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

Summary 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.
- College of New Jersey United States
- Lund University Sweden
- UNIVERSITE PARIS DESCARTES France
- Boston College United States
- CSIRO Ocean and Atmosphere Australia
Global vegetation models, model evaluation, Time Factors, 550, Ecosystem modeling, GLOBAL VEGETATION MODELS, 551, Nitrogen cycle, Free-Air CO2Enrichment (FACE), nitrogen, Canopy production, Sweetgum plantation, Models, [SDV.BV] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Vegetal Biology, Carbon (C) storage, Biomass, Free-Air CO2, elevated CO2, CANOPY PRODUCTION, Air, FOREST PRODUCTIVITY, Carbon cycle, ecosystem modelling, Nitrogen Cycle, Soil carbon, PLANT SCIENCES, Deciduous forest, Biological sciences, Elevated CO2, Light-use efficiency, ecosystems, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, carbon (C) storage, PINE FOREST, 570, Nitrogen, [SDE.MCG]Environmental Sciences/Global Changes, Plant physiology, Ecosystem modelling, Forest productivity, nitrogen (N) limitation, Models, Biological, SWEETGUM PLANTATION, Carbon Cycle, Nitrogen (N) limitation, XXXXXX - Unknown, nitrogen cycle, [SDV.BV]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Vegetal Biology, ATMOSPHERIC CO2, Model evaluation, Plant biology & botany, CO2 fertilization, Ecosystem, 580, Science & Technology, plant physiology, Atmosphere, Time factors, Research, Plant Sciences, carbon dioxide, 500, Carbon Dioxide, Biological, Agricultural and veterinary sciences, Enrichment (FACE), DECIDUOUS FOREST, Carbon, Life sciences & biomedicine, [SDE.MCG] Environmental Sciences/Global Changes, Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE), Carbon dioxide, LIGHT-USE EFFICIENCY, Atmospheric CO2, Pine forest, temperate forests, Science & technology, Plant sciences, ELEVATED CO2, SOIL CARBON, biological
Global vegetation models, model evaluation, Time Factors, 550, Ecosystem modeling, GLOBAL VEGETATION MODELS, 551, Nitrogen cycle, Free-Air CO2Enrichment (FACE), nitrogen, Canopy production, Sweetgum plantation, Models, [SDV.BV] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Vegetal Biology, Carbon (C) storage, Biomass, Free-Air CO2, elevated CO2, CANOPY PRODUCTION, Air, FOREST PRODUCTIVITY, Carbon cycle, ecosystem modelling, Nitrogen Cycle, Soil carbon, PLANT SCIENCES, Deciduous forest, Biological sciences, Elevated CO2, Light-use efficiency, ecosystems, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, carbon (C) storage, PINE FOREST, 570, Nitrogen, [SDE.MCG]Environmental Sciences/Global Changes, Plant physiology, Ecosystem modelling, Forest productivity, nitrogen (N) limitation, Models, Biological, SWEETGUM PLANTATION, Carbon Cycle, Nitrogen (N) limitation, XXXXXX - Unknown, nitrogen cycle, [SDV.BV]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Vegetal Biology, ATMOSPHERIC CO2, Model evaluation, Plant biology & botany, CO2 fertilization, Ecosystem, 580, Science & Technology, plant physiology, Atmosphere, Time factors, Research, Plant Sciences, carbon dioxide, 500, Carbon Dioxide, Biological, Agricultural and veterinary sciences, Enrichment (FACE), DECIDUOUS FOREST, Carbon, Life sciences & biomedicine, [SDE.MCG] Environmental Sciences/Global Changes, Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE), Carbon dioxide, LIGHT-USE EFFICIENCY, Atmospheric CO2, Pine forest, temperate forests, Science & technology, Plant sciences, ELEVATED CO2, SOIL CARBON, biological
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).376 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 1% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Top 1% impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 0.1%
