Evaluation of 11 terrestrial carbon–nitrogen cycle models against observations from two temperate Free-Air CO2 Enrichment studies

IF 8.1 1区 生物学 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
New Phytologist Pub Date : 2014-01-28 DOI:10.1111/nph.12697
S?nke Zaehle, Belinda E. Medlyn, Martin G. De Kauwe, Anthony P. Walker, Michael C. Dietze, Thomas Hickler, Yiqi Luo, Ying-Ping Wang, Bassil El-Masri, Peter Thornton, Atul Jain, Shusen Wang, David Warlind, Ensheng Weng, William Parton, Colleen M. Iversen, Anne Gallet-Budynek, Heather McCarthy, Adrien Finzi, Paul J. Hanson, I. Colin Prentice, Ram Oren, Richard J. Norby
{"title":"Evaluation of 11 terrestrial carbon–nitrogen cycle models against observations from two temperate Free-Air CO2 Enrichment studies","authors":"S?nke Zaehle,&nbsp;Belinda E. Medlyn,&nbsp;Martin G. De Kauwe,&nbsp;Anthony P. Walker,&nbsp;Michael C. Dietze,&nbsp;Thomas Hickler,&nbsp;Yiqi Luo,&nbsp;Ying-Ping Wang,&nbsp;Bassil El-Masri,&nbsp;Peter Thornton,&nbsp;Atul Jain,&nbsp;Shusen Wang,&nbsp;David Warlind,&nbsp;Ensheng Weng,&nbsp;William Parton,&nbsp;Colleen M. Iversen,&nbsp;Anne Gallet-Budynek,&nbsp;Heather McCarthy,&nbsp;Adrien Finzi,&nbsp;Paul J. Hanson,&nbsp;I. Colin Prentice,&nbsp;Ram Oren,&nbsp;Richard J. Norby","doi":"10.1111/nph.12697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>\n \n </p><ul>\n \n \n <li>We analysed the responses of 11 ecosystem models to elevated atmospheric [CO<sub>2</sub>] (eCO<sub>2</sub>) at two temperate forest ecosystems (Duke and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Free-Air CO<sub>2</sub> Enrichment (FACE) experiments) to test alternative representations of carbon (C)–nitrogen (N) cycle processes.</li>\n \n \n <li>We decomposed the model responses into component processes affecting the response to eCO<sub>2</sub> and confronted these with observations from the FACE experiments.</li>\n \n \n <li>Most of the models reproduced the observed initial enhancement of net primary production (NPP) at both sites, but none was able to simulate both the sustained 10-yr enhancement at Duke and the declining response at ORNL: models generally showed signs of progressive N limitation as a result of lower than observed plant N uptake. Nonetheless, many models showed qualitative agreement with observed component processes. The results suggest that improved representation of above-ground–below-ground interactions and better constraints on plant stoichiometry are important for a predictive understanding of eCO<sub>2</sub> effects. Improved accuracy of soil organic matter inventories is pivotal to reduce uncertainty in the observed C–N budgets.</li>\n \n \n <li>The two FACE experiments are insufficient to fully constrain terrestrial responses to eCO<sub>2</sub>, given the complexity of factors leading to the observed diverging trends, and the consequential inability of the models to explain these trends. Nevertheless, the ecosystem models were able to capture important features of the experiments, lending some support to their projections.</li>\n </ul>\n \n </div>","PeriodicalId":48887,"journal":{"name":"New Phytologist","volume":"202 3","pages":"803-822"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/nph.12697","citationCount":"386","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Phytologist","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.12697","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 386

Abstract

  • We analysed the responses of 11 ecosystem models to elevated atmospheric [CO2] (eCO2) at two temperate forest ecosystems (Duke and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiments) to test alternative representations of carbon (C)–nitrogen (N) cycle processes.
  • We decomposed the model responses into component processes affecting the response to eCO2 and confronted these with observations from the FACE experiments.
  • Most of the models reproduced the observed initial enhancement of net primary production (NPP) at both sites, but none was able to simulate both the sustained 10-yr enhancement at Duke and the declining response at ORNL: models generally showed signs of progressive N limitation as a result of lower than observed plant N uptake. Nonetheless, many models showed qualitative agreement with observed component processes. The results suggest that improved representation of above-ground–below-ground interactions and better constraints on plant stoichiometry are important for a predictive understanding of eCO2 effects. Improved accuracy of soil organic matter inventories is pivotal to reduce uncertainty in the observed C–N budgets.
  • The two FACE experiments are insufficient to fully constrain terrestrial responses to eCO2, given the complexity of factors leading to the observed diverging trends, and the consequential inability of the models to explain these trends. Nevertheless, the ecosystem models were able to capture important features of the experiments, lending some support to their projections.
11个陆地碳氮循环模式与两个温带自由空气CO2富集研究的对比评价
我们分析了两个温带森林生态系统(杜克和橡树岭国家实验室(ORNL)自由空气CO2富集(FACE)实验)中11个生态系统模型对大气[CO2] (eCO2)升高的响应,以测试碳(C) -氮(N)循环过程的替代表示。我们将模型响应分解为影响对eCO2响应的组成过程,并将这些过程与FACE实验的观察结果进行对比。大多数模型重现了两个地点的净初级生产量(NPP)的初始增强,但没有一个模型能够同时模拟杜克大学10年的持续增强和ORNL的下降响应:由于植物氮素吸收率低于观测值,模型普遍显示出氮的渐进限制迹象。尽管如此,许多模型与观察到的组成过程在定性上一致。结果表明,改善地上-地下相互作用的表征和更好的植物化学计量学约束对于预测eCO2效应非常重要。提高土壤有机质清单的准确性对于减少观测到的碳氮收支的不确定性至关重要。考虑到导致观测到的不同趋势的因素的复杂性,以及相应的模式无法解释这些趋势,两个FACE实验不足以完全约束陆地对eCO2的响应。然而,生态系统模型能够捕捉到实验的重要特征,为他们的预测提供了一些支持。
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
New Phytologist
New Phytologist PLANT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
5.30%
发文量
728
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: New Phytologist is a leading publication that showcases exceptional and groundbreaking research in plant science and its practical applications. With a focus on five distinct sections - Physiology & Development, Environment, Interaction, Evolution, and Transformative Plant Biotechnology - the journal covers a wide array of topics ranging from cellular processes to the impact of global environmental changes. We encourage the use of interdisciplinary approaches, and our content is structured to reflect this. Our journal acknowledges the diverse techniques employed in plant science, including molecular and cell biology, functional genomics, modeling, and system-based approaches, across various subfields.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信