Using ecosystem experiments to improve vegetation models (original) (raw)

References

1. Gregory, J. M., Jones, C. D., Cadule, P. & Friedlingstein, P. Quantifying carbon cycle feedbacks. J. Clim. 22, 5232–5250 (2009).
   Article Google Scholar
2. Arora, V. K. et al. Carbon-concentration and carbon-climate feedbacks in CMIP5 Earth system models. J. Clim. 26, 5289–5313 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
3. Friedlingstein, P. et al. Uncertainties in CMIP5 climate projections due to carbon cycle feedbacks. J. Clim. 27, 511–526 (2014).
   Article Google Scholar
4. Thornton, P. E., Lamarque, J. F., Rosenbloom, N. A. & Mahowald, N. M. Influence of carbon–nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO2 fertilization and climate variability. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 21, 1–15 (2007).
   Article Google Scholar
5. Sokolov, A. P. et al. Consequences of considering carbon–nitrogen interactions on the feedbacks between climate and the terrestrial carbon cycle. J. Clim. 21, 3776–3796 (2008).
   Article Google Scholar
6. Zaehle, S. & Dalmonech, D. Carbon–nitrogen interactions on land at global scales: Current understanding in modelling climate biosphere feedbacks. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 3, 311–320 (2011).
   Article Google Scholar
7. Zhang, Q., Wang, Y. P., Matear, R. J., Pitman, A. J. & Dai, Y. J. Nitrogen and phosphorus limitations significantly reduce future allowable CO2 emissions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 632–637 (2014).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
8. Friend, A. D. et al. Carbon residence time dominates uncertainty in terrestrial vegetation responses to future climate and atmospheric CO2 . Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3280–3285 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
9. Ainsworth, E. A. & Long, S. P. What have we learned from 15 years of Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2 . New Phytol. 165, 351–372 (2005).
   Article Google Scholar
10. Norby, R. J. & Zak, D. R. Ecological lessons from Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiments. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 42, 181–203 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
11. Hickler, T. et al. CO2 fertilization in temperate FACE experiments not representative of boreal and tropical forests. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 1531–1542 (2008).
    Article Google Scholar
12. Zaehle, S. et al. Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model: 2. Role of the nitrogen cycle in the historical terrestrial carbon balance. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 24, GB1006 (2010).
    Google Scholar
13. Piao, S. L. et al. Evaluation of terrestrial carbon cycle models for their response to climate variability and to CO2 trends. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2117–2132 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
14. Walker, A. P. et al. Comprehensive ecosystem model-data synthesis using multiple data sets at two temperate forest Free-Air CO2 Enrichment experiments: Model performance at ambient CO2 concentration. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 119, 937–964 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
15. Parton, W. J., Anderson, D. W., Cole, C. V. & Stewart, J. W. B. in Nutrient Cycling in Agricultural Ecosystems (eds Lowrance, R. R. et al.) 533–550 (Special Publication No. 23, Univ. Georgia, 1983).
    Google Scholar
16. Medvigy, D. et al. Mechanistic scaling of ecosystem function and dynamics in space and time: Ecosystem demography model version 2. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 114, G01002 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
17. Comins, H. N. & McMurtrie, R. E. Long-term biotic response of nutrient-limited forest ecosystems to CO2-enrichment: Equilibrium behavior of integrated plant soil models. Ecol. Appl., 3, 666–681 (1993).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
18. Weng, E. S. & Luo, Y. Q. Soil hydrological properties regulate grassland ecosystem responses to multifactor global change: A modeling analysis. J. Geophys. Res. 113, G03003 (2008).
    Article Google Scholar
19. Wang, Y. P. et al. Diagnosing errors in a land surface model (CABLE) in the time and frequency domains. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 116, 2005–2012 (2011).
    Google Scholar
20. Oleson, K. W. et al. Technical Description of Version 4.0 of the Community Land Model (CLM) (NCAR, 2010).
    Google Scholar
21. Wang, S., Trishchenko, A. P. & Sun, X. Simulation of canopy radiation transfer and surface albedo in the EALCO model. Clim. Dyn. 29, 615–632 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
22. Jain, A. K. et al. Nitrogen attenuation of terrestrial carbon cycle response to global environmental factors. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23, GB4028 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
23. Zaehle, S. & Friend, A. Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model: 1. Model description, site-scale evaluation, and sensitivity to parameter estimates. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 24, GB1005 (2010).
    Google Scholar
24. Smith, B. et al. Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model. Biogeosciences 11, 2027–2054 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
25. Woodward, F. I., Smith, T. M. & Emanuel, W. R. A global land primary productivity and phytogeography model. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 9, 471–490 (1995).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
26. McCarthy, H. R. et al. Re-assessment of plant carbon dynamics at the Duke Free-Air CO2 Enrichment site: Interactions of atmospheric [CO2] with nitrogen and water availability over stand development. New Phytol. 185, 514–528 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
27. Norby, R. J., Warren, J. M., Iverson, C. M., Medlyn, B. M. & McMurtrie, R. E. CO2 enhancement of forest productivity constrained by limited nitrogen availability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 19368–19373 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
28. Zaehle, S. et al. Evaluation of 11 terrestrial carbon–nitrogen cycle models against observations from two temperate Free-Air CO2 Enrichment studies. New Phytol. 202, 803–822 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
29. De Kauwe, M. G. et al. Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: A model–data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 1759–1779 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
30. De Kauwe, M. G. et al. Where does the carbon go? A model–data intercomparison of vegetation carbon allocation and turnover processes at two temperate forest Free-Air CO2 Enrichment sites. New Phytol. 203, 883–899 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
31. Oren, R. et al. Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere. Nature 411, 469–472 (2001).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
32. McCarthy, H. R. et al. Temporal dynamics and spatial variability in the enhancement of canopy leaf area under elevated atmospheric CO2 . Glob. Change Biol. 13, 2479–2497 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
33. Domec, J-C. et al. Acclimation of leaf hydraulic conductance and stomatal conductance of Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) to long-term growth in elevated CO2 (Free-Air CO2 Enrichment) and N-fertilization. Plant Cell Environ. 32, 1500–1512 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
34. Norby, R. J., Ledford, J., Reilly, C. D., Miller, N. E. & O'Neill, E. G. Fine-root production dominates response of a deciduous forest to atmospheric CO2 enrichment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 9689–9693 (2004).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
35. Warren, J. M., Norby, R. J. & Wullschleger, S. D. Elevated CO2 enhances leaf senescence during extreme drought in a temperate forest. Tree Physiol. 31, 117–130 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
36. Norby, R. J. et al. Phase 1 Free Air CO2 Enrichment Model-Data Synthesis (FACE-MDS): Meteorological Data (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, 2015); http://cdiac.ornl.gov/face/metdata1.html
    Google Scholar
37. Walker, A. P. et al. Phase 1 Free Air CO2 Enrichment Model-Data Synthesis (FACE-MDS): Model Output Data (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, 2015); http://cdiac.ornl.gov/face/model1.html
    Google Scholar
38. Luo, Y. Q. et al. A framework for benchmarking land models. Biogeosciences 9, 3857–74 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
39. Medlyn, B. E., Robinson, A. P., Clement, R. & McMurtrie, R. E. On the validation of models of forest CO2 exchange using eddy covariance data: some perils and pitfalls. Tree Physiol. 25, 839–857 (2005).
    Article Google Scholar
40. Luo, Y. & Weng, E. Dynamic disequilibrium of the terrestrial carbon cycle under global change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 96–104 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
41. Medlyn, B. et al. Stomatal conductance of forest species after long-term exposure to elevated CO2 concentration: A synthesis. New Phytol. 149, 247–264 (2001).
    Article Google Scholar
42. Ainsworth, E. & Rogers, A. The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: Mechanisms and environmental interactions. Plant Cell Environ. 30, 258–270 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
43. Barton, C. V. M. et al. Effects of elevated atmospheric [CO2] on instantaneous transpiration efficiency at leaf and canopy scales in Eucalyptus saligna. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 585–595 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
44. Iversen, C. M., Ledford, J. & Norby, R. J. CO2 enrichment increases carbon and nitrogen input from fine roots in a deciduous forest. New Phytol. 179, 837–847 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
45. Franklin, O. et al. Modeling carbon allocation in trees: A search for principles. Tree Physiol. 32, 648–666 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
46. Maire, V. et al. The coordination of leaf photosynthesis links C and N fluxes in C3 plant species. PLoS ONE 7, e38345 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
47. Phillips, R. P., Finzi, A. F. & Bernhardt, E. S. Enhanced root exudation induces microbial feedbacks to N cycling in a pine forest under long-term CO2 fumigation. Ecol. Lett. 14, 187–194 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
48. Drake, J. E. et al. Stoichiometry constrains microbial response to root exudation- insights from a model and a field experiment in a temperate forest. Biogeosciences 10, 821–838 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
49. Iversen, C. M., Hooker, T. D., Classen, A. T & Norby, R. J. Net mineralization of N at deeper soil depths as a potential mechanism for sustained forest production under elevated [CO2]. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 1130–1139 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
50. Grant, R. F. Modelling changes in nitrogen cycling to sustain increases in forest productivity under elevated atmospheric CO2 and contrasting site conditions. Biogeosciences 10, 7703–7721 (2013).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
51. Cheng, W. et al. Synthesis and modeling perspectives of rhizosphere priming. New Phytol. 201, 31–44 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
52. Farquhar, G. D. & Von Caemmerer, S. in Physiological Plant Ecology II (eds Lange, O. L. et al.) 549–587 (Springer, 1982).
    Book Google Scholar
53. Xu, C. et al. Toward a mechanistic modeling of nitrogen limitation on vegetation dynamics. PLoS ONE 7, e37914 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
54. Friend, A. Modelling canopy CO2 fluxes: Are 'big-leaf' simplifications justified? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 10, 603–619 (2001).
    Article Google Scholar
55. Jarvis, P. & McNaughton, K. Stomatal control of transpiration: Scaling up from leaf to region. Adv. Ecol. Res. 15, 1–49 (1986).
    Article Google Scholar
56. Raupach, M. & Finnigan, J. 'Single-layer models of evaporation from plant canopies are incorrect but useful, whereas multilayer models are correct but useless': Discuss. Funct. Plant Biol. 15, 705–716 (1988).
    Article Google Scholar
57. Wullschleger, S. D., Gunderson, C., Hanson, P., Wilson, K. & Norby, R. Sensitivity of stomatal and canopy conductance to elevated CO2 concentration–interacting variables and perspectives of scale. New Phytol. 153, 485–496 (2002).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
58. Egea, G., Verhoef, A. & Vidale, P. L. Towards an improved and more flexible representation of water stress in coupled photosynthesis–stomatal conductance models. Agr. Forest Meteorol. 151, 1370–1384 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
59. Zhou, S., Duursma, R. A., Medlyn, B. E., Kelly, J. W. & Prentice, I. C. How should we model plant responses to drought? An analysis of stomatal and non-stomatal responses to water stress. Agr. Forest Meteorol. 182–183, 204–214 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
60. Dietze, M. C. & Moorcroft, P. R. Tree mortality in the eastern and central United States: Patterns and drivers. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 3312–3326 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
61. Carvalhais, N. et al. Global covariation of carbon turnover times with climate in terrestrial ecosystems. Nature 514, 213–217 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
62. Best, M. J. et al. The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes. Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss. 4, 595–640 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
63. Sitch, S. et al. Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ Dynamic Vegetation Model. Glob. Change Biol. 9, 161–185 (2003).
    Article Google Scholar
64. Ball, J. T., Woodrow, I. E. & Berry, J. A. in Progress in Photosynthesis Research (ed. Biggins, I.) 221–224 (Martinus Nijhoff, 1987).
    Book Google Scholar
65. Xia, J. Y., Luo, Y. Q., Wang, Y. P. & Hararuk, O. Traceable components of terrestrial carbon storage capacity in biogeochemical models. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2104–2116 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar

Download references