Search Results
Understanding the uncertainty in global forest carbon turnover
2020, Pugh, Thomas A.M., Rademacher, Tim, Shafer, Sarah L., Steinkamp, Jörg, Barichivich, Jonathan, Beckage, Brian, Haverd, Vanessa, Harper, Anna, Heinke, Jens, Nishina, Kazuya, Rammig, Anja, Sato, Hisashi, Arneth, Almut, Hantson, Stijn, Hickler, Thomas, Kautz, Markus, Quesada, Benjamin, Smith, Benjamin, Thonicke, Kirsten
The length of time that carbon remains in forest biomass is one of the largest uncertainties in the global carbon cycle, with both recent historical baselines and future responses to environmental change poorly constrained by available observations. In the absence of large-scale observations, models used for global assessments tend to fall back on simplified assumptions of the turnover rates of biomass and soil carbon pools. In this study, the biomass carbon turnover times calculated by an ensemble of contemporary terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) are analysed to assess their current capability to accurately estimate biomass carbon turnover times in forests and how these times are anticipated to change in the future. Modelled baseline 1985-2014 global average forest biomass turnover times vary from 12.2 to 23.5 years between TBMs. TBM differences in phenological processes, which control allocation to, and turnover rate of, leaves and fine roots, are as important as tree mortality with regard to explaining the variation in total turnover among TBMs. The different governing mechanisms exhibited by each TBM result in a wide range of plausible turnover time projections for the end of the century. Based on these simulations, it is not possible to draw robust conclusions regarding likely future changes in turnover time, and thus biomass change, for different regions. Both spatial and temporal uncertainty in turnover time are strongly linked to model assumptions concerning plant functional type distributions and their controls. Thirteen model-based hypotheses of controls on turnover time are identified, along with recommendations for pragmatic steps to test them using existing and novel observations. Efforts to resolve uncertainty in turnover time, and thus its impacts on the future evolution of biomass carbon stocks across the world's forests, will need to address both mortality and establishment components of forest demography, as well as allocation of carbon to woody versus non-woody biomass growth. © 2020 SPIE. All rights reserved.
Benchmarking carbon fluxes of the ISIMIP2a biome models
2017, Chang, Jinfeng, Ciais, Philippe, Wang, Xuhui, Piao, Shilong, Asrar, Ghassem, Betts, Richard, Chevallier, Frédéric, Dury, Marie, François, Louis, Frieler, Katja, Ros, Anselmo García Cantú, Henrot, Alexandra-Jane, Hickler, Thomas, Ito, Akihiko, Morfopoulos, Catherine, Munhoven, Guy, Nishina, Kazuya, Ostberg, Sebastian, Pan, Shufen, Peng, Shushi, Rafique, Rashid, Reyer, Christopher, Rödenbeck, Christian, Schaphoff, Sibyll, Steinkamp, Jörg, Tian, Hanqin, Viovy, Nicolas, Yang, Jia, Zeng, Ning, Zhao, Fang
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the eight ISIMIP2a biome models against independent estimates of long-term net carbon fluxes (i.e. Net Biome Productivity, NBP) over terrestrial ecosystems for the recent four decades (1971–2010). We evaluate modeled global NBP against 1) the updated global residual land sink (RLS) plus land use emissions (E LUC) from the Global Carbon Project (GCP), presented as R + L in this study by Le Quéré et al (2015), and 2) the land CO2 fluxes from two atmospheric inversion systems: Jena CarboScope s81_v3.8 and CAMS v15r2, referred to as F Jena and F CAMS respectively. The model ensemble-mean NBP (that includes seven models with land-use change) is higher than but within the uncertainty of R + L, while the simulated positive NBP trend over the last 30 yr is lower than that from R + L and from the two inversion systems. ISIMIP2a biome models well capture the interannual variation of global net terrestrial ecosystem carbon fluxes. Tropical NBP represents 31 ± 17% of global total NBP during the past decades, and the year-to-year variation of tropical NBP contributes most of the interannual variation of global NBP. According to the models, increasing Net Primary Productivity (NPP) was the main cause for the generally increasing NBP. Significant global NBP anomalies from the long-term mean between the two phases of El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events are simulated by all models (p < 0.05), which is consistent with the R + L estimate (p = 0.06), also mainly attributed to NPP anomalies, rather than to changes in heterotrophic respiration (Rh). The global NPP and NBP anomalies during ENSO events are dominated by their anomalies in tropical regions impacted by tropical climate variability. Multiple regressions between R + L, F Jena and F CAMS interannual variations and tropical climate variations reveal a significant negative response of global net terrestrial ecosystem carbon fluxes to tropical mean annual temperature variation, and a non-significant response to tropical annual precipitation variation. According to the models, tropical precipitation is a more important driver, suggesting that some models do not capture the roles of precipitation and temperature changes adequately.
Projecting Exposure to Extreme Climate Impact Events Across Six Event Categories and Three Spatial Scales
2020, Lange, Stefan, Volkholz, Jan, Geiger, Tobias, Zhao, Fang, Vega, Iliusi, Veldkamp, Ted, Reyer, Christopher P.O., Warszawski, Lila, Huber, Veronika, Jägermeyr, Jonas, Schewe, Jacob, Bresch, David N., Büchner, Matthias, Chang, Jinfeng, Ciais, Philippe, Dury, Marie, Emanuel, Kerry, Folberth, Christian, Gerten, Dieter, Gosling, Simon N., Grillakis, Manolis, Hanasaki, Naota, Henrot, Alexandra-Jane, Hickler, Thomas, Honda, Yasushi, Ito, Akihiko, Khabarov, Nikolay, Koutroulis, Aristeidis, Liu, Wenfeng, Müller, Christoph, Nishina, Kazuya, Ostberg, Sebastian, Müller Schmied, Hannes, Seneviratne, Sonia I., Stacke, Tobias, Steinkamp, Jörg, Thiery, Wim, Wada, Yoshihide, Willner, Sven, Yang, Hong, Yoshikawa, Minoru, Yue, Chao, Frieler, Katja
The extent and impact of climate-related extreme events depend on the underlying meteorological, hydrological, or climatological drivers as well as on human factors such as land use or population density. Here we quantify the pure effect of historical and future climate change on the exposure of land and population to extreme climate impact events using an unprecedentedly large ensemble of harmonized climate impact simulations from the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b. Our results indicate that global warming has already more than doubled both the global land area and the global population annually exposed to all six categories of extreme events considered: river floods, tropical cyclones, crop failure, wildfires, droughts, and heatwaves. Global warming of 2°C relative to preindustrial conditions is projected to lead to a more than fivefold increase in cross-category aggregate exposure globally. Changes in exposure are unevenly distributed, with tropical and subtropical regions facing larger increases than higher latitudes. The largest increases in overall exposure are projected for the population of South Asia. ©2020. The Authors.
Tree mortality submodels drive simulated long-term forest dynamics: assessing 15 models from the stand to global scale
2019, Bugmann, Harald, Seidl, Rupert, Hartig, Florian, Bohn, Friedrich, Bruna, Josef, Cailleret, Maxime, Francois, Louis, Heinke, Jens, Henrot, Alexandra-Jane, Hickler, Thomas, Huelsmann, Lisa, Huth, Andreas, Jacquemin, Ingrid, Kollas, Chris, Lasch-Born, Petra, Lexer, Manfred J., Merganic, Jan, Merganicova, Katarna, Mette, Tobias, Miranda, Brian R., Nadal-Sala, Daniel, Rammer, Werner, Rammig, Anja, Reineking, Bjoern, Roedig, Edna, Sabate, Santi, Steinkamp, Jorg, Suckow, Felicitas, Vacchiano, Giorgio, Wild, Jan, Xu, Chonggang, Reyer, Christopher P.O.
Models are pivotal for assessing future forest dynamics under the impacts of changing climate and management practices, incorporating representations of tree growth, mortality, and regeneration. Quantitative studies on the importance of mortality submodels are scarce. We evaluated 15 dynamic vegetation models (DVMs) regarding their sensitivity to different formulations of tree mortality under different degrees of climate change. The set of models comprised eight DVMs at the stand scale, three at the landscape scale, and four typically applied at the continental to global scale. Some incorporate empirically derived mortality models, and others are based on experimental data, whereas still others are based on theoretical reasoning. Each DVM was run with at least two alternative mortality submodels. Model behavior was evaluated against empirical time series data, and then, the models were subjected to different scenarios of climate change. Most DVMs matched empirical data quite well, irrespective of the mortality submodel that was used. However, mortality submodels that performed in a very similar manner against past data often led to sharply different trajectories of forest dynamics under future climate change. Most DVMs featured high sensitivity to the mortality submodel, with deviations of basal area and stem numbers on the order of 10–40% per century under current climate and 20–170% under climate change. The sensitivity of a given DVM to scenarios of climate change, however, was typically lower by a factor of two to three. We conclude that (1) mortality is one of the most uncertain processes when it comes to assessing forest response to climate change, and (2) more data and a better process understanding of tree mortality are needed to improve the robustness of simulated future forest dynamics. Our study highlights that comparing several alternative mortality formulations in DVMs provides valuable insights into the effects of process uncertainties on simulated future forest dynamics. © 2019 The Authors.
Adaptive responses of animals to climate change are most likely insufficient
2019, Radchuk, Viktoriia, Reed, Thomas, Teplitsky, Céline, van de Pol, Martijn, Charmantier, Anne, Hassall, Christopher, Adamík, Peter, Adriaensen, Frank, Ahola, Markus P., Arcese, Peter, Avilés, Jesús Miguel, Balbontin, Javier, Berg, Karl S., Borras, Antoni, Burthe, Sarah, Clobert, Jean, Dehnhard, Nina, de Lope, Florentino, Dhondt, André A., Dingemanse, Niels J., Doi, Hideyuki, Eeva, Tapio, Fickel, Joerns, Filella, Iolanda, Fossøy, Frode, Goodenough, Anne E., Hall, Stephen J. G., Hansson, Bengt, Harris, Michael, Hasselquist, Dennis, Hickler, Thomas, Joshi, Jasmin, Kharouba, Heather, Martínez, Juan Gabriel, Mihoub, Jean-Baptiste, Mills, James A., Molina-Morales, Mercedes, Moksnes, Arne, Ozgul, Arpat, Parejo, Deseada, Pilard, Philippe, Poisbleau, Maud, Rousset, Francois, Rödel, Mark-Oliver, Scott, David, Senar, Juan Carlos, Stefanescu, Constanti, Stokke, Bård G., Kusano, Tamotsu, Tarka, Maja, Tarwater, Corey E., Thonicke, Kirsten, Thorley, Jack, Wilting, Andreas, Tryjanowski, Piotr, Merilä, Juha, Sheldon, Ben C., Pape Møller, Anders, Matthysen, Erik, Janzen, Fredric, Dobson, F. Stephen, Visser, Marcel E., Beissinger, Steven R., Courtiol, Alexandre, Kramer-Schadt, Stephanie
Biological responses to climate change have been widely documented across taxa and regions, but it remains unclear whether species are maintaining a good match between phenotype and environment, i.e. whether observed trait changes are adaptive. Here we reviewed 10,090 abstracts and extracted data from 71 studies reported in 58 relevant publications, to assess quantitatively whether phenotypic trait changes associated with climate change are adaptive in animals. A meta-analysis focussing on birds, the taxon best represented in our dataset, suggests that global warming has not systematically affected morphological traits, but has advanced phenological traits. We demonstrate that these advances are adaptive for some species, but imperfect as evidenced by the observed consistent selection for earlier timing. Application of a theoretical model indicates that the evolutionary load imposed by incomplete adaptive responses to ongoing climate change may already be threatening the persistence of species. © 2019, The Author(s).
Pronounced and unavoidable impacts of low-end global warming on northern high-latitude land ecosystems
2020, Ito, Akihiko, Reyer, Christopher P. O., Gädeke, Anne, Ciais, Philippe, Chang, Jinfeng, Chen, Min, François, Louis, Forrest, Matthew, Hickler, Thomas, Ostberg, Sebastian, Shi, Hao, Thiery, Wim, Tian, Hanqin
Arctic ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to climate change because of Arctic amplification. Here, we assessed the climatic impacts of low-end, 1.5 °C, and 2.0 °C global temperature increases above pre-industrial levels, on the warming of terrestrial ecosystems in northern high latitudes (NHL, above 60 °N including pan-Arctic tundra and boreal forests) under the framework of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b protocol. We analyzed the simulated changes of net primary productivity, vegetation biomass, and soil carbon stocks of eight ecosystem models that were forced by the projections of four global climate models and two atmospheric greenhouse gas pathways (RCP2.6 and RCP6.0). Our results showed that considerable impacts on ecosystem carbon budgets, particularly primary productivity and vegetation biomass, are very likely to occur in the NHL areas. The models agreed on increases in primary productivity and biomass accumulation, despite considerable inter-model and inter-scenario differences in the magnitudes of the responses. The inter-model variability highlighted the inadequacies of the present models, which fail to consider important components such as permafrost and wildfire. The simulated impacts were attributable primarily to the rapid temperature increases in the NHL and the greater sensitivity of northern vegetation to warming, which contrasted with the less pronounced responses of soil carbon stocks. The simulated increases of vegetation biomass by 30–60 Pg C in this century have implications for climate policy such as the Paris Agreement. Comparison between the results at two warming levels showed the effectiveness of emission reductions in ameliorating the impacts and revealed unavoidable impacts for which adaptation options are urgently needed in the NHL ecosystems.
The concerns of the young protesters are justified: A statement by Scientists for Future concerning the protests for more climate protection
2019, Hagedorn, Gregor, Loew, Thomas, Seneviratne, Sonia I., Lucht, Wolfgang, Beck, Marie-Luise, Hesse, Janina, Knutti, Reto, Quaschning, Volker, Schleimer, Jan-Hendrik, Mattauch, Linus, Breyer, Christian, Hübener, Heike, Kirchengast, Gottfried, Chodura, Alice, Clausen, Jens, Creutzig, Felix, Darbi, Marianne, Daub, Claus-Heinrich, Ekardt, Felix, Göpel, Maja, Hardt, Judith N., Hertin, Julia, Hickler, Thomas, Köhncke, Arnulf, Köster, Stephan, Krohmer, Julia, Kromp-Kolb, Helga, Leinfelder, Reinhold, Mederake, Linda, Neuhaus, Michael, Rahmstorf, Stefan, Schmidt, Christine, Schneider, Christoph, Schneider, Gerhard, Seppelt, Ralf, Spindler, Uli, Springmann, Marco, Staab, Katharina, Stocker, Thomas F., Steininger, Karl, Hirschhausen, Eckart von, Winter, Susanne, Wittau, Martin, Zens, Josef
In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead. © 2019 G. Hagedorn et al.; licensee oekom verlag.This Open Access article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CCBY4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).
Photosynthetic productivity and its efficiencies in ISIMIP2a biome models: Benchmarking for impact assessment studies
2017, Ito, Akihiko, Nishina, Kazuya, Reyer, Christopher P.O., François, Louis, Henrot, Alexandra-Jane, Munhoven, Guy, Jacquemin, Ingrid, Tian, Hanqin, Yang, Jia, Pan, Shufen, Morfopoulos, Catherine, Betts, Richard, Hickler, Thomas, Steinkamp, Jörg, Ostberg, Sebastian, Schaphoff, Sibyll, Ciais, Philippe, Chang, Jinfeng, Rafique, Rashid, Zeng, Ning, Zhao, Fang
Simulating vegetation photosynthetic productivity (or gross primary production, GPP) is a critical feature of the biome models used for impact assessments of climate change. We conducted a benchmarking of global GPP simulated by eight biome models participating in the second phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2a) with four meteorological forcing datasets (30 simulations), using independent GPP estimates and recent satellite data of solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence as a proxy of GPP. The simulated global terrestrial GPP ranged from 98 to 141 Pg C yr−1 (1981–2000 mean); considerable inter-model and inter-data differences were found. Major features of spatial distribution and seasonal change of GPP were captured by each model, showing good agreement with the benchmarking data. All simulations showed incremental trends of annual GPP, seasonal-cycle amplitude, radiation-use efficiency, and water-use efficiency, mainly caused by the CO2 fertilization effect. The incremental slopes were higher than those obtained by remote sensing studies, but comparable with those by recent atmospheric observation. Apparent differences were found in the relationship between GPP and incoming solar radiation, for which forcing data differed considerably. The simulated GPP trends co-varied with a vegetation structural parameter, leaf area index, at model-dependent strengths, implying the importance of constraining canopy properties. In terms of extreme events, GPP anomalies associated with a historical El Niño event and large volcanic eruption were not consistently simulated in the model experiments due to deficiencies in both forcing data and parameterized environmental responsiveness. Although the benchmarking demonstrated the overall advancement of contemporary biome models, further refinements are required, for example, for solar radiation data and vegetation canopy schemes.
Evapotranspiration simulations in ISIMIP2a—Evaluation of spatio-temporal characteristics with a comprehensive ensemble of independent datasets
2018, Wartenburger, Richard, Seneviratne, Sonia I, Hirschi, Martin, Chang, Jinfeng, Ciais, Philippe, Deryng, Delphine, Elliott, Joshua, Folberth, Christian, Gosling, Simon N, Gudmundsson, Lukas, Henrot, Alexandra-Jane, Hickler, Thomas, Ito, Akihiko, Khabarov, Nikolay, Kim, Hyungjun, Leng, Guoyong, Liu, Junguo, Liu, Xingcai, Masaki, Yoshimitsu, Morfopoulos, Catherine, Müller, Christoph, Müller Schmied, Hannes, Nishina, Kazuya, Orth, Rene, Pokhrel, Yadu, Pugh, Thomas A M, Satoh, Yusuke, Schaphoff, Sibyll, Schmid, Erwin, Sheffield, Justin, Stacke, Tobias, Steinkamp, Joerg, Tang, Qiuhong, Thiery, Wim, Wada, Yoshihide, Wang, Xuhui, Weedon, Graham P, Yang, Hong, Zhou, Tian
Actual land evapotranspiration (ET) is a key component of the global hydrological cycle and an essential variable determining the evolution of hydrological extreme events under different climate change scenarios. However, recently available ET products show persistent uncertainties that are impeding a precise attribution of human-induced climate change. Here, we aim at comparing a range of independent global monthly land ET estimates with historical model simulations from the global water, agriculture, and biomes sectors participating in the second phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2a). Among the independent estimates, we use the EartH2Observe Tier-1 dataset (E2O), two commonly used reanalyses, a pre-compiled ensemble product (LandFlux-EVAL), and an updated collection of recently published datasets that algorithmically derive ET from observations or observations-based estimates (diagnostic datasets). A cluster analysis is applied in order to identify spatio-temporal differences among all datasets and to thus identify factors that dominate overall uncertainties. The clustering is controlled by several factors including the model choice, the meteorological forcing used to drive the assessed models, the data category (models participating in the different sectors of ISIMIP2a, E2O models, diagnostic estimates, reanalysis-based estimates or composite products), the ET scheme, and the number of soil layers in the models. By using these factors to explain spatial and spatio-temporal variabilities in ET, we find that the model choice mostly dominates (24%–40% of variance explained), except for spatio-temporal patterns of total ET, where the forcing explains the largest fraction of the variance (29%). The most dominant clusters of datasets are further compared with individual diagnostic and reanalysis-based estimates to assess their representation of selected heat waves and droughts in the Great Plains, Central Europe and western Russia. Although most of the ET estimates capture these extreme events, the generally large spread among the entire ensemble indicates substantial uncertainties.
Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b)
2017, Frieler, Katja, Lange, Stefan, Piontek, Franziska, Reyer, Christopher P.O., Schewe, Jacob, Warszawski, Lila, Zhao, Fang, Chini, Louise, Denvil, Sebastien, Emanuel, Kerry, Geiger, Tobias, Halladay, Kate, Hurtt, George, Mengel, Matthias, Murakami, Daisuke, Ostberg, Sebastian, Popp, Alexander, Riva, Riccardo, Stevanovic, Miodrag, Suzuki, Tatsuo, Volkholz, Jan, Burke, Eleanor, Ciais, Philippe, Ebi, Kristie, Eddy, Tyler D., Elliott, Joshua, Galbraith, Eric, Gosling, Simon N., Hattermann, Fred, Hickler, Thomas, Hinkel, Jochen, Hof, Christian, Huber, Veronika, Jägermeyr, Jonas, Krysanova, Valentina, Marcé, Rafael, Müller Schmied, Hannes, Mouratiadou, Ioanna, Pierson, Don, Tittensor, Derek P., Vautard, Robert, van Vliet, Michelle, Biber, Matthias F., Betts, Richard A., Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon, Deryng, Delphine, Frolking, Steve, Jones, Chris D., Lotze, Heike K., Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Sahajpal, Ritvik, Thonicke, Kirsten, Tian, Hanqin, Yamagata, Yoshiki
In Paris, France, December 2015, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) invited the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide a "special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways". In Nairobi, Kenya, April 2016, the IPCC panel accepted the invitation. Here we describe the response devised within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) to provide tailored, cross-sectorally consistent impact projections to broaden the scientific basis for the report. The simulation protocol is designed to allow for (1) separation of the impacts of historical warming starting from pre-industrial conditions from impacts of other drivers such as historical land-use changes (based on pre-industrial and historical impact model simulations); (2) quantification of the impacts of additional warming up to 1.5°C, including a potential overshoot and long-term impacts up to 2299, and comparison to higher levels of global mean temperature change (based on the low-emissions Representative Concentration Pathway RCP2.6 and a no-mitigation pathway RCP6.0) with socio-economic conditions fixed at 2005 levels; and (3) assessment of the climate effects based on the same climate scenarios while accounting for simultaneous changes in socio-economic conditions following the middle-of-the-road Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2, Fricko et al., 2016) and in particular differential bioenergy requirements associated with the transformation of the energy system to comply with RCP2.6 compared to RCP6.0. With the aim of providing the scientific basis for an aggregation of impacts across sectors and analysis of cross-sectoral interactions that may dampen or amplify sectoral impacts, the protocol is designed to facilitate consistent impact projections from a range of impact models across different sectors (global and regional hydrology, lakes, global crops, global vegetation, regional forests, global and regional marine ecosystems and fisheries, global and regional coastal infrastructure, energy supply and demand, temperature-related mortality, and global terrestrial biodiversity).