Abstract

Abstract. Energy and carbon balance implications of representing vegetation using a composite or mosaic approach in a land surface scheme are investigated. In the composite approach the attributes of different plant functional types (PFTs) present in a grid cell are aggregated in some fashion for energy and water balance calculations. The resulting physical environmental conditions (including net radiation, soil moisture and soil temperature) are common to all PFTs and affect their ecosystem processes. In the mosaic approach energy and water balance calculations are performed separately for each PFT tile using its own vegetation attributes, so each PFT "sees" different physical environmental conditions and its carbon balance evolves somewhat differently from that in the composite approach. Simulations are performed at selected boreal, temperate and tropical locations to illustrate the differences caused by using the composite versus mosaic approaches of representing vegetation. These idealized simulations use 50% fractional coverage for each of the two dominant PFTs in a grid cell. Differences in simulated grid averaged primary energy fluxes at selected sites are generally less than 5% between the two approaches. Simulated grid-averaged carbon fluxes and pool sizes at these sites can, however, differ by as much as 46%. Simulation results suggest that differences in carbon balance between the two approaches arise primarily through differences in net radiation which directly affects net primary productivity, and thus leaf area index and vegetation biomass.

Highlights

  • Land surface schemes (LSSs) are integral part of climate models and they simulate the energy and water fluxes at the land-atmosphere boundary (Pitman, 2003)

  • Plots are shown for individual plant functional types (PFTs) values tion for C3 grasses around day 100 (∼10 April) in the mosaic approach is the result of leaf onset for grasses while the increase in net radiation for evergreen both approaches

  • This behaviour is in contrast to the Manitoba location, where these carbon quantities were smaller for the evergreen needleleaf trees and larger for C3 grasses in the composite compared to the mosaic approach, primarily in response to the lower and higher net radiation these PFTs received

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Land surface schemes (LSSs) are integral part of climate models and they simulate the energy and water fluxes at the land-atmosphere boundary (Pitman, 2003). A “mixed” approach, which lies in between the composite and mosaic approaches, uses vegetation attributes of each PFT separately for energy and water balance calculations over each PFT tile, but the resulting soil moisture and temperature are averaged over all tiles at the end of every time step. While the energy and water balance implications of representing vegetation using the composite and mosaic approaches have been studied (Koster and Suarez, 1992; Klink, 1995; Molod and Salmun, 2002), there have been, to our knowledge, no studies that address the effect of these approaches on the resulting carbon balance.

Coupled terrestrial ecosystem and land surface models
The Manitoba and Siberia locations
The Eastern United States location
The Africa location
Discussion and summary
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.