IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v232y2012icp144-157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: Terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison

Author

Listed:
  • Huntzinger, D.N.
  • Post, W.M.
  • Wei, Y.
  • Michalak, A.M.
  • West, T.O.
  • Jacobson, A.R.
  • Baker, I.T.
  • Chen, J.M.
  • Davis, K.J.
  • Hayes, D.J.
  • Hoffman, F.M.
  • Jain, A.K.
  • Liu, S.
  • McGuire, A.D.
  • Neilson, R.P.
  • Potter, Chris
  • Poulter, B.
  • Price, David
  • Raczka, B.M.
  • Tian, H.Q.
  • Thornton, P.
  • Tomelleri, E.
  • Viovy, N.
  • Xiao, J.
  • Yuan, W.
  • Zeng, N.
  • Zhao, M.
  • Cook, R.

Abstract

Understanding of carbon exchange between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere can be improved through direct observations and experiments, as well as through modeling activities. Terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) have become an integral tool for extrapolating local observations and understanding to much larger terrestrial regions. Although models vary in their specific goals and approaches, their central role within carbon cycle science is to provide a better understanding of the mechanisms currently controlling carbon exchange. Recently, the North American Carbon Program (NACP) organized several interim-synthesis activities to evaluate and inter-compare models and observations at local to continental scales for the years 2000–2005. Here, we compare the results from the TBMs collected as part of the regional and continental interim-synthesis (RCIS) activities. The primary objective of this work is to synthesize and compare the 19 participating TBMs to assess current understanding of the terrestrial carbon cycle in North America. Thus, the RCIS focuses on model simulations available from analyses that have been completed by ongoing NACP projects and other recently published studies. The TBM flux estimates are compared and evaluated over different spatial (1°×1° and spatially aggregated to different regions) and temporal (monthly and annually) scales. The range in model estimates of net ecosystem productivity (NEP) for North America is much narrower than estimates of productivity or respiration, with estimates of NEP varying between −0.7 and 2.2PgCyr−1, while gross primary productivity and heterotrophic respiration vary between 12.2 and 32.9PgCyr−1 and 5.6 and 13.2PgCyr−1, respectively. The range in estimates from the models appears to be driven by a combination of factors, including the representation of photosynthesis, the source and of environmental driver data and the temporal variability of those data, as well as whether nutrient limitation is considered in soil carbon decomposition. The disagreement in current estimates of carbon flux across North America, including whether North America is a net biospheric carbon source or sink, highlights the need for further analysis through the use of model runs following a common simulation protocol, in order to isolate the influences of model formulation, structure, and assumptions on flux estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Huntzinger, D.N. & Post, W.M. & Wei, Y. & Michalak, A.M. & West, T.O. & Jacobson, A.R. & Baker, I.T. & Chen, J.M. & Davis, K.J. & Hayes, D.J. & Hoffman, F.M. & Jain, A.K. & Liu, S. & McGuire, A.D. & N, 2012. "North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: Terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 144-157.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:232:y:2012:i:c:p:144-157
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380012000725
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Z. & Grant, R.F. & Arain, M.A. & Chen, B.N. & Coops, N. & Hember, R. & Kurz, W.A. & Price, D.T. & Stinson, G. & Trofymow, J.A. & Yeluripati, J. & Chen, Z., 2011. "Evaluating weather effects on interannual variation in net ecosystem productivity of a coastal temperate forest landscape: A model intercomparison," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(17), pages 3236-3249.
    2. Ben Bond-Lamberty & Scott D. Peckham & Douglas E. Ahl & Stith T. Gower, 2007. "Fire as the dominant driver of central Canadian boreal forest carbon balance," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7166), pages 89-92, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Antonarakis, A.S., 2014. "Uncertainty in initial forest structure and composition when predicting carbon dynamics in a temperate forest," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 134-141.
    2. Xianming Dou & Yongguo Yang & Jinhui Luo, 2018. "Estimating Forest Carbon Fluxes Using Machine Learning Techniques Based on Eddy Covariance Measurements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, January.
    3. Krishna, Dyvavani K. & Watham, Taibanganba & Padalia, Hitendra & Srinet, Ritika & Nandy, Subrata, 2023. "Improved gross primary productivity estimation using semi empirical (PRELES) model for moist Indian sal forest," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 475(C).
    4. Hanqin Tian & Guangsheng Chen & Chaoqun Lu & Xiaofeng Xu & Daniel Hayes & Wei Ren & Shufen Pan & Deborah Huntzinger & Steven Wofsy, 2015. "North American terrestrial CO 2 uptake largely offset by CH 4 and N 2 O emissions: toward a full accounting of the greenhouse gas budget," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 129(3), pages 413-426, April.
    5. Mekonnen, Zelalem A. & Grant, Robert F. & Schwalm, Christopher, 2016. "Sensitivity of modeled NEP to climate forcing and soil at site and regional scales: Implications for upscaling ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 241-257.
    6. Sannigrahi, Srikanta, 2017. "Modeling terrestrial ecosystem productivity of an estuarine ecosystem in the Sundarban Biosphere Region, India using seven ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 356(C), pages 73-90.
    7. Yan, Hao & Wang, Shao-qiang & Billesbach, Dave & Oechel, Walter & Bohrer, Gil & Meyers, Tilden & Martin, Timothy A. & Matamala, Roser & Phillips, Richard P. & Rahman, Faiz & Yu, Qin & Shugart, Herman , 2015. "Improved global simulations of gross primary product based on a new definition of water stress factor and a separate treatment of C3 and C4 plants," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 297(C), pages 42-59.
    8. Sohl, Terry L. & Wimberly, Michael C. & Radeloff, Volker C. & Theobald, David M. & Sleeter, Benjamin M., 2016. "Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 281-297.
    9. Li, Zhengpeng & Liu, Shuguang & Zhang, Xuesong & West, Tristram O. & Ogle, Stephen M. & Zhou, Naijun, 2016. "Evaluating land cover influences on model uncertainties—A case study of cropland carbon dynamics in the Mid-Continent Intensive Campaign region," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 176-187.
    10. Schwalm, C.R. & Huntzinger, D.N. & Cook, R.B. & Wei, Y. & Baker, I.T. & Neilson, R.P. & Poulter, B. & Caldwell, Peter & Sun, G. & Tian, H.Q. & Zeng, N., 2015. "How well do terrestrial biosphere models simulate coarse-scale runoff in the contiguous United States?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 303(C), pages 87-96.
    11. Keane, Robert E. & McKenzie, Donald & Falk, Donald A. & Smithwick, Erica A.H. & Miller, Carol & Kellogg, Lara-Karena B., 2015. "Representing climate, disturbance, and vegetation interactions in landscape models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 309, pages 33-47.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Metsaranta, J.M. & Kurz, W.A., 2012. "Inter-annual variability of ecosystem production in boreal jack pine forests (1975–2004) estimated from tree-ring data using CBM-CFS3," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 111-123.
    2. Yang Shu & Chunming Shi & Bole Yi & Pengwu Zhao & Lijuan Guan & Mei Zhou, 2022. "Influence of Climatic Factors on Lightning Fires in the Primeval Forest Region of the Northern Daxing’an Mountains, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-11, May.
    3. Nikolay Gorbach & Viktor Startsev & Anton Mazur & Evgeniy Milanovskiy & Anatoly Prokushkin & Alexey Dymov, 2022. "Simulation of Smoldering Combustion of Organic Horizons at Pine and Spruce Boreal Forests with Lab-Heating Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Shaw, C.H. & Hilger, A.B. & Metsaranta, J. & Kurz, W.A. & Russo, G. & Eichel, F. & Stinson, G. & Smyth, C. & Filiatrault, M., 2014. "Evaluation of simulated estimates of forest ecosystem carbon stocks using ground plot data from Canada's National Forest Inventory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 323-347.
    5. Jean-Sébastien Landry & Navin Ramankutty, 2015. "Carbon Cycling, Climate Regulation, and Disturbances in Canadian Forests: Scientific Principles for Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-36, January.
    6. Priscilla Addison & Thomas Oommen, 2020. "Post-fire debris flow modeling analyses: case study of the post-Thomas Fire event in California," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 100(1), pages 329-343, January.
    7. Wang, Z. & Grant, R.F. & Arain, M.A. & Bernier, P.Y. & Chen, B. & Chen, J.M. & Govind, A. & Guindon, L. & Kurz, W.A. & Peng, C. & Price, D.T. & Stinson, G. & Sun, J. & Trofymowe, J.A. & Yeluripati, J., 2013. "Incorporating weather sensitivity in inventory-based estimates of boreal forest productivity: A meta-analysis of process model results," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 260(C), pages 25-35.
    8. Michael Ter-Mikaelian & Stephen Colombo & Jiaxin Chen, 2014. "Effect of age and disturbance on decadal changes in carbon stocks in managed forest landscapes in central Canada," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(7), pages 1063-1075, October.
    9. Weber, Thomas A. & Nguyen, Viet Anh, 2018. "A linear-quadratic Gaussian approach to dynamic information acquisition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 260-281.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:232:y:2012:i:c:p:144-157. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.