gusev, A. V.: Simulating present-day climate with the INMCM4.0 coupled model of the atmospheric and oceanic general circulations, Izvestiya, Atmos. Oceanic Phys., 46, 414–431, https://doi.org/10.1134/S000143381004002X, 2010. a
Volodin, E. M., Mortikov, E. V., Kostrykin, S. V., Galin, V. Y., Lykosov, V. N., Gritsun, A. S., Diansky, N. A., Gusev, A. V., and Yakovlev, N. G.: Simulation of modern climate with the new version of the INM RAS climate model, Izvestiya, Atmos. Oceanic Phys., 53, 142–155, https://doi.org/10.1134/S0001433817020128, 2017a. a
Volodin, E. M., Mortikov, E. V., Kostrykin, S. V., Galin, V. Y., Lykossov, V. N., Gritsun, A. S., Diansky, N. A., Gusev, A. V., and Iakovlev, N. G.: Simulation of the present-day climate with the climate model INMCM5, Clim. Dynam., 49, 3715–3734, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3539-7, 2017b. a, b
Volodin, E. M., Mortikov, E. V., Kostrykin, S. V., Galin, V. Y., Lykossov, V. N., Gritsun, A. S., Diansky, N. A., Gusev, A. V., Iakovlev, N. G., Shestakova, A. A., and Emelina, S. V.: Simulation of the modern climate using the INM-CM48 climate model, Russ. J. Numer. Anal. M., 33, 367–374, https://doi.org/10.1515/rnam-2018-0032, 2018. a
Volodin, E., Mortikov, E., Gritsun, A., Lykossov, V., Galin, V., Diansky, N., Gusev, A., Kostrykin, S., Iakovlev, N., Shestakova, A., and Emelina, S.: INM INM-CM4-8 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5069, 2019a. a
Volodin, E., Mortikov, E., Gritsun, A., Lykossov, V., Galin, V., Diansky, N., Gusev, A., Kostrykin, S., Iakovlev, N., Shestakova, A., and Emelina, S.: INM INM-CM5-0 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.5070, 2019b. a
Wang, S., Luo, Y., and Niu, S.: Reparameterization Required After Model Structure Changes From Carbon Only to Carbon-Nitrogen Coupling, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002798, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002798, 2022. a, b
Wang, Y. P., Law, R. M., and Pak, B.: A global model of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles for the terrestrial biosphere, Biogeosciences, 7, 2261–2282, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-2261-2010, 2010. a
Watanabe, S., Hajima, T., Sudo, K., Nagashima, T., Takemura, T., Okajima, H., Nozawa, T., Kawase, H., Abe, M., Yokohata, T., Ise, T., Sato, H., Kato, E., Takata, K., Emori, S., and Kawamiya, M.: MIROC-ESM 2010: model description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 845–872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011, 2011. a, b, c, d
Wei, N., Xia, J., Zhou, J., Jiang, L., Cui, E., Ping, J., and Luo, Y.: Evolution of Uncertainty in Terrestrial Carbon Storage in Earth System Models from CMIP5 to CMIP6, J. Clim., 35, 5483–5499, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0763.1, 2022. a
Weigel, K., Bock, L., Gier, B. K., Lauer, A., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Adeniyi, K., Andela, B., Arnone, E., Berg, P., Caron, L.-P., Cionni, I., Corti, S., Drost, N., Hunter, A., Lledó, L., Mohr, C. W., Paçal, A., Pérez-Zanón, N., Predoi, V., Sandstad, M., Sillmann, J., Sterl, A., Vegas-Regidor, J., von Hardenberg, J., and Eyring, V.: Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – diagnostics for extreme events, regional and impact evaluation, and analysis of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021. a, b
Weng, E. S., Malyshev, S., Lichstein, J. W., Farrior, C. E., Dybzinski, R., Zhang, T., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: Scaling from individual trees to forests in an Earth system modeling framework using a mathematically tractable model of height-structured competition, Biogeosciences, 12, 2655–2694, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015, 2015. a
Wieder, W.: Regridded Harmonized World Soil Database v1.2, ORNL Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1247, 2014. a, b
Wieder, W. R., Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Bonan, G. B., Cheng, S. J., Goodale, C. L., Grandy, A. S., Koven, C. D., Lombardozzi, D. L., Oleson, K. W., and Thomas, R. Q.: Beyond Static Benchmarking: Using Experimental Manipulations to Evaluate Land Model Assumptions, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 33, 1289–1309, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gb006141, 2019. a
Wieners, K.-H., Giorgetta, M., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C., Esch, M., Bittner, M., Legutke, S., Schupfner, M., Wachsmann, F., Gayler, V., Haak, H., de Vrese, P., Raddatz, T., Mauritsen, T., von Storch, J.-S., Behrens, J., Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Fast, I., Fiedler, S., Hagemann, S., Hohenegger, C., Jahns, T., Kloster, S., Kinne, S., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke, J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Müller, W., Nabel, J., Notz, D., Peters-von Gehlen, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K., Stevens, B., Voigt, A., and Roeckner, E.: MPI-M MPI-ESM1.2-LR model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6595, 2019a. a, b
Wieners, K.-H., Giorgetta, M., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C., Esch, M., Bittner, M., Legutke, S., Schupfner, M., Wachsmann, F., Gayler, V., Haak, H., de Vrese, P., Raddatz, T., Mauritsen, T., von Storch, J.-S., Behrens, J., Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Fast, I., Fiedler, S., Hagemann, S., Hohenegger, C., Jahns, T., Kloster, S., Kinne, S., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke, J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Müller, W., Nabel, J., Notz, D., Peters-von Gehlen, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K., Stevens, B., Voigt, A., and Roeckner, E.: MPI-M MPI-ESM1.2-LR model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [dataset], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6545, 2019b. a
Wiltshire, A. J., Burke, E. J., Chadburn, S. E., Jones, C. D., Cox, P. M., Davies-Barnard, T., Friedlingstein, P., Harper, A. B., Liddicoat, S., Sitch, S., and Zaehle, S.: JULES-CN: a coupled terrestrial carbon–nitrogen scheme (JULES vn5.1), Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2161–2186, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2161-2021, 2021. a
Xiao, Z., Liang, S., and Jiang, B.: Evaluation of four long time-series global leaf area index products, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 246, 218–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.06.016, 2017. a, b
Yang, X., Thornton, P., Ricciuto, D., Wang, Y., and Hoffman, F.: Global evaluation of terrestrial biogeochemistry in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) and the role of the phosphorus cycle in the historical terrestrial carbon balance, Biogeosciences, 20, 2813–2836, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-2813-2023, 2023. a
Yuan, W., Liu, S., Zhou, G., Zhou, G., Tieszen, L. L., Baldocchi, D., Bernhofer, C., Gholz, H., Goldstein, A. H., Goulden, M. L., Hollinger, D. Y., Hu, Y., Law, B. E., Stoy, P. C., Vesala, T., and Wofsy, S. C.: Deriving a light use efficiency model from eddy covariance flux data for predicting daily gross primary production across biomes, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 143, 189–207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.12.001, 2007. a
Yukimoto, S., Yoshimura, H., Hosaka, M., Sakami, T., Tsujino, H., Hirabara, M., Tanaka, T. Y., Deushi, M., Obata, A., Nakano, H., Adachi, Y., Shindo, E., Yabu, S., Ose, T., and Kitoh, A.: Meteorological Research Institute-Earth System Model Version 1 (MRI-ESM1), Tech. Rep., 64, 88, https://doi.org/10.11483/mritechrepo.64, 2011. a
Yukimoto, S., Kawai, H., Koshiro, T., Oshima, N., Yoshida, K., Urakawa, S., Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Tanaka, T., Hosaka, M., Yabu, S., Yoshimura, H., Shindo, E., Mizuta, R., Obata, A., Adachi, Y., and Ishii, M.: The Meteorological Research Institute Earth System Model Version 2.0, MRI-ESM2.0: Description and Basic Evaluation of the Physical Component, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 97, 931–965, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2019-051, 2019a. a
Yukimoto, S., Koshiro, T., Kawai, H., Oshima, N., Yoshida, K., Urakawa, S., Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Tanaka, T., Hosaka, M., Yoshimura, H., Shindo, E., Mizuta, R., Ishii, M., Obata, A., and Adachi, Y.: MRI MRI-ESM2.0 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6807, 2019b. a
Yukimoto, S., Koshiro, T., Kawai, H., Oshima, N., Yoshida, K., Urakawa, S., Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Tanaka, T., Hosaka, M., Yoshimura, H., Shindo, E., Mizuta, R., Ishii, M., Obata, A., and Adachi, Y.: MRI MRI-ESM2.0 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.6842, 2019c. a, b
Zaehle, S., Jones, C. D., Houlton, B., Lamarque, J.-F., and Robertson, E.: Nitrogen Availability Reduces CMIP5 Projections of Twenty-First-Century Land Carbon Uptake, J. Clim., 28, 2494–2511, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00776.1, 2015. a
Zhang, Q., Pitman, A. J., Wang, Y. P., Dai, Y. J., and Lawrence, P. J.: The impact of nitrogen and phosphorous limitation on the estimated terrestrial carbon balance and warming of land use change over the last 156 yr, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 333–345, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-333-2013, 2013. a
Zhu, Z., Bi, J., Pan, Y., Ganguly, S., Anav, A., Xu, L., Samanta, A., Piao, S., Nemani, R., and Myneni, R.: Global Data Sets of Vegetation Leaf Area Index (LAI)3g and Fraction of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (FPAR)3g Derived from Global Inventory Modeling and Mapping Studies (GIMMS) Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI3g) for the Period 1981 to 2011, Remote Sens., 5, 927–948, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5020927, 2013. a, b
Ziehn, T., Lenton, A., Law, R. M., Matear, R. J., and Chamberlain, M. A.: The carbon cycle in the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS-ESM1) – Part 2: Historical simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2591–2614, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2591-2017, 2017. a, b, c
Ziehn, T., Chamberlain, M., Lenton, A., Law, R., Bodman, R., Dix, M., Wang, Y., Dobrohotoff, P., Srbinovsky, J., Stevens, L., Vohralik, P., Mackallah, C., Sullivan, A., O'Farrell, S., and Druken, K.: CSIRO ACCESS-ESM1.5 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP esm-hist, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4242, 2019a. a
Ziehn, T., Chamberlain, M., Lenton, A., Law, R., Bodman, R., Dix, M., Wang, Y., Dobrohotoff, P., Srbinovsky, J., Stevens, L., Vohralik, P., Mackallah, C., Sullivan, A., O'Farrell, S., and Druken, K.: CSIRO ACCESS-ESM1.5 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP historical, Earth System Grid Federation [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.4272, 2019b. a
Ziehn, T., Chamberlain, M. A., Law, R. M., Lenton, A., Bodman, R. W., Dix, M., Stevens, L., Wang, Y.-P., and Srbinovsky, J.: The Australian Earth System Model: ACCESS-ESM1.5, J. Southern Hemisph. Earth Syst. Sci., 70, 193–214, https://doi.org/10.1071/es19035, 2020. a, b
Co-editor-in-chief
The work documents the progress in modelling the terrestrial biosphere by including more biology. A new generation of global dynamic vegetation models contributing to the most recent phase of CMIP has included feedbacks between biogeochemical cycling and vegetation development and show improved simulation of photosynthesis. Other model challenges, such as the simulation of leaf area index and carbon pool dynamics still pertain.
The work documents the progress in modelling the terrestrial biosphere by including more...
Short summary
This study investigates present-day carbon cycle variables in CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations. Overall, CMIP6 models perform better but also show many remaining biases. A significant improvement in the simulation of photosynthesis in models with a nitrogen cycle is found, with only small differences between emission- and concentration-based simulations. Thus, we recommend using emission-driven simulations in CMIP7 by default and including the nitrogen cycle in all future carbon cycle models.
This study investigates present-day carbon cycle variables in CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations....
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint