Evaluation of soil carbon simulation in CMIP6 Earth system models
-
Published:2022-10-05
Issue:19
Volume:19
Page:4671-4704
-
ISSN:1726-4189
-
Container-title:Biogeosciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Biogeosciences
Author:
Varney Rebecca M.ORCID, Chadburn Sarah E.ORCID, Burke Eleanor J.ORCID, Cox Peter M.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract. The response of soil carbon represents one of the key uncertainties in future climate change. The ability of Earth system models (ESMs) to simulate present-day soil carbon is therefore vital for reliably estimating global carbon budgets required for Paris Agreement targets. In this study CMIP6 ESMs are evaluated against empirical datasets to assess the ability of each model to simulate soil carbon and related controls: net primary productivity (NPP) and soil carbon turnover time (τs). Comparing CMIP6 with the previous generation of models (CMIP5), a lack of consistency in modelled soil carbon remains, particularly the underestimation of northern high-latitude soil carbon stocks. There is a robust improvement in the simulation of NPP in CMIP6 compared with CMIP5; however, an unrealistically high correlation with soil carbon stocks remains, suggesting the potential for an overestimation of the long-term terrestrial carbon sink. Additionally, the same improvements are not seen in the simulation of τs. These results suggest that much of the uncertainty associated with modelled soil carbon stocks can be attributed to the simulation of below-ground processes, and greater emphasis is required on improving the representation of below-ground soil processes in future developments of models. These improvements would help to reduce the uncertainty in projected carbon release from global soils under climate change and to increase confidence in the carbon budgets associated with different levels of global warming.
Funder
H2020 European Research Council Natural Environment Research Council Met Office
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Earth-Surface Processes,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference134 articles.
1. Amthor, J. S.: Terrestrial higher-plant response to increasing atmospheric
[CO2] in relation to the global carbon cycle, Global Change Biol., 1,
243–274, 1995. a 2. Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Kidston, M., Bopp, L., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Jones,
C., Jung, M., Myneni, R., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluating the land and ocean
components of the global carbon cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models,
J. Climate, 26, 6801–6843, 2013. a, b, c, d 3. Arora, V. and Boer, G.: Uncertainties in the 20th century carbon budget
associated with land use change, Global Change Biol., 16, 3327–3348, 2010. a 4. Arora, V., Boer, G., Christian, J., Curry, C., Denman, K., Zahariev, K., Flato,
G., Scinocca, J., Merryfield, W., and Lee, W.: The effect of terrestrial
photosynthesis down regulation on the twentieth-century carbon budget
simulated with the CCCma Earth System Model, J. Climate, 22,
6066–6088, 2009. a 5. Arora, V. K., Boer, G. J., Friedlingstein, P., Eby, M., Jones, C. D.,
Christian, J. R., Bonan, G., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Hajima, T., Ilyina, T., Lindsay, K., Tjiputra, J. F., and Wu, T.:
Carbon–concentration and carbon–climate feedbacks in CMIP5 Earth system
models, J. Climate, 26, 5289–5314, 2013. a, b, c
Cited by
31 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|