Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Sources of variation in simulated ecosystem carbon storage capacity from the 5th Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) Cover

Sources of variation in simulated ecosystem carbon storage capacity from the 5th Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5)

Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology
Volume 66 (2014): Issue 1
By: ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Jan 2014
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Table 1. Full summary of land biogeochemistry models used by ESMs

Model nameLand modelSpatial resolutionDynamic vegetationFireN cycleLUC
CanESM 2.2CTEM/CLASS2.85°×2.77°NYNYCCSM4.2CLM 4.01.25°×0.94°NYYYIPSL-CM5A-LRORCHIDEE3.75°×1.89°NYNYIPSL-CM5B-LRMIROC-ESMMATSIRO/SEIB-DGVM2.81°×2.79°YNNYMIROC-ESM-CHEMNorESM1-MCLM 4.02.5°×1.89°NYYYNorESM1-ME
Fig. 1

The spatial pattern of ecosystem C storage capacity (NPP*MRTcor, kg C m−2) for the five models (modelled time: 1850–1860). Coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated for each grid cell using five models’ results.

Fig. 2

The relationship between mean residence time (MRT, years) and net primary production (NPP, kg C m−2 yr−1) and the latitude pattern of ecosystem C storage capacity (NPP*MRTcor) for five models (modelled time: 1850–1860).

Fig. 3

The relationship between ecosystem C storage and soil C across models (a, b, c, d, e) and Taylor diagram for soil C storage at grid scale (f).

Fig. 4

Spatial pattern of net primary production (NPP, kg C m−2 yr−1) estimated from MODIS and the difference between five models and MODIS (modelled time: 1995–2005).

Fig. 5

Spatial pattern of the NPP/GPP ratio estimated from MODIS and the difference between five models and MODIS (modelled time: 1995–2005).

Fig. 6

Spatial pattern of average mean residence time (MRT, years) of ecosystem for five models and the difference between five models and the average of models (modelled time: 1850–1865).

Table 2. Effects of extreme data on ecosystem mean residence time (MRT) and the publication-based global average

Model Mean_orig (years)Percent* eliminated dataMean_corrected* (years) Reference
CanESM36.4036.4CCSM23.020.814.5IPSL33.410.421.3MIROC132.630.544.6NorESM123.020.0718.0Based on soil respiration measurement32 Raich and Schlesinger (1992)Based on 13C measurement29Randerson et al. (1999)44Ciais et al. (1999)Models37–60Meyer et al. (1999)

[i] *A majority of MRTs at all grids for all models at the same spatial resolution are less than 400 yr, so we set the threshold of 1000 yr according as the hist. of data. The percentage of the eliminated data is not more than 1% (the valid data).

Fig. 7

The latitude pattern of NPP, the NPP/GPP ratio and mean residence time (MRT) for five models (each point representing the average over one latitudinal zone). The Data of MODIS was got from Zhang et al. (2009), which is the central tendency produced by average over 5° latitude.

Fig. 8

Spatial pattern of mean residence time (MRT) of ecosystem in the USA from inversed models (Zhou and Luo, 2008; Zhou et al., 2012) and the difference between five models and the estimates of inverse models.

Table 3. Comparison NPP, NPP/GPP and mean residence time (MRT) in the USA and Australia between model-based and publication-based

NPP (kg C m−2 yr−1)
Model1850–18601995–2005NPP/GPPMRT cor (year) (USA)MRT cor (year) (Australia)Reference
CanESM0.370.420.533426CCSM0.310.340.422418IPSL0.470.540.52299MIROC0.450.490.524930NorESM10.170.180.185540Inverse model46Zhou and Luo (2008)**Inverse model56.8±8.8 Zhou et al. (2012) VAST1.1 with genetic algorithm78 Barret (2002)**MODIS-based0.475 (±0.375) (2000–2005) Zhao and Running (2010)
MODIS-based0.55 (2000–2003)0.5 (2000–2003)Zhang et al. (2009)

[i] **MRT of Zhou and Luo (2008) and Barrett (2002) was estimated with NPP, so as comparison, MRT is corrected by the NPP/GPP ratio in the USA and in Australia.

Fig. 9

Spatial pattern of coefficient of variation (CV) and standard deviation (SD) of NPP and MRT for all five models (modelled time: 1850–1860).

Table 4. Q10 variance across models (function: )

Modelk (yr)Q10R2
CanESM19.41.830.61CCSM3.53.890.65IPSL13.71.430.59MIROC36.61.520.58NorESM12.45.060.63
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v66.22568 | Journal eISSN: 1600-0889
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 22568 - 22568
Submitted on: Aug 8, 2013
Accepted on: Mar 20, 2014
Published on: Jan 1, 2014
Published by: Stockholm University Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
ecosystem C storage capacity,
ecosystem residence time,
C input,
model intercomparison,
uncertainty,
CMIP5,
net primary productivity

© 2014 Yaner Yan, Yiqi Luo, Xuhui Zhou, Jianmin Chen, published by Stockholm University Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 66 (2014): Issue 1
Previous article
Next article