Improving biome and climate modelling for a set of past climate conditions: evaluating bias correction using the CDF-t approach

Anhelina Zapolska, M. Vrac, A. Quiquet, T. Extier, Frank Arthur, H. Renssen, D. Roche
{"title":"Improving biome and climate modelling for a set of past climate conditions: evaluating bias correction using the CDF-t approach","authors":"Anhelina Zapolska, M. Vrac, A. Quiquet, T. Extier, Frank Arthur, H. Renssen, D. Roche","doi":"10.1088/2752-5295/accbe2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate model simulations are inherently biased. It is a notably difficult problem when dealing with climate impact assessments and model-data integration. This is especially true when looking at derived quantities such as biomes, where not only climate but also vegetation dynamics biases come into play. To overcome such difficulties, we evaluate the performance of an existing methodology to correct climate model outputs, applied here for the first time to long past climate conditions. The proposed methodology relies on the ‘Cumulative Distribution Function-transform’ (CDF-t) technique, which allows to account for climate change within the bias-correction procedure. The results are evaluated in two independent ways: (i) using forward modelling, so that model results are directly comparable to reconstructed vegetation distribution; (ii) using climatic reconstructions based on an inverse modelling approach. The modelling is performed using the intermediate complexity model iLOVECLIM in the standard global and interactively downscaled over the Europe version. The combined effects of dynamical downscaling and bias correction resulted in significantly stronger agreement between the simulated results and pollen-based biome reconstructions (BIOME6000) for the pre-industrial (0.18 versus 0.44) and mid-Holocene (MH) (0.31 versus 0.40). Higher correlation is also observed between statistically modelled global gridded potential natural distribution and modelled biomes (0.36 versus 0.41). Similarly, we find higher correlation between the reconstructed and the modelled temperatures for the MH (0.02 versus 0.21). No significant difference is found for the Last Glacial Maximum when using temperature reconstructions, due to the low number of data points available. Our findings show that the application of the CDF-t method on simulated climate variables enables us to simulate palaeoclimate and vegetation distribution in better agreement with independent reconstructions.","PeriodicalId":432508,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Research: Climate","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Research: Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/2752-5295/accbe2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Climate model simulations are inherently biased. It is a notably difficult problem when dealing with climate impact assessments and model-data integration. This is especially true when looking at derived quantities such as biomes, where not only climate but also vegetation dynamics biases come into play. To overcome such difficulties, we evaluate the performance of an existing methodology to correct climate model outputs, applied here for the first time to long past climate conditions. The proposed methodology relies on the ‘Cumulative Distribution Function-transform’ (CDF-t) technique, which allows to account for climate change within the bias-correction procedure. The results are evaluated in two independent ways: (i) using forward modelling, so that model results are directly comparable to reconstructed vegetation distribution; (ii) using climatic reconstructions based on an inverse modelling approach. The modelling is performed using the intermediate complexity model iLOVECLIM in the standard global and interactively downscaled over the Europe version. The combined effects of dynamical downscaling and bias correction resulted in significantly stronger agreement between the simulated results and pollen-based biome reconstructions (BIOME6000) for the pre-industrial (0.18 versus 0.44) and mid-Holocene (MH) (0.31 versus 0.40). Higher correlation is also observed between statistically modelled global gridded potential natural distribution and modelled biomes (0.36 versus 0.41). Similarly, we find higher correlation between the reconstructed and the modelled temperatures for the MH (0.02 versus 0.21). No significant difference is found for the Last Glacial Maximum when using temperature reconstructions, due to the low number of data points available. Our findings show that the application of the CDF-t method on simulated climate variables enables us to simulate palaeoclimate and vegetation distribution in better agreement with independent reconstructions.
改进一组过去气候条件的生物群落和气候模型:利用CDF-t方法评估偏差校正
气候模式模拟具有固有的偏见。在处理气候影响评估和模式数据整合时,这是一个非常困难的问题。在观察诸如生物群落之类的衍生数量时尤其如此,在这些数量中,不仅气候偏差,植被动态偏差也会起作用。为了克服这些困难,我们评估了一种修正气候模式输出的现有方法的性能,该方法首次应用于长期过去的气候条件。所提出的方法依赖于“累积分布函数变换”(CDF-t)技术,该技术允许在偏差校正过程中考虑气候变化。结果以两种独立的方式进行评估:(i)使用正演模拟,使模型结果与重建的植被分布直接比较;(ii)利用基于逆模拟方法的气候重建。建模是使用标准全球和交互式缩小欧洲版本的中间复杂性模型iLOVECLIM进行的。在动态降尺度和偏置校正的共同作用下,模拟结果与基于花粉的生物群系重建(BIOME6000)在工业化前(0.18 vs 0.44)和全新世中期(MH) (0.31 vs 0.40)的一致性显著增强。在统计模拟的全球网格化潜在自然分布与模拟的生物群系之间也观察到较高的相关性(0.36 vs 0.41)。同样,我们发现重建的和模拟的MH温度之间有更高的相关性(0.02对0.21)。由于可用的数据点较少,末次盛冰期的温度重建没有发现显著差异。研究结果表明,CDF-t方法在模拟气候变量上的应用使我们能够更好地模拟古气候和植被分布,并与独立重建结果相吻合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信