Filters

2017 - 20182

More filters

20202
Reset filters

Settings

search.filters.applied.f.access: openAccess × Publisher: Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH × Subject: climate effect × Subject: future prospect ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A protocol for the intercomparison of marine fishery and ecosystem models: Fish-MIP v1.0
    (Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH, 2018) Tittensor, D.P.; Eddy, T.D.; Lotze, H.K.; Galbraith, E.D.; Cheung, W.; Barange, M.; Blanchard, J.L.; Bopp, L.; Bryndum-Buchholz, A.; Büchner, M.; Bulman, C.; Carozza, D.A.; Christensen, V.; Coll, M.; Dunne, J.P.; Fernandes, J.A.; Fulton, E.A.; Hobday, A.J.; Huber, V.; Jennings, S.; Jones, M.; Lehodey, P.; Link, J.S.; MacKinson, S.; Maury, O.; Niiranen, S.; Oliveros-Ramos, R.; Roy, T.; Schewe, J.; Shin, Y.-J.; Silva, T.; Stock, C.A.; Steenbeek, J.; Underwood, P.J.; Volkholz, J.; Watson, J.R.; Walker, N.D.
    Model intercomparison studies in the climate and Earth sciences communities have been crucial to building credibility and coherence for future projections. They have quantified variability among models, spurred model development, contrasted within-and among-model uncertainty, assessed model fits to historical data, and provided ensemble projections of future change under specified scenarios. Given the speed and magnitude of anthropogenic change in the marine environment and the consequent effects on food security, biodiversity, marine industries, and society, the time is ripe for similar comparisons among models of fisheries and marine ecosystems. Here, we describe the Fisheries and Marine Ecosystem Model Intercomparison Project protocol version 1.0 (Fish-MIP v1.0), part of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP), which is a cross-sectoral network of climate impact modellers. Given the complexity of the marine ecosystem, this class of models has substantial heterogeneity of purpose, scope, theoretical underpinning, processes considered, parameterizations, resolution (grain size), and spatial extent. This heterogeneity reflects the lack of a unified understanding of the marine ecosystem and implies that the assemblage of all models is more likely to include a greater number of relevant processes than any single model. The current Fish-MIP protocol is designed to allow these heterogeneous models to be forced with common Earth System Model (ESM) Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) outputs under prescribed scenarios for historic (from the 1950s) and future (to 2100) time periods; it will be adapted to CMIP phase 6 (CMIP6) in future iterations. It also describes a standardized set of outputs for each participating Fish-MIP model to produce. This enables the broad characterization of differences between and uncertainties within models and projections when assessing climate and fisheries impacts on marine ecosystems and the services they provide. The systematic generation, collation, and comparison of results from Fish-MIP will inform an understanding of the range of plausible changes in marine ecosystems and improve our capacity to define and convey the strengths and weaknesses of model-based advice on future states of marine ecosystems and fisheries. Ultimately, Fish-MIP represents a step towards bringing together the marine ecosystem modelling community to produce consistent ensemble medium-and long-term projections of marine ecosystems.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Impacts of future deforestation and climate change on the hydrology of the Amazon Basin: A multi-model analysis with a new set of land-cover change scenarios
    (Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH, 2017) Guimberteau, M.; Ciais, P.; Pablo, Boisier, J.; Paula Dutra Aguiar, A.; Biemans, H.; De Deurwaerder, H.; Galbraith, D.; Kruijt, B.; Langerwisch, F.; Poveda, G.; Rammig, A.; Andres Rodriguez, D.; Tejada, G.; Thonicke, K.; Von, Randow, C.; Randow, R.; Zhang, K.; Verbeeck, H.
    Deforestation in Amazon is expected to decrease evapotranspiration (ET) and to increase soil moisture and river discharge under prevailing energy-limited conditions. The magnitude and sign of the response of ET to deforestation depend both on the magnitude and regional patterns of land-cover change (LCC), as well as on climate change and CO2 levels. On the one hand, elevated CO2 decreases leaf-scale transpiration, but this effect could be offset by increased foliar area density. Using three regional LCC scenarios specifically established for the Brazilian and Bolivian Amazon, we investigate the impacts of climate change and deforestation on the surface hydrology of the Amazon Basin for this century, taking 2009 as a reference. For each LCC scenario, three land surface models (LSMs), LPJmL-DGVM, INLAND-DGVM and ORCHIDEE, are forced by bias-corrected climate simulated by three general circulation models (GCMs) of the IPCC 4th Assessment Report (AR4). On average, over the Amazon Basin with no deforestation, the GCM results indicate a temperature increase of 3.3ĝ€°C by 2100 which drives up the evaporative demand, whereby precipitation increases by 8.5 %, with a large uncertainty across GCMs. In the case of no deforestation, we found that ET and runoff increase by 5.0 and 14ĝ€%, respectively. However, in south-east Amazonia, precipitation decreases by 10ĝ€% at the end of the dry season and the three LSMs produce a 6ĝ€% decrease of ET, which is less than precipitation, so that runoff decreases by 22 %. For instance, the minimum river discharge of the Rio Tapajós is reduced by 31ĝ€% in 2100. To study the additional effect of deforestation, we prescribed to the LSMs three contrasted LCC scenarios, with a forest decline going from 7 to 34ĝ€% over this century. All three scenarios partly offset the climate-induced increase of ET, and runoff increases over the entire Amazon. In the south-east, however, deforestation amplifies the decrease of ET at the end of dry season, leading to a large increase of runoff (up to +27ĝ€% in the extreme deforestation case), offsetting the negative effect of climate change, thus balancing the decrease of low flows in the Rio Tapajós. These projections are associated with large uncertainties, which we attribute separately to the differences in LSMs, GCMs and to the uncertain range of deforestation. At the subcatchment scale, the uncertainty range on ET changes is shown to first depend on GCMs, while the uncertainty of runoff projections is predominantly induced by LSM structural differences. By contrast, we found that the uncertainty in both ET and runoff changes attributable to uncertain future deforestation is low.