Search

Climate change, rising CO2 concentration, and land use and land cover change (LULCC) are primary driving forces for terrestrial gross primary productivity (GPP), but their impacts on the temporal changes in GPP are uncertain. In this study, the effects of the three main factors on the interannual variation (IAV) and seasonal cycle amplitude (SCA) of GPP in China were investigated using 12 terrestrial biosphere models from the Multi-scale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project. The simulated ensemble mean value of China's GPP between 1981 and 2010, driven by common climate forcing, LULCC and CO2 data, was found to be 7.4±1.8 Pg C/yr. In general, climate was the dominant control factor of the annual trends, IAV and seasonality of China's GPP. The overall rising CO2 led to enhanced plant photosynthesis, thus increasing annual mean and IAV of China's total GPP, especially in northeastern and southern China, where vegetation is dense. LULCC decreased the IAV of China's total GPP by ∼7 %, whereas rising CO2 induced an increase of 8 %. Compared to climate change and elevated CO2, LULCC showed less contributions to GPP's temporal variation, and its impact acted locally, mainly in southwestern China. Furthermore, this study also examined subregional contributions to the temporal changes in China's total GPP. Southern and southeastern China showed higher contributions to China's annual GPP, whereas southwestern and central parts of China explained larger fractions of the IAV in China's GPP.

NASA's Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) integrates field and airborne data into modeling and synthesis activities for understanding Arctic and Boreal ecosystem dynamics. The ABoVE Benchmarking System (ABS) is an operational software package to evaluate terrestrial biosphere models against key indicators of Arctic and Boreal ecosystem dynamics, i.e.: carbon biogeochemistry, vegetation, permafrost, hydrology, and disturbance. The ABS utilizes satellite remote sensing data, airborne data, and field data from ABoVE as well as collaborating research networks in the region, e.g.: the Permafrost Carbon Network, the International Soil Carbon Network, the Northern Circumpolar Soil Carbon Database, AmeriFlux sites, the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2, and the Soil Moisture Active Passive mission. The ABS is designed to be interactive for researchers interested in having their models accurately represent observations of key Arctic indicators: a user submits model results to the system, the system evaluates the model results against a set of Arctic-Boreal benchmarks outlined in the ABoVE Concise Experiment Plan, and the user then receives a quantitative scoring of model strengths and deficiencies through a web interface. This interactivity allows model developers to iteratively improve their model for the Arctic-Boreal Region by evaluating results from successive model versions. We show here, for illustration, the improvement of the Lund–Potsdam–Jena-Wald Schnee und Landschaft (LPJwsl) version model through the ABoVE ABS as a new permafrost module is coupled to the existing model framework. The ABS will continue to incorporate new benchmarks that address indicators of Arctic-Boreal ecosystem dynamics as they become available.

The ability to accurately predict ecosystem drought response and recovery is necessary to produce reliable forecasts of land carbon uptake and future climate. Using a suite of models from the Multi-scale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project (MsTMIP), we assessed modeled net primary productivity (NPP) response to, and recovery from, drought events against a benchmark derived from tree ring observations between 1948 and 2008 across forested regions of the US and Europe. We find short lag times (0–6 months) between climate anomalies and modeled NPP response. Although models accurately simulate the direction of drought legacy effects (i.e. NPP decreases), projected effects are approximately four times shorter and four times weaker than observations suggest. This discrepancy between observed and simulated vegetation recovery from drought reveals a potential critical model deficiency. Since productivity is a crucial component of the land carbon balance, models that underestimate drought recovery time could overestimate predictions of future land carbon sink strength and, consequently, underestimate forecasts of atmospheric CO2.