More Like this

1. Historically inconsistent productivity and respiration fluxes in the global terrestrial carbon cycle

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29391-5  

   Jian, Jinshi ; Bailey, Vanessa ; Dorheim, Kalyn ; Konings, Alexandra G. ; Hao, Dalei ; Shiklomanov, Alexey N. ; Snyder, Abigail ; Steele, Meredith ; Teramoto, Munemasa ; Vargas, Rodrigo ; et al ( December 2022 , Nature Communications)

   Abstract The terrestrial carbon cycle is a major source of uncertainty in climate projections. Its dominant fluxes, gross primary productivity (GPP), and respiration (in particular soil respiration, R S ), are typically estimated from independent satellite-driven models and upscaled in situ measurements, respectively. We combine carbon-cycle flux estimates and partitioning coefficients to show that historical estimates of global GPP and R S are irreconcilable. When we estimate GPP based on R S measurements and some assumptions about R S :GPP ratios, we found the resulted global GPP values (bootstrap mean $${149}_{-23}^{+29}$$ 149 − 23 + 29 Pg C yr −1 ) are significantly higher than most GPP estimates reported in the literature ( $${113}_{-18}^{+18}$$ 113 − 18 + 18 Pg C yr −1 ). Similarly, historical GPP estimates imply a soil respiration flux (Rs GPP , bootstrap mean of $${68}_{-8}^{+10}$$ 68 − 8 + 10 Pg C yr −1 ) statistically inconsistent with most published R S values ( $${87}_{-8}^{+9}$$ 87 − 8 + 9 Pg C yr −1 ), although recent, higher, GPP estimates are narrowing this gap. Furthermore, global R S :GPP ratios are inconsistent with spatial averages of this ratio calculated from individual sites as well as CMIP6 model results. This discrepancy has implications for our understanding of carbon turnover times and the terrestrial sensitivity to climate change. Future efforts should reconcile the discrepancies associated with calculations for GPP and Rs to improve estimates of the global carbon budget. 

   more » « less
2. Sources of Uncertainty in Regional and Global Terrestrial CO 2 Exchange Estimates

   https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006393  

   Bastos, A. ; O'Sullivan, M. ; Ciais, P. ; Makowski, D. ; Sitch, S. ; Friedlingstein, P. ; Chevallier, F. ; Rödenbeck, C. ; Pongratz, J. ; Luijkx, I. T. ; et al ( February 2020 , Global Biogeochemical Cycles)

   The Global Carbon Budget 2018 (GCB2018) estimated by the atmospheric COgrowth rate, fossil fuel emissions, and modeled (bottom‐up) land and ocean fluxes cannot be fully closed, leading to a “budget imbalance,” highlighting uncertainties in GCB components. However, no systematic analysis has been performed on which regions or processes contribute to this term. To obtain deeper insight on the sources of uncertainty in global and regional carbon budgets, we analyzed differences in Net Biome Productivity (NBP) for all possible combinations of bottom‐up and top‐down data sets in GCB2018: (i) 16 dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs), and (ii) 5 atmospheric inversions that match the atmospheric COgrowth rate. We find that the global mismatch between the two ensembles matches well the GCB2018 budget imbalance, with Brazil, Southeast Asia, and Oceania as the largest contributors. Differences between DGVMs dominate global mismatches, while at regional scale differences between inversions contribute the most to uncertainty. At both global and regional scales, disagreement on NBP interannual variability between the two approaches explains a large fraction of differences. We attribute this mismatch to distinct responses to El Niño–Southern Oscillation variability between DGVMs and inversions and to uncertainties in land use change emissions, especially in South America and Southeast Asia. We identify key needs to reduce uncertainty in carbon budgets: reducing uncertainty in atmospheric inversions (e.g., through more observations in the tropics) and in land use change fluxes, including more land use processes and evaluating land use transitions (e.g., using high‐resolution remote‐sensing), and, finally, improving tropical hydroecological processes and fire representation within DGVMs.

    

   more » « less
3. Assessing dynamic vegetation model parameter uncertainty across Alaskan arctic tundra plant communities

   https://doi.org/10.1002/EAP.2499  

   Euskirchen, Eugénie S. ; Serbin, Shawn P. ; Carman, Tobey B. ; Fraterrigo, Jennifer M. ; Genet, Hélène ; Iversen, Colleen M. ; Salmon, Verity ; McGuire, A. David ( November 2021 , Ecological Applications)

   As the Arctic region moves into uncharted territory under a warming climate, it is important to refine the terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) that help us understand and predict change. One fundamental uncertainty in TBMs relates to model parameters, configuration variables internal to the model whose value can be estimated from data. We incorporate a version of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (TEM) developed for arctic ecosystems into the Predictive Ecosystem Analyzer (PEcAn) framework. PEcAn treats model parameters as probability distributions, estimates parameters based on a synthesis of available field data, and then quantifies both model sensitivity and uncertainty to a given parameter or suite of parameters. We examined how variation in 21 parameters in the equation for gross primary production influenced model sensitivity and uncertainty in terms of two carbon fluxes (net primary productivity and heterotrophic respiration) and two carbon (C) pools (vegetation C and soil C). We set up different parameterizations of TEM across a range of tundra types (tussock tundra, heath tundra, wet sedge tundra, and shrub tundra) in northern Alaska, along a latitudinal transect extending from the coastal plain near Utqiaġvik to the southern foothills of the Brooks Range, to the Seward Peninsula. TEM was most sensitive to parameters related to the temperature regulation of photosynthesis. Model uncertainty was mostly due to parameters related to leaf area, temperature regulation of photosynthesis, and the stomatal responses to ambient light conditions. Our analysis also showed that sensitivity and uncertainty to a given parameter varied spatially. At some sites, model sensitivity and uncertainty tended to be connected to a wider range of parameters, underlining the importance of assessing tundra community processes across environmental gradients or geographic locations. Generally, across sites, the flux of net primary productivity (NPP) and pool of vegetation C had about equal uncertainty, while heterotrophic respiration had higher uncertainty than the pool of soil C. Our study illustrates the complexity inherent in evaluating parameter uncertainty across highly heterogeneous arctic tundra plant communities. It also provides a framework for iteratively testing how newly collected field data related to key parameters may result in more effective forecasting of Arctic change. 

   more » « less
4. Carbon uptake in Eurasian boreal forests dominates the high‐latitude net ecosystem carbon budget

   https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16553  

   Watts, Jennifer D. ; Farina, Mary ; Kimball, John S. ; Schiferl, Luke D. ; Liu, Zhihua ; Arndt, Kyle A. ; Zona, Donatella ; Ballantyne, Ashley ; Euskirchen, Eugénie S. ; Parmentier, Frans‐Jan W. ; et al ( January 2023 , Global Change Biology)

   Arctic‐boreal landscapes are experiencing profound warming, along with changes in ecosystem moisture status and disturbance from fire. This region is of global importance in terms of carbon feedbacks to climate, yet the sign (sink or source) and magnitude of the Arctic‐boreal carbon budget within recent years remains highly uncertain. Here, we provide new estimates of recent (2003–2015) vegetation gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (R_eco), net ecosystem CO₂exchange (NEE;R_eco − GPP), and terrestrial methane (CH₄) emissions for the Arctic‐boreal zone using a satellite data‐driven process‐model for northern ecosystems (TCFM‐Arctic), calibrated and evaluated using measurements from >60 tower eddy covariance (EC) sites. We used TCFM‐Arctic to obtain daily 1‐km²flux estimates and annual carbon budgets for the pan‐Arctic‐boreal region. Across the domain, the model indicated an overall average NEE sink of −850 Tg CO₂‐C year⁻¹. Eurasian boreal zones, especially those in Siberia, contributed to a majority of the net sink. In contrast, the tundra biome was relatively carbon neutral (ranging from small sink to source). Regional CH₄emissions from tundra and boreal wetlands (not accounting for aquatic CH₄) were estimated at 35 Tg CH₄‐C year⁻¹. Accounting for additional emissions from open water aquatic bodies and from fire, using available estimates from the literature, reduced the total regional NEE sink by 21% and shifted many far northern tundra landscapes, and some boreal forests, to a net carbon source. This assessment, based on in situ observations and models, improves our understanding of the high‐latitude carbon status and also indicates a continued need for integrated site‐to‐regional assessments to monitor the vulnerability of these ecosystems to climate change.

    

   more » « less
5. Climate Extreme Versus Carbon Extreme: Responses of Terrestrial Carbon Fluxes to Temperature and Precipitation

   https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JG005252  

   Pan, Shufen ; Yang, Jia ; Tian, Hanqin ; Shi, Hao ; Chang, Jinfeng ; Ciais, Philippe ; Francois, Louis ; Frieler, Katja ; Fu, Bojie ; Hickler, Thomas ; et al ( April 2020 , Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences)

   Carbon fluxes at the land‐atmosphere interface are strongly influenced by weather and climate conditions. Yet what is usually known as “climate extremes” does not always translate into very high or low carbon fluxes or so‐called “carbon extremes.” To reveal the patterns of how climate extremes influence terrestrial carbon fluxes, we analyzed the interannual variations in ecosystem carbon fluxes simulated by the Terrestrial Biosphere Models (TBMs) in the Inter‐Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project. At the global level, TBMs simulated reduced ecosystem net primary productivity (NPP; 18.5 ± 9.3 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹), but enhanced heterotrophic respiration (Rh; 7 ± 4.6 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹) during extremely hot events. TBMs also simulated reduced NPP (60.9 ± 24.4 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹) and reduced Rh (16.5 ± 11.4 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹) during extreme dry events. Influences of precipitation extremes on terrestrial carbon uptake were larger in the arid/semiarid zones than other regions. During hot extremes, ecosystems in the low latitudes experienced a larger reduction in carbon uptake. However, a large fraction of carbon extremes did not occur in concert with either temperature or precipitation extremes. Rather these carbon extremes are likely to be caused by the interactive effects of the concurrent temperature and precipitation anomalies. The interactive effects showed considerable spatial variations with the largest effects on NPP in South America and Africa. Additionally, TBMs simulated a stronger sensitivity of ecosystem productivity to precipitation than satellite estimates. This study provides new insights into the complex ecosystem responses to climate extremes, especially the emergent properties of carbon dynamics resulting from compound climate extremes.

    

   more » « less