One stomatal model to rule them all? Evaluating competing hypotheses to regulate the exchange of carbon and water against experimental data

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manon Sabot ◽  
Martin De Kauwe ◽  
Belinda Medlyn ◽  
Andy Pitman
Keyword(s):  
Stomatal Conductance ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Model Comparison ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Vapour Pressure Deficit ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Model Complexity ◽  
Coupled Climate Models

<p>Nearly 2/3 of the annual global evapotranspiration (ET) over land arises from the vegetation. Yet, coupled-climate models only attribute between 22% – 58% of the annual terrestrial ET to plants. In coupled-climate models, the exchange of carbon and water between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere is simulated by land-surface models (LSMs). Within those LSMs, stomatal conductance (g<sub>s</sub>) models allow plants to regulate their transpiration and carbon uptake, but most are empirically linked to climate, soil moisture availabilty, and CO<sub>2</sub>. Therefore, how and which g<sub>s</sub> schemes are implemented within LSMs is a key source of model uncertainty. This uncertainty has led to considerable investment in theory development in the recent years; multiple alternative hypotheses of optimal leaf-level regulation of gas exchange have been proposed as solutions to reduce existing model biases. However, a systematic inter-model evaluation is lacking (i.e. inter-model comparison within a single framework is needed to understand how different mechanistic assumptions across these new g<sub>s</sub> models affect plant behaviour). Here, we asked how, and under what conditions, nine novel optimal g<sub>s</sub> models differ from one another. The models were trained to match under average conditions before being subjected to: (i) a dry-down, (ii) high vapour pressure deficit, and (iii) elevated CO<sub>2</sub>. These experiments allowed us to identify the models’ specific responses and sensitivities. To further assess whether the models’ responses were realistic, we tested them against photosynthetic and hydraulic field data measured along mesic-xeric gradients in Europe and Australia. Finally, we evaluated model performance versus model complexity and the amount of information taken in by each model, which enables us to make recommendations regarding the use of stomatal conductance schemes in global climate models.</p>

scholarly journals Evaluating the Performance of Land Surface Models

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (21) ◽  
pp. 5468-5481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gab Abramowitz ◽  
Ray Leuning ◽  
Martyn Clark ◽  
Andy Pitman
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Models ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Specific Humidity ◽  
Model Complexity ◽  
Land Surface Models ◽  
Surface Models

Abstract This paper presents a set of analytical tools to evaluate the performance of three land surface models (LSMs) that are used in global climate models (GCMs). Predictions of the fluxes of sensible heat, latent heat, and net CO2 exchange obtained using process-based LSMs are benchmarked against two statistical models that only use incoming solar radiation, air temperature, and specific humidity as inputs to predict the fluxes. Both are then compared to measured fluxes at several flux stations located on three continents. Parameter sets used for the LSMs include default values used in GCMs for the plant functional type and soil type surrounding each flux station, locally calibrated values, and ensemble sets encompassing combinations of parameters within their respective uncertainty ranges. Performance of the LSMs is found to be generally inferior to that of the statistical models across a wide variety of performance metrics, suggesting that the LSMs underutilize the meteorological information used in their inputs and that model complexity may be hindering accurate prediction. The authors show that model evaluation is purpose specific; good performance in one metric does not guarantee good performance in others. Self-organizing maps are used to divide meteorological “‘forcing space” into distinct regions as a mechanism to identify the conditions under which model bias is greatest. These new techniques will aid modelers to identify the areas of model structure responsible for poor performance.

scholarly journals Exploring how groundwater buffers the influence of heatwaves on vegetation function during multi-year droughts

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 919-938
Author(s):  
Mengyuan Mu ◽  
Martin G. De Kauwe ◽  
Anna M. Ukkola ◽  
Andy J. Pitman ◽  
Weidong Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Land Surface ◽  
Forest Canopy ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Root Zone ◽  
Stomatal Closure ◽  
Capillary Rise ◽  
Vapour Pressure Deficit ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Surface Model ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. The co-occurrence of droughts and heatwaves can have significant impacts on many socioeconomic and environmental systems. Groundwater has the potential to moderate the impact of droughts and heatwaves by moistening the soil and enabling vegetation to maintain higher evaporation, thereby cooling the canopy. We use the Community Atmosphere Biosphere Land Exchange (CABLE) land surface model, coupled to a groundwater scheme, to examine how groundwater influences ecosystems under conditions of co-occurring droughts and heatwaves. We focus specifically on south-east Australia for the period 2000–2019, when two significant droughts and multiple extreme heatwave events occurred. We found groundwater plays an important role in helping vegetation maintain transpiration, particularly in the first 1–2 years of a multi-year drought. Groundwater impedes gravity-driven drainage and moistens the root zone via capillary rise. These mechanisms reduced forest canopy temperatures by up to 5 ∘C during individual heatwaves, particularly where the water table depth is shallow. The role of groundwater diminishes as the drought lengthens beyond 2 years and soil water reserves are depleted. Further, the lack of deep roots or stomatal closure caused by high vapour pressure deficit or high temperatures can reduce the additional transpiration induced by groundwater. The capacity of groundwater to moderate both water and heat stress on ecosystems during simultaneous droughts and heatwaves is not represented in most global climate models, suggesting that model projections may overestimate the risk of these events in the future.

A simple approach to mimic the effect of active vegetation in hydrological models to better estimate hydrological variables under climate change

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thedini Asali Peiris ◽  
Petra Döll
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Potential Evapotranspiration ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Net Radiation ◽  
Ensemble Mean ◽  
The Impact

<p>Unlike global climate models, hydrological models cannot simulate the feedbacks among atmospheric processes, vegetation, water, and energy exchange at the land surface. This severely limits their ability to quantify the impact of climate change and the concurrent increase of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations on evapotranspiration and thus runoff. Hydrological models generally calculate actual evapotranspiration as a fraction of potential evapotranspiration (PET), which is computed as a function of temperature and net radiation and sometimes of humidity and wind speed. Almost no hydrological model takes into account that PET changes because the vegetation responds to changing CO<sub>2</sub> and climate. This active vegetation response consists of three components. With higher CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations, 1) plant stomata close, reducing transpiration (physiological effect) and 2) plants may grow better, with more leaves, increasing transpiration (structural effect), while 3) climatic changes lead to changes in plants growth and even biome shifts, changing evapotranspiration. Global climate models, which include dynamic vegetation models, simulate all these processes, albeit with a high uncertainty, and take into account the feedbacks to the atmosphere.</p><p>Milly and Dunne (2016) (MD) found that in the case of RCP8.5 the change of PET (computed using the Penman-Monteith equation) between 1981- 2000 and 2081-2100 is much higher than the change of non-water-stressed evapotranspiration (NWSET) computed by an ensemble of global climate models. This overestimation is partially due to the neglect of active vegetation response and partially due to the neglected feedbacks between the atmosphere and the land surface.</p><p>The objective of this paper is to present a simple approach for hydrological models that enables them to mimic the effect of active vegetation on potential evapotranspiration under climate change, thus improving computation of freshwater-related climate change hazards by hydrological models. MD proposed an alternative approach to estimate changes in PET for impact studies that is only a function of the changes in energy and not of temperature and achieves a good fit to the ensemble mean change of evapotranspiration computed by the ensemble of global climate models in months and grid cells without water stress. We developed an implementation of the MD idea for hydrological models using the Priestley-Taylor equation (PET-PT) to estimate PET as a function of net radiation and temperature. With PET-PT, an increasing temperature trend leads to strong increases in PET. Our proposed methodology (PET-MD) helps to remove this effect, retaining the impact of temperature on PET but not on long-term PET change.</p><p>We implemented the PET-MD approach in the global hydrological model WaterGAP2.2d. and computed daily time series of PET between 1981 and 2099 using bias-adjusted climate data of four global climate models for RCP 8.5. We evaluated, computed PET-PT and PET-MD at the grid cell level and globally, comparing also to the results of the Milly-Dunne study. The global analysis suggests that the application of PET-MD reduces the PET change until the end of this century from 3.341 mm/day according to PET-PT to 3.087 mm/day (ensemble mean over the four global climate models).</p><p>Milly, P.C.D., Dunne K.A. (2016). DOI:10.1038/nclimate3046.</p>

scholarly journals Terrestrial Aridity and Its Response to Greenhouse Warming across CMIP5 Climate Models

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (14) ◽  
pp. 5583-5600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Scheff ◽  
Dargan M. W. Frierson
Keyword(s):  
Land Surface ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Potential Evapotranspiration ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Aridity Index ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Greenhouse Warming ◽  
Dimensionless Ratio ◽  
The Tropics

Abstract The aridity of a terrestrial climate is often quantified using the dimensionless ratio of annual precipitation (P) to annual potential evapotranspiration (PET). In this study, the climatological patterns and greenhouse warming responses of terrestrial P, Penman–Monteith PET, and are compared among 16 modern global climate models. The large-scale climatological values and implied biome types often disagree widely among models, with large systematic differences from observational estimates. In addition, the PET climatologies often differ by several tens of percent when computed using monthly versus 3-hourly inputs. With greenhouse warming, land P does not systematically increase or decrease, except at high latitudes. Therefore, because of moderate, ubiquitous PET increases, decreases (drying) are much more widespread than increases (wetting) in the tropics, subtropics, and midlatitudes in most models, confirming and expanding on earlier findings. The PET increases are also somewhat sensitive to the time resolution of the inputs, although not as systematically as for the PET climatologies. The changes in the balance between P and PET are also quantified using an alternative aridity index, the ratio , which has a one-to-one but nonlinear correspondence with . It is argued that the magnitudes of changes are more uniformly relevant than the magnitudes of changes, which tend to be much higher in wetter regions. The ratio and its changes are also found to be excellent statistical predictors of the land surface evaporative fraction and its changes.

Climate engineering to mitigate the projected 21st-century terrestrial drying of the Americas: a direct comparison of carbon capture and sulfur injection

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yangyang Xu ◽  
Lei Lin ◽  
Simone Tilmes ◽  
Katherine Dagon ◽  
Lili Xia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
South America ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Model Comparison ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Amazon Region ◽  
Global Climate Models

<p>To mitigate the projected global warming in the 21st century, it is well-recognized that society needs to cut CO2 emissions and other short-lived warming agents aggressively. However, to stabilize the climate at a warming level closer to the present day, such as the “well below 2 ◦C” aspiration in the Paris Agreement, a net-zero carbon emission by 2050 is still insufficient. The recent IPCC special report calls for a massive scheme to extract CO2 directly from the atmosphere, in addition to decarbonization, to reach negative net emissions at the mid-century mark. Another ambitious proposal is solar-radiation-based geoengineering schemes, including injecting sulfur gas into the stratosphere. Despite being in public debate for years, these two leading geoengineering schemes have not been directly compared under a consistent analytical framework using global climate models.</p><p>Here we present the first explicit analysis of the hydroclimate impacts of these two geoengineering approaches using two recently available large-ensemble model experiments conducted by a family of state-of-the-art Earth system models. Our analysis focuses on the projected aridity conditions over the Americas in the 21st century in detailed terms of the potential mitigation benefits, the temporal evolution, the spatial distribution (within North and South America), the relative efficiency, and the physical mechanisms. We show that sulfur injection, in contrast to previous notions of leading to excessive terrestrial drying (in terms of precipitation reduction) while offsetting the global mean greenhouse gas (GHG) warming, will instead mitigate the projected drying tendency under RCP8.5. The surface energy balance change induced by sulfur injection, in addition to the well-known response in temperature and precipitation, plays a crucial role in determining the overall terrestrial hydroclimate response. However, when normalized by the same amount of avoided global warming in these simulations, sulfur injection is less effective in curbing the worsening trend of regional land aridity in the Americas under RCP8.5 when compared with carbon capture. Temporally, the climate benefit of sulfur injection will emerge more quickly, even when both schemes are hypothetically started in the same year of 2020. Spatially, both schemes are effective in curbing the drying trend over North America. However, for South America, the sulfur injection scheme is particularly more effective for the sub-Amazon region (southern Brazil), while the carbon capture scheme is more effective for the Amazon region. We conclude that despite the apparent limitations (such as an inability to address ocean acidification) and potential side effects (such as changes to the ozone layer), innovative means of sulfur injection should continue to be explored as a potential low-cost option in the climate solution toolbox, complementing other mitigation approaches such as emission cuts and carbon capture (Cao et al., 2017). Our results demonstrate the urgent need for multi-model comparison studies and detailed regional assessments in other parts of the world.</p>

Hydrological simulations in the Rhine basin

2005 ◽  
Vol 51 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
B. van den Hurk ◽  
J. Beersma ◽  
G. Lenderink
Keyword(s):  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Rhine River ◽  
Rhine Basin ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Selection Of

Simulations with regional climate models (RCMs), carried out for the Rhine basin, have been analyzed in the context of implications of the possible future discharge of the Rhine river. In a first analysis, the runoff generated by the RCMs is compared to observations, in order to detect the way the RCMs treat anomalies in precipitation in their land surface component. A second analysis is devoted to the frequency distribution of area averaged precipitation, and the impact of selection of various driving global climate models.

scholarly journals Peatlands and the carbon cycle: from local processes to global implications – a synthesis

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 1475-1491 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Limpens ◽  
F. Berendse ◽  
C. Blodau ◽  
J. G. Canadell ◽  
C. Freeman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Trace Gas ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Ecosystem Structure ◽  
Positive Feedbacks

Abstract. Peatlands cover only 3% of the Earth's land surface but boreal and subarctic peatlands store about 15–30% of the world's soil carbon (C) as peat. Despite their potential for large positive feedbacks to the climate system through sequestration and emission of greenhouse gases, peatlands are not explicitly included in global climate models and therefore in predictions of future climate change. In April 2007 a symposium was held in Wageningen, the Netherlands, to advance our understanding of peatland C cycling. This paper synthesizes the main findings of the symposium, focusing on (i) small-scale processes, (ii) C fluxes at the landscape scale, and (iii) peatlands in the context of climate change. The main drivers controlling C fluxes are largely scale dependent and most are related to some aspects of hydrology. Despite high spatial and annual variability in Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE), the differences in cumulative annual NEE are more a function of broad scale geographic location and physical setting than internal factors, suggesting the existence of strong feedbacks. In contrast, trace gas emissions seem mainly controlled by local factors. Key uncertainties remain concerning the existence of perturbation thresholds, the relative strengths of the CO2 and CH4 feedback, the links among peatland surface climate, hydrology, ecosystem structure and function, and trace gas biogeochemistry as well as the similarity of process rates across peatland types and climatic zones. Progress on these research areas can only be realized by stronger co-operation between disciplines that address different spatial and temporal scales.

scholarly journals Considerations in the Selection of Global Climate Models for Regional Climate Projections: The Arctic as a Case Study*

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1583-1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Overland ◽  
Muyin Wang ◽  
Nicholas A. Bond ◽  
John E. Walsh ◽  
Vladimir M. Kattsov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Regional Scale ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Scale Evaluation ◽  
Continental Scale ◽  
Societal Relevance

Abstract Climate projections at regional scales are in increased demand from management agencies and other stakeholders. While global atmosphere–ocean climate models provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate at continental scales and above, individual model performance varies for different regions, variables, and evaluation metrics—a less than satisfying situation. Using the high-latitude Northern Hemisphere as a focus, the authors assess strategies for providing regional projections based on global climate models. Starting with a set of model results obtained from an “ensemble of opportunity,” the core of this procedure is to retain a subset of models through comparisons of model simulations with observations at both continental and regional scales. The exercise is more one of model culling than model selection. The continental-scale evaluation is a check on the large-scale climate physics of the models, and the regional-scale evaluation emphasizes variables of ecological or societal relevance. An additional consideration is given to the comprehensiveness of processes included in the models. In many but not all applications, different results are obtained from a reduced set of models compared to relying on the simple mean of all available models. For example, in the Arctic the top-performing models tend to be more sensitive to greenhouse forcing than the poorer-performing models. Because of the mostly unexplained inconsistencies in model performance under different selection criteria, simple and transparent evaluation methods are favored. The use of a single model is not recommended. For some applications, no model may be able to provide a suitable regional projection. The use of model evaluation strategies, as opposed to relying on simple averages of ensembles of opportunity, should be part of future synthesis activities such as the upcoming Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

scholarly journals Model improvement and future projection of permafrost processes in a global land surface model

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tokuta Yokohata ◽  
Kazuyuki Saito ◽  
Kumiko Takata ◽  
Tomoko Nitta ◽  
Yusuke Satoh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Land Surface ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Land Surface Model ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Soil Freezing ◽  
Surface Model ◽  
Southern Limit ◽  
Future Projections ◽  
Global Land

AbstractTo date, the treatment of permafrost in global climate models has been simplified due to the prevailing uncertainties in the processes involving frozen ground. In this study, we improved the modeling of permafrost processes in a state-of-the-art climate model by taking into account some of the relevant physical properties of soil such as changes in the thermophysical properties due to soil freezing. As a result, the improved version of the global land surface model was able to reproduce a more realistic permafrost distribution at the southern limit of the permafrost area by increasing the freezing of soil moisture in winter. The improved modeling of permafrost processes also had a significant effect on future projections. Using the conventional formulation, the predicted cumulative reduction of the permafrost area by year 2100 was approximately 60% (40–80% range of uncertainty from a multi-model ensemble) in the RCP8.5 scenario, while with the improved formulation, the reduction was approximately 35% (20–50%). Our results indicate that the improved treatment of permafrost processes in global climate models is important to ensuring more reliable future projections.

scholarly journals Estimating the potential impact of climate change on sunflower yield in the Konya province of Turkey

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Hudaverdi Gurkan ◽  
Vakhtang Shelia ◽  
Nilgun Bayraktar ◽  
Y. Ersoy Yildirim ◽  
Nebi Yesilekin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Change Scenarios ◽  
Adaptation To Climate Change ◽  
Impact Of Climate Change ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The impact of climate change on agricultural productivity is difficult to assess. However, determining the possible effects of climate change is an absolute necessity for planning by decision-makers. The aim of the study was the evaluation of the CSM-CROPGRO-Sunflower model of DSSAT4.7 and the assessment of impact of climate change on sunflower yield under future climate projections. For this purpose, a 2-year sunflower field experiment was conducted under semi-arid conditions in the Konya province of Turkey. Rainfed and irrigated treatments were used for model analysis. For the assessment of impact of climate change, three global climate models and two representative concentration pathways, i.e. 4.5 and 8.5 were selected. The evaluation of the model showed that the model was able to simulate yield reasonably well, with normalized root mean square error of 1.3% for the irrigated treatment and 17.7% for the rainfed treatment, a d-index of 0.98 and a modelling efficiency of 0.93 for the overall model performance. For the climate change scenarios, the model predicted that yield will decrease in a range of 2.9–39.6% under rainfed conditions and will increase in a range of 7.4–38.5% under irrigated conditions. Results suggest that temperature increases due to climate change will cause a shortening of plant growth cycles. Projection results also confirmed that increasing temperatures due to climate change will cause an increase in sunflower water requirements in the future. Thus, the results reveal the necessity to apply adequate water management strategies for adaptation to climate change for sunflower production.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document