Assessment of a tiling energy budget approach in a land surface model, ORCHIDEE-MICT (r8205)
-
Published:2024-06-18
Issue:12
Volume:17
Page:4727-4754
-
ISSN:1991-9603
-
Container-title:Geoscientific Model Development
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Geosci. Model Dev.
Author:
Xi YiORCID, Qiu ChunjingORCID, Zhang YuanORCID, Zhu DanORCID, Peng ShushiORCID, Hugelius Gustaf, Chang JinfengORCID, Salmon ElodieORCID, Ciais PhilippeORCID
Abstract
Abstract. The surface energy budget plays a critical role in terrestrial hydrological and biogeochemical cycles. Nevertheless, its highly spatial heterogeneity across different vegetation types is still missing in the ORCHIDEE-MICT (ORganizing Carbon and Hydrology in Dynamic EcosystEms–aMeliorated Interactions between Carbon and Temperature) land surface model. In this study, we describe the representation of a tiling energy budget in ORCHIDEE-MICT and assess its short-term and long-term impacts on energy, hydrology, and carbon processes. With the specific values of surface properties for each vegetation type, the new version presents warmer surface and soil temperatures (∼ 0.5 °C, +3 %), wetter soil moisture (∼ 10 kg m−2, +2 %), and increased soil organic carbon storage (∼ 170 Pg C, +9 %) across the Northern Hemisphere. Despite reproducing the absolute values and spatial gradients of surface and soil temperatures from satellite and in situ observations, the considerable uncertainties in simulated soil organic carbon and hydrological processes prevent an obvious improvement in the temperature bias existing in the original ORCHIDEE-MICT model. However, the separation of sub-grid energy budgets in the new version improves permafrost simulation greatly by accounting for the presence of discontinuous permafrost types (∼ 3×106 km2), which will facilitate various permafrost-related studies in the future.
Funder
Horizon 2020 National Natural Science Foundation of China Schmidt Futures
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference69 articles.
1. Alkama, R. and Cescatti, A.: Biophysical climate impacts of recent changes in global forest cover, Science, 351, 600–604, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac8083, 2016. 2. Best, M. J., Beljaars, A., Polcher, J., and Viterbo, P.: A Proposed Structure for Coupling Tiled Surfaces with the Planetary Boundary Layer, J. Hydrometeorol., 5, 1271–1278, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-382.1, 2004. 3. Betts, R. A.: Offset of the potential carbon sink from boreal forestation by decreases in surface albedo, Nature, 408, 187–190, https://doi.org/10.1038/35041545, 2000. 4. Bonan, G. B.: Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests, Science, 320, 1444–1449, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121, 2008. 5. Boone, A., Samuelsson, P., Gollvik, S., Napoly, A., Jarlan, L., Brun, E., and Decharme, B.: The interactions between soil–biosphere–atmosphere land surface model with a multi-energy balance (ISBA-MEB) option in SURFEXv8 – Part 1: Model description, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 843–872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-843-2017, 2017.
|
|