We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Deficiencies of Phenology Models in Simulating Spatial and Temporal Variations in Temperate Spring Leaf Phenology.
- Authors
Li, Shihua; Wang, Yingping; Ciais, Philippe; Sitch, Stephen; Sato, Hisashi; Shen, Miaogen; Chen, Xiuzhi; Ito, Akihiko; Wu, Chaoyang; Kucharik, Christopher J.; Yuan, Wenping
- Abstract
Spring leaf phenology and its response to climate change have crucial effects on surface albedo, carbon balance, and the water cycle of terrestrial ecosystems. Based on long‐term (period 1963–2014) in situ observations of budburst date and leaf unfolding date of more than 300 deciduous woody species from 32 sites across the temperate zone in China, we conducted model‐data comparison of spatial and temporal variations for spring leaf phenology calculated using the phenology modules that were embed into 10 existing terrestrial ecosystem models. Our results suggested that ORganizing Carbon and Hydrology in Dynamic EcosystEms and Spatially Explicit Individual‐Based performed the best in reproducing the spatial patterns of spring leaf phenology, but tended to underestimate the temporal variations in responding to temperature warming, showing low interannual variability (IAV) and temperature sensitivity (ST). In contrast, the performances of Vegetation Integrated SImulator for Trace Gases were the best in modeling IAV and ST. BIOME3, Lund‐Potsdam‐Jena model, Joint UK Land Environment Simulator, BioGeochemical Cycles, Community Land Model, Integrated Biosphere Simulator, and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Atmosphere Biosphere Land Exchange Model failed to reproduce both the spatial and temporal patterns. Using temperature series (1960–2100) form Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Number 6 scenarios to force the 10 phenology modules, our results highlighted large uncertainties in predicting spring leaf phenology changes with the warming climate, and more work is required to deal with the deficiencies of phenology model parameters and algorithms. Plain Language Summary: This study evaluated the performance of 10 existing terrestrial ecosystem models on simulating both the spatial and temporal variations in temperate spring leaf phenology, which is significant to assess the productivity and carbon uptake of terrestrial ecosystems. Through model‐data comparison, our results suggested that no model could accurately predict the spatial‐temporal variations in spring leaf phenology. The reasons to the deficiencies and differences in these phenology models were also analyzed. We examined the simulations of spring leaf phenology in temperate zone under different global warming scenarios and highlighted large uncertainties in predicting spring leaf phenology changes with the warming climate. This study aims to provide ideas for further developing and improving the accuracy of phenology models. Key Points: Terrestrial ecosystem models (TEMs) failed to accurately predict the spatial‐temporal patterns in spring leaf phenology of temperate forestsAlternating models predicted the most minor trends toward earlier spring leaf phenology under global warmingDistinguishing the temperature sensitivities in space and in time can help to improve simulating the spatial‐temporal variations
- Subjects
UNITED Kingdom; PLANT phenology; COMMONWEALTH Scientific &; Industrial Research Organization (Australia); LEAF springs; PHENOLOGY; SPATIAL variation; BIOGEOCHEMICAL cycles; TRACE gases
- Publication
Journal of Geophysical Research. Biogeosciences, 2022, Vol 127, Issue 3, p1
- ISSN
2169-8953
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1029/2021JG006421