Suchergebnisse

This is the final version. Available on open access from EGU via the DOI in this record ; Data availability. The JULES model can be downloaded from the Met Office Science Repository Service (https://code.metoffice.gov. uk/trac/jules, last access: 11 September 2017 – see here for a helpful how-to http://jules.jchmr.org/content/getting-started, last access: 11 September 2017). Model output data presented in this paper and the exact version of JULES with name lists are available upon request from the corresponding author. ; The capacity of the terrestrial biosphere to sequester carbon and mitigate climate change is governed by the ability of vegetation to remove emissions of CO2 through photosynthesis. Tropospheric O3, a globally abundant and potent greenhouse gas, is, however, known to damage plants, causing reductions in primary productivity. Despite emission control policies across Europe, background concentrations of tropospheric O3 have risen significantly over the last decades due to hemispheric-scale increases in O3 and its precursors. Therefore, plants are exposed to increasing background concentrations, at levels currently causing chronic damage. Studying the impact of O3 on European vegetation at the regional scale is important for gaining greater understanding of the impact of O3 on the land carbon sink at large spatial scales. In this work we take a regional approach and update the JULES land surface model using new measurements specifically for European vegetation. Given the importance of stomatal conductance in determining the flux of O3 into plants, we implement an alternative stomatal closure parameterisation and account for diurnal variations in O3 concentration in our simulations. We conduct our analysis specifically for the European region to quantify the impact of the interactive effects of tropospheric O3 and CO2 on gross primary productivity (GPP) and land carbon storage across Europe. A factorial set of model experiments showed that tropospheric O3 can suppress terrestrial carbon uptake across Europe over the period 1901 to 2050. By 2050, simulated GPP was reduced by 4 to 9 % due to plant O3 damage and land carbon storage was reduced by 3 to 7 %. The combined physiological effects of elevated future CO2 (acting to reduce stomatal opening) and reductions in O3 concentrations resulted in reduced O3 damage in the future. This alleviation of O3 damage by CO2-induced stomatal closure was around 1 to 2 % for both land carbon and GPP, depending on plant sensitivity to O3. Reduced land carbon storage resulted from diminished soil carbon stocks consistent with the reduction in GPP. Regional variations are identified with larger impacts shown for temperate Europe (GPP reduced by 10 to 20 %) compared to boreal regions (GPP reduced by 2 to 8 %). These results highlight that O3 damage needs to be considered when predicting GPP and land carbon, and that the effects of O3 on plant physiology need to be considered in regional land carbon cycle assessments. ; Rebecca J. Oliver and Lina M. Mercado were supported by the EU FP7 (ECLAIRE, 282910) and JWCRP (UKESM, NEC05816). This work was also supported by EMEP under UNECE. Stephen Sitch and Lina M. Mercado acknowledge the support of the NERC SAMBBA project (NE/J010057/1). The UK Met Office contribution was funded by BEIS under the Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). Gerd A. Folberth also acknowledges funding from the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (CRESCENDO, 641816).

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from EGU via the DOI in this record. ; The important role of fire in regulating vegetation community composition and contributions to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols make it a critical component of dynamic global vegetation models and Earth system models. Over 2 decades of development, a wide variety of model structures and mechanisms have been designed and incorporated into global fire models, which have been linked to different vegetation models. However, there has not yet been a systematic examination of how these different strategies contribute to model performance. Here we describe the structure of the first phase of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), which for the first time seeks to systematically compare a number of models. By combining a standardized set of input data and model experiments with a rigorous comparison of model outputs to each other and to observations, we will improve the understanding of what drives vegetation fire, how it can best be simulated, and what new or improved observational data could allow better constraints on model behavior. In this paper, we introduce the fire models used in the first phase of FireMIP, the simulation protocols applied, and the benchmarking system used to evaluate the models. We have also created supplementary tables that describe, in thorough mathematical detail, the structure of each model. ; S. Rabin was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship and by the Carbon Mitigation Initiative, and along with S. Hantson and A. Arneth would like to acknowledge support by the EU FP7 projects BACCHUS (grant agreement no. 603445) and LUC4C (grant agreement no. 603542). This work was supported, in part, by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), through the Helmholtz Association and its research programme ATMO, and the HGF Impulse and Networking 5 fund. F. Li was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 41475099 and the CAS Youth Innovation Promotion Association Fellowship. The UK Met Office contribution was funded by BEIS under the Hadley Centre Climate Programme contract (GA01101). G. A. Folberth also wishes to acknowledge funding received from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 641816 (CRESCENDO). J. O. Kaplan was supported by the European Research Council (COEVOLVE, 313797).