Articles | Volume 15, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-5987-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-5987-2015
Review article
 | Highlight paper
 | 
29 May 2015
Review article | Highlight paper |  | 29 May 2015

Reliable, robust and realistic: the three R's of next-generation land-surface modelling

I. C. Prentice, X. Liang, B. E. Medlyn, and Y.-P. Wang

Related authors

Leaf carbon and nitrogen stoichiometric variation along environmental gradients
Huiying Xu, Han Wang, Iain Colin Prentice, and Sandy P. Harrison
Biogeosciences, 20, 4511–4525, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4511-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-4511-2023, 2023
Short summary
INFERNO-peat v1.0.0: A representation of northern high latitude peat fires in the JULES-INFERNO global fire model
Katie R. Blackford, Matthew Kasoar, Chantelle Burton, Eleanor Burke, Iain Colin Prentice, and Apostolos Voulgarakis
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2399,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2399, 2023
Short summary
Simple process-led algorithms for simulating habitats (SPLASH v.2.0): calibration-free calculations of water and energy fluxes
David Sandoval, Iain Colin Prentice, and Rodolfo L. B. Nóbrega
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1626,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1626, 2023
Short summary
Pollen-based reconstructions of Holocene climate trends in the eastern Mediterranean region
Esmeralda Cruz-Silva, Sandy P. Harrison, I. Colin Prentice, Elena Marinova, Patrick J. Bartlein, Hans Renssen, and Yurui Zhang
Clim. Past, 19, 2093–2108, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-2093-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-2093-2023, 2023
Short summary
The response of wildfire regimes to Last Glacial Maximum carbon dioxide and climate
Olivia Haas, Iain Colin Prentice, and Sandy P. Harrison
Biogeosciences, 20, 3981–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3981-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3981-2023, 2023
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Biosphere Interactions | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Why do inverse models disagree? A case study with two European CO2 inversions
Saqr Munassar, Guillaume Monteil, Marko Scholze, Ute Karstens, Christian Rödenbeck, Frank-Thomas Koch, Kai U. Totsche, and Christoph Gerbig
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 2813–2828, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-2813-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-2813-2023, 2023
Short summary
Net ecosystem exchange (NEE) estimates 2006–2019 over Europe from a pre-operational ensemble-inversion system
Saqr Munassar, Christian Rödenbeck, Frank-Thomas Koch, Kai U. Totsche, Michał Gałkowski, Sophia Walther, and Christoph Gerbig
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7875–7892, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7875-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7875-2022, 2022
Short summary
Interpreting machine learning prediction of fire emissions and comparison with FireMIP process-based models
Sally S.-C. Wang, Yun Qian, L. Ruby Leung, and Yang Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3445–3468, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3445-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3445-2022, 2022
Short summary
Distinguishing the impacts of natural and anthropogenic aerosols on global gross primary productivity through diffuse fertilization effect
Hao Zhou, Xu Yue, Yadong Lei, Chenguang Tian, Jun Zhu, Yimian Ma, Yang Cao, Xixi Yin, and Zhiding Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 693–709, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-693-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-693-2022, 2022
Short summary
Was Australia a sink or source of CO2 in 2015? Data assimilation using OCO-2 satellite measurements
Yohanna Villalobos, Peter J. Rayner, Jeremy D. Silver, Steven Thomas, Vanessa Haverd, Jürgen Knauer, Zoë M. Loh, Nicholas M. Deutscher, David W. T. Griffith, and David F. Pollard
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 17453–17494, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-17453-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-17453-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Abramowitz, G.: Towards a benchmark for land surface models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L22702, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024419, 2005.
Ahlström, A., Schurgers, G., Arneth, A., and Smith, B.: Robustness and uncertainty in terrestrial ecosystem carbon response to CMIP5 climate change projections, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 044008, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044008, 2012.
Ainsworth, E. A. and Long, S. P.: What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2, New Phytol., 165, 351–372, 2005.
Amenu, G. G. and Kumar, P.: A model for hydraulic redistribution incorporating coupled soil-root moisture transport, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 55–74, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-55-2008, 2008.
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 mode, J. Climate, 26, 6801–6843, 2013.
Download
Short summary
Land surface models (LSMs) describe how carbon and water fluxes react to environmental change. They are key component of climate models, yet they differ enormously. Many perform poorly, despite having many parameters. We outline a development strategy emphasizing robustness, reliability and realism, none of which is guaranteed by complexity alone. We propose multiple constraints, benchmarking and data assimilation, and representing unresolved processes stochastically, as tools in this endeavour.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint