loading page

Addressing Challenges in Simulating Inter-annual Variability of Gross Primary Production
  • +32
  • Ranit De,
  • Shanning Bao,
  • Sujan Koirala,
  • Alexander Brenning,
  • Markus Reichstein,
  • Torbern Tagesson,
  • Michael Liddell,
  • Andreas Ibrom,
  • Sebastian Wolf,
  • Ladislav Sigut,
  • Lukas Hörtnagl,
  • William Woodgate,
  • Mika Korkiakoski,
  • Lutz Merbold,
  • T. Andrew Black,
  • Marilyn E. Roland,
  • Anne Klosterhalfen,
  • Peter D. Blanken,
  • Sara Knox,
  • Simone Sabbatini,
  • Bert Gielen,
  • Leonardo Montagnani,
  • Rasmus Fensholt,
  • Georg Wohlfahrt,
  • Ankur R. Desai,
  • Eugenie Paul-Limoges,
  • Marta Galvagno,
  • Albin Hammerle,
  • Georg Jocher,
  • Borja Ruiz Reverter,
  • David Holl,
  • Jiquan Chen,
  • Luca Vitale,
  • M. Altaf Arain,
  • Nuno Carvalhais
Ranit De
Max-Planck-Institut fur Biogeochemie

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Shanning Bao
National Space Science Center
Author Profile
Sujan Koirala
Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry
Author Profile
Alexander Brenning
Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat Jena
Author Profile
Markus Reichstein
Max Planck Institute fur Biogeochemistry
Author Profile
Torbern Tagesson
Lund
Author Profile
Michael Liddell
Australian SuperSite Network and Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science, James Cook University
Author Profile
Andreas Ibrom
Technical University of Denmark
Author Profile
Sebastian Wolf
ETH Zurich
Author Profile
Ladislav Sigut
Global Change Research Institute CAS
Author Profile
Lukas Hörtnagl
ETH Zurich
Author Profile
William Woodgate
The University of Queensland
Author Profile
Mika Korkiakoski
Finnish Meterological Institute
Author Profile
Lutz Merbold
Agroscope
Author Profile
T. Andrew Black
University of British Columbia
Author Profile
Marilyn E. Roland
University of Antwerp
Author Profile
Anne Klosterhalfen
Georg-August University Goettingen
Author Profile
Peter D. Blanken
University of Colorado Boulder
Author Profile
Sara Knox
Department of Geography, McGill University
Author Profile
Simone Sabbatini
CMCC Foundation - Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change
Author Profile
Bert Gielen
University of Antwerp
Author Profile
Leonardo Montagnani
Free University of Bolzano
Author Profile
Rasmus Fensholt
Copenhagen University
Author Profile
Georg Wohlfahrt
University of Innsbruck
Author Profile
Ankur R. Desai
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Author Profile
Eugenie Paul-Limoges
University of Zurich
Author Profile
Marta Galvagno
Environmental Protection Agency of Aosta Valley
Author Profile
Albin Hammerle
University of Innsbruck
Author Profile
Georg Jocher
Thünen Institute of Climate-Smart Agriculture
Author Profile
Borja Ruiz Reverter
Universidade Federal da Paraíba - Campus II
Author Profile
David Holl
Institute of Soil Science, Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN), Universit ̈at Hamburg
Author Profile
Jiquan Chen
Michigan State University
Author Profile
Luca Vitale
CNR Institute for Mediterranean Agricultural and Forest Systems
Author Profile
M. Altaf Arain
McMaster University
Author Profile
Nuno Carvalhais
Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile

Abstract

A long-standing challenge in studying the global carbon cycle has been understanding the factors controlling inter–annual variation (IAV) of carbon fluxes related to vegetation photosynthesis and respiration, and improving their representations in existing biogeochemical models. Here, we compared an optimality-based mechanistic model and a semi-empirical light use efficiency model to understand how current models can be improved to simulate IAV of gross primary production (GPP). Both models simulated hourly GPP and were parameterized for (1) each site–year, (2) each site with an additional constraint on IAV (CostIAV), (3) each site, (4) each plant–functional type, and (5) globally. This was followed by forward runs using calibrated parameters, and model evaluations at different temporal scales across 198 eddy covariance sites. Both models performed better on hourly scale than annual scale for most sites. Specifically, the mechanistic model substantially improved when drought stress was explicitly included. Most of the variability in model performances was due to model types and parameterization strategies. The semi-empirical model produced statistically better hourly simulations than the mechanistic model, and site–year parameterization yielded better annual performance for both models. Annual model performance did not improve even when parameterized using CostIAV. Furthermore, both models underestimated the peaks of diurnal GPP in each site–year, suggesting that improving predictions of peaks could produce a comparatively better annual model performance. GPP of forests were better simulated than grassland or savanna sites by both models. Our findings reveal current model deficiencies in representing IAV of carbon fluxes and guide improvements in further model development.
13 Sep 2024Submitted to ESS Open Archive
17 Sep 2024Published in ESS Open Archive