Premium
Evaluation of terrestrial carbon cycle models with atmospheric CO 2 measurements: Results from transient simulations considering increasing CO 2 , climate, and land‐use effects
Author(s) -
Dargaville R. J.,
Heimann M.,
McGuire A. D.,
Prentice I. C.,
Kicklighter D. W.,
Joos F.,
Clein J. S.,
Esser G.,
Foley J.,
Kaplan J.,
Meier R. A.,
Melillo J. M.,
Moore B.,
Ramankutty N.,
Reichenau T.,
Schloss A.,
Sitch S.,
Tian H.,
Williams L. J.,
Wittenberg U.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
global biogeochemical cycles
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.512
H-Index - 187
eISSN - 1944-9224
pISSN - 0886-6236
DOI - 10.1029/2001gb001426
Subject(s) - environmental science , biosphere , atmosphere (unit) , carbon cycle , biosphere model , atmospheric sciences , atmospheric model , climate model , carbon dioxide in earth's atmosphere , climatology , carbon dioxide , terrestrial ecosystem , climate change , ecosystem , meteorology , chemistry , geology , ecology , organic chemistry , biology , physics , oceanography
An atmospheric transport model and observations of atmospheric CO 2 are used to evaluate the performance of four Terrestrial Carbon Models (TCMs) in simulating the seasonal dynamics and interannual variability of atmospheric CO 2 between 1980 and 1991. The TCMs were forced with time varying atmospheric CO 2 concentrations, climate, and land use to simulate the net exchange of carbon between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere. The monthly surface CO 2 fluxes from the TCMs were used to drive the Model of Atmospheric Transport and Chemistry and the simulated seasonal cycles and concentration anomalies are compared with observations from several stations in the CMDL network. The TCMs underestimate the amplitude of the seasonal cycle and tend to simulate too early an uptake of CO 2 during the spring by approximately one to two months. The model fluxes show an increase in amplitude as a result of land‐use change, but that pattern is not so evident in the simulated atmospheric amplitudes, and the different models suggest different causes for the amplitude increase (i.e., CO 2 fertilization, climate variability or land use change). The comparison of the modeled concentration anomalies with the observed anomalies indicates that either the TCMs underestimate interannual variability in the exchange of CO 2 between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere, or that either the variability in the ocean fluxes or the atmospheric transport may be key factors in the atmospheric interannual variability.