Climate Warming Benefits Plant Growth but Not Net Carbon Uptake: Simulation of Alaska Tundra and Needle Leaf Forest Using LPJ-GUESS
Author:
Liu Cui1, Li Chuanhua12ORCID, Li Liangliang1
Affiliation:
1. College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, China 2. Cryosphere Research Station on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, State Key Laboratory of Cryospheric Science, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
Abstract
Climate warming significantly impacts Arctic vegetation, yet its future role as a carbon sink or source is unclear. We analyzed vegetation growth and carbon exchange in Alaska’s tundra and needle leaf forests using the LPJ-GUESS model. The accuracy of the model is verified using linear regression of the measured data from 2004 to 2008, and the results are significantly correlated, which proves that the model is reliable, with R2 values of 0.51 and 0.46, respectively, for net ecosystem carbon exchange (NEE) at the tundra and needle leaf forest sites, and RMSE values of 22.85 and 23.40 gC/m2/yr for the tundra and needle forest sites, respectively. For the gross primary production (GPP), the R2 values were 0.66 and 0.85, and the RMSE values were 39.25 and 43.75 gC/m2/yr at the tundra and needle leaf forest sites, respectively. We simulated vegetation carbon exchanges for 1992–2014 and projected future exchanges for 2020–2100 using climate variables. Under SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, GPP values increase with higher emissions, while the NEE showed great fluctuations without significant differences among the three pathways. Our results showed although climate warming can benefit vegetation growth, net carbon assimilation by vegetation may not increase accordingly in the future.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Reference56 articles.
1. Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S.L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., and Gomis, M.I. (2021). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press. 2. Hansen, J., Ruedy, R., Sato, M., and Lo, K. (2010). Global Surface Temperature Change. Rev. Geophys., 48. 3. Park, H., Tanoue, M., Sugimoto, A., Ichiyanagi, K., Iwahana, G., and Hiyama, T. (2021). Quantitative separation of precipitation and permafrost waters used for evapotranspiration in a boreal forest: A numerical study using tracer model. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci., 126. 4. Parmesan, C., Morecroft, M.D., and Trisurat, Y. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, GIEC. 5. Modeling climate change impact on groundwater and adaptation strategies for its sustainable management in the Karnal district of Northwest India;Kumar;Clim. Change,2022
|
|