Description and evaluation of the process-based forest model 4C v2.2 at four European forest sites

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage5311eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue11eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.lastPage5343eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume13eng
dc.contributor.authorLasch-Born, Petra
dc.contributor.authorSuckow, Felicitas
dc.contributor.authorReyer, Christopher P. O.
dc.contributor.authorGutsch, Martin
dc.contributor.authorKollas, Chris
dc.contributor.authorBadeck, Franz-Werner
dc.contributor.authorBugmann, Harald K. M.
dc.contributor.authorGrote, Rüdiger
dc.contributor.authorFürstenau, Cornelia
dc.contributor.authorLindner, Marcus
dc.contributor.authorSchaber, Jörg
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-16T06:36:21Z
dc.date.available2022-08-16T06:36:21Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractThe process-based model 4C (FORESEE) has been developed over the past 20 years to study climate impacts on forests and is now freely available as an open-source tool. The objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive description of this 4C version (v2.2) for scientific users of the model and to present an evaluation of 4C at four different forest sites across Europe. The evaluation focuses on forest growth as well as carbon (net ecosystem exchange, gross primary production), water (actual evapotranspiration, soil water content), and heat fluxes (soil temperature) using data from the PROFOUND database. We applied different evaluation metrics and compared the daily, monthly, and annual variability of observed and simulated values. The ability to reproduce forest growth (stem diameter and biomass) differs from site to site and is best for a pine stand in Germany (Peitz, model efficiency ME=0.98). 4C is able to reproduce soil temperature at different depths in Sorø and Hyytiälä with good accuracy (for all soil depths ME > 0.8). The dynamics in simulating carbon and water fluxes are well captured on daily and monthly timescales (0.51 < ME < 0.983) but less so on an annual timescale (ME < 0). This model–data mismatch is possibly due to the accumulation of errors because of processes that are missing or represented in a very general way in 4C but not with enough specific detail to cover strong, site-specific dependencies such as ground vegetation growth. These processes need to be further elaborated to improve the projections of climate change on forests. We conclude that, despite shortcomings, 4C is widely applicable, reliable, and therefore ready to be released to the scientific community to use and further develop the model.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/10043
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34657/9081
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherKatlenburg-Lindau : Copernicuseng
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5311-2020
dc.relation.essn1991-9603
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGeoscientific model development : GMD 13 (2020), Nr. 11eng
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unportedeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.subjectclimate changeeng
dc.subjectclimate effecteng
dc.subjectforest ecosystemeng
dc.subjectgrowth rateeng
dc.subjectheat fluxeng
dc.subject.ddc910eng
dc.titleDescription and evaluation of the process-based forest model 4C v2.2 at four European forest siteseng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleGeoscientific model development : GMDeng
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIKeng
wgl.subjectGeowissenschafteneng
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikeleng
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Description_and_evaluation.pdf
Size:
3.53 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: