
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Observational constraints reduce model spread but not uncertainty in global wetland methane emission estimates

doi: 10.1111/gcb.16755 , 10.48350/182628
pmid: 37190869
AbstractThe recent rise in atmospheric methane (CH4) concentrations accelerates climate change and offsets mitigation efforts. Although wetlands are the largest natural CH4 source, estimates of global wetland CH4 emissions vary widely among approaches taken by bottom‐up (BU) process‐based biogeochemical models and top‐down (TD) atmospheric inversion methods. Here, we integrate in situ measurements, multi‐model ensembles, and a machine learning upscaling product into the International Land Model Benchmarking system to examine the relationship between wetland CH4 emission estimates and model performance. We find that using better‐performing models identified by observational constraints reduces the spread of wetland CH4 emission estimates by 62% and 39% for BU‐ and TD‐based approaches, respectively. However, global BU and TD CH4 emission estimate discrepancies increased by about 15% (from 31 to 36 TgCH4 year−1) when the top 20% models were used, although we consider this result moderately uncertain given the unevenly distributed global observations. Our analyses demonstrate that model performance ranking is subject to benchmark selection due to large inter‐site variability, highlighting the importance of expanding coverage of benchmark sites to diverse environmental conditions. We encourage future development of wetland CH4 models to move beyond static benchmarking and focus on evaluating site‐specific and ecosystem‐specific variabilities inferred from observations.
- Chinese Academy of Sciences China (People's Republic of)
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory United States
- Finnish Meteorological Institute Finland
- University of Illinois at Chicago United States
- Instituto de Investigación en Cambio Global Spain
Global and Planetary Change, Ecology, Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide, 530 Physik, 333, [SDU]Sciences of the Universe [physics], Wetlands, Environmental Chemistry, Methane, Ecosystem, General Environmental Science, Forecasting
Global and Planetary Change, Ecology, Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide, 530 Physik, 333, [SDU]Sciences of the Universe [physics], Wetlands, Environmental Chemistry, Methane, Ecosystem, General Environmental Science, Forecasting
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).15 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Average impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10%
