Articles | Volume 21, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024
Research article
 | 
16 Feb 2024
Research article |  | 16 Feb 2024

Multiscale assessment of North American terrestrial carbon balance

Kelsey T. Foster, Wu Sun, Yoichi P. Shiga, Jiafu Mao, and Anna M. Michalak

Related authors

Insights into the long-term (2005–2021) spatiotemporal evolution of summer ozone production sensitivity in the Northern Hemisphere derived with the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI)
Matthew S. Johnson, Sajeev Philip, Scott Meech, Rajesh Kumar, Meytar Sorek-Hamer, Yoichi P. Shiga, and Jia Jung
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10363–10384, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10363-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10363-2024, 2024
Short summary
Quantifying wildfire drivers and predictability in boreal peatlands using a two-step error-correcting machine learning framework in TeFire v1.0
Rongyun Tang, Mingzhou Jin, Jiafu Mao, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Anping Chen, and Yulong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1525–1542, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024, 2024
Short summary
Historical and projected future runoff over the Mekong River basin
Chao Wang, Stephen Leisz, Li Li, Xiaoying Shi, Jiafu Mao, Yi Zheng, and Anping Chen
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 75–90, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024, 2024
Short summary
Global modelling of soil carbonyl sulfide exchanges
Camille Abadie, Fabienne Maignan, Marine Remaud, Jérôme Ogée, J. Elliott Campbell, Mary E. Whelan, Florian Kitz, Felix M. Spielmann, Georg Wohlfahrt, Richard Wehr, Wu Sun, Nina Raoult, Ulli Seibt, Didier Hauglustaine, Sinikka T. Lennartz, Sauveur Belviso, David Montagne, and Philippe Peylin
Biogeosciences, 19, 2427–2463, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2427-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2427-2022, 2022
Short summary
Evaluation of carbonyl sulfide biosphere exchange in the Simple Biosphere Model (SiB4)
Linda M. J. Kooijmans, Ara Cho, Jin Ma, Aleya Kaushik, Katherine D. Haynes, Ian Baker, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Mathijs Groenink, Wouter Peters, John B. Miller, Joseph A. Berry, Jerome Ogée, Laura K. Meredith, Wu Sun, Kukka-Maaria Kohonen, Timo Vesala, Ivan Mammarella, Huilin Chen, Felix M. Spielmann, Georg Wohlfahrt, Max Berkelhammer, Mary E. Whelan, Kadmiel Maseyk, Ulli Seibt, Roisin Commane, Richard Wehr, and Maarten Krol
Biogeosciences, 18, 6547–6565, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-6547-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-6547-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeochemistry: Modelling, Terrestrial
A 2001–2022 global gross primary productivity dataset using an ensemble model based on the random forest method
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
Future projections of Siberian wildfire and aerosol emissions
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
Mechanisms of soil organic carbon and nitrogen stabilization in mineral-associated organic matter – insights from modeling in phase space
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
Optimizing the terrestrial ecosystem gross primary productivity using carbonyl sulfide (COS) within a two-leaf modeling framework
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
Modeling integrated soil fertility management for maize production in Kenya using a Bayesian calibration of the DayCent model
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

Cited articles

Ahlström, A., Xia, J., Arneth, A., Luo, Y., and Smith, B.: Importance of vegetation dynamics for future terrestrial carbon cycling, Environ. Res. Lett., 10, 054019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/5/054019, 2015. 
Andrews, A. E., Kofler, J. D., Trudeau, M. E., Williams, J. C., Neff, D. H., Masarie, K. A., Chao, D. Y., Kitzis, D. R., Novelli, P. C., Zhao, C. L., Dlugokencky, E. J., Lang, P. M., Crotwell, M. J., Fischer, M. L., Parker, M. J., Lee, J. T., Baumann, D. D., Desai, A. R., Stanier, C. O., De Wekker, S. F. J., Wolfe, D. E., Munger, J. W., and Tans, P. P.: CO2, CO, and CH4 measurements from tall towers in the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory's Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network: instrumentation, uncertainty analysis, and recommendations for future high-accuracy greenhouse gas monitoring efforts, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 647–687, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-647-2014, 2014. 
Annan, J. D. and Hargreaves, J. C.: Reliability of the CMIP3 ensemble, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L02703, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL041994, 2010. 
Asefi-Najafabady, S., Rayner, P. J., Gurney, K. R., McRobert, A., Song, Y., Coltin, K., Huang, J., Elvidge, C., and Baugh, K.: A multiyear, global gridded fossil fuel CO2 emission data product: Evaluation and analysis of results, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 10213–10231, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021296, 2014. 
Baker, D. F., Law, R. M., Gurney, K. R., Rayner, P., Peylin, P., Denning, A. S., Bousquet, P., Bruhwiler, L., Chen, Y.-H., Ciais, P., Fung, I. Y., Heimann, M., John, J., Maki, T., Maksyutov, S., Masarie, K., Prather, M., Pak, B., Taguchi, S., and Zhu, Z.: TransCom 3 inversion intercomparison: Impact of transport model errors on the interannual variability of regional CO2 fluxes, 1988–2003, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 20, 1, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GB002439, 2006. 
Download
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.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint