Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • Author or Editor: Tongwen Wu x
  • All content x
Clear All Modify Search
Lifen Jiang, Yaner Yan, Oleksandra Hararuk, Nathaniel Mikle, Jianyang Xia, Zheng Shi, Jerry Tjiputra, Tongwen Wu, and Yiqi Luo

Abstract

Model intercomparisons and evaluations against observations are essential for better understanding of models’ performance and for identifying the sources of uncertainty in their output. The terrestrial vegetation carbon simulated by 11 Earth system models (ESMs) involved in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) was evaluated in this study. The simulated vegetation carbon was compared at three distinct spatial scales (grid, biome, and global) among models and against the observations (an updated database from Olson et al.’s “Major World Ecosystem Complexes Ranked by Carbon in Live Vegetation: A Database”). Moreover, the underlying causes of the differences in the models’ predictions were explored. Model–data fit at the grid scale was poor but greatly improved at the biome scale. Large intermodel variability was pronounced in the tropical and boreal regions, where total vegetation carbon stocks were high. While 8 out of 11 ESMs reproduced the global vegetation carbon to within 20% uncertainty of the observational estimate (560 ± 112 Pg C), the simulated global totals varied nearly threefold between the models. The goodness of fit of ESMs in simulating vegetation carbon depended strongly on the spatial scales. Sixty-three percent of the variability in contemporary global vegetation carbon stocks across ESMs could be explained by differences in vegetation carbon residence time across ESMs (P < 0.01). The analysis indicated that ESMs’ performance of vegetation carbon predictions can be substantially improved through better representation of plant longevity (i.e., carbon residence time) and its respective spatial distributions.

Full access
Vivek K. Arora, George J. Boer, Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael Eby, Chris D. Jones, James R. Christian, Gordon Bonan, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, Patricia Cadule, Tomohiro Hajima, Tatiana Ilyina, Keith Lindsay, Jerry F. Tjiputra, and Tongwen Wu

Abstract

The magnitude and evolution of parameters that characterize feedbacks in the coupled carbon–climate system are compared across nine Earth system models (ESMs). The analysis is based on results from biogeochemically, radiatively, and fully coupled simulations in which CO2 increases at a rate of 1% yr−1. These simulations are part of phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The CO2 fluxes between the atmosphere and underlying land and ocean respond to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration and to changes in temperature and other climate variables. The carbon–concentration and carbon–climate feedback parameters characterize the response of the CO2 flux between the atmosphere and the underlying surface to these changes. Feedback parameters are calculated using two different approaches. The two approaches are equivalent and either may be used to calculate the contribution of the feedback terms to diagnosed cumulative emissions. The contribution of carbon–concentration feedback to diagnosed cumulative emissions that are consistent with the 1% increasing CO2 concentration scenario is about 4.5 times larger than the carbon–climate feedback. Differences in the modeled responses of the carbon budget to changes in CO2 and temperature are seen to be 3–4 times larger for the land components compared to the ocean components of participating models. The feedback parameters depend on the state of the system as well the forcing scenario but nevertheless provide insight into the behavior of the coupled carbon–climate system and a useful common framework for comparing models.

Full access