Search for: All records

Abstract Grassland and other herbaceous communities cover significant portions of Earth's terrestrial surface and provide many critical services, such as carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, and food production. Forecasts of global change impacts on these services will require predictive tools, such as process‐based dynamic vegetation models. Yet, model representation of herbaceous communities and ecosystems lags substantially behind that of tree communities and forests. The limited representation of herbaceous communities within models arises from two important knowledge gaps: first, our empirical understanding of the principles governing herbaceous vegetation dynamics is either incomplete or does not provide mechanistic information necessary to drive herbaceous community processes with models; second, current model structure and parameterization of grass and other herbaceous plant functional types limits the ability of models to predict outcomes of competition and growth for herbaceous vegetation. In this review, we provide direction for addressing these gaps by: (1) presenting a brief history of how vegetation dynamics have been developed and incorporated into earth system models, (2) reporting on a model simulation activity to evaluate current model capability to represent herbaceous vegetation dynamics and ecosystem function, and (3) detailing several ecological properties and phenomena that should be a focus for both empiricists and modelers to improve representation of herbaceous vegetation in models. Together, empiricists and modelers can improve representation of herbaceous ecosystem processes within models. In so doing, we will greatly enhance our ability to forecast future states of the earth system, which is of high importance given the rapid rate of environmental change on our planet. 

Abstract Transitioning across biological scales is a central challenge in land surface models. Processes that operate at the scale of individual leaves must be scaled to canopies, and this is done using dedicated submodels. Here, we focus on a submodel that prescribes how light and nitrogen are distributed through plant canopies. We found a mathematical inconsistency in a submodel implemented in the Community and Energy Land Models (CLM and ELM), which incorporates twigs, branches, stems, and dead leaves in nitrogen scaling from leaf to canopy. The inconsistency leads to unrealistic (physically impossible) values of the nitrogen scaling coefficient. The mathematical inconsistency is a general mistake, that is, would occur in any model adopting this particular submodel. We resolve the inconsistency by allowing distinct profiles of stems and branches versus living leaves. We implemented the updated scheme in the ELM and find that the correction reduces global mean gross primary production (GPP) by 3.9 Pg C (3%). Further, when stems and branches are removed from the canopy in the updated model (akin to models that ignore shading from stems), global GPP increases by 4.1 Pg C (3.2%), because of reduced shading. Hence, models that entirely ignore stem shading also introduce errors in the global spatial distribution of GPP estimates, with a strong signal in the tropics, increasing GPP there by over 200 g C m⁻² yr⁻¹. Appropriately incorporating stems and other nonphotosynthesizing material into the light and nitrogen scaling routines of global land models, will improve their biological realism and accuracy.