Votre recherche

Abstract Interannual air temperature variability has changed over some regions in Northern Hemisphere (NH), accompanying with climate warming. However, whether and to what extent it regulates the interannual sensitivity of vegetation growth to temperature variability (i.e., interannual temperature sensitivity)—one central issue in understanding and predicting the responses of vegetation growth to changing climate—still remains poorly quantified and understood. Here we quantify the relationships between the interannual temperature sensitivity of mean growing‐season (April–October) normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and ecosystem model simulations of gross primary productivity (GPP), and variability in mean growing‐season temperature for forest, shrub, and grass over NH. We find that higher interannual variability in mean growing‐season temperature leads to consistent decrease in interannual temperature sensitivity of mean growing‐season NDVI among all vegetation types but not in model simulations of GPP. Drier condition associates with ~130 ± 150% further decrease in interannual temperature sensitivity of mean growing‐season NDVI by temperature variability in forest and shrub. These results illustrate that varying temperature variability can significantly regulate the interannual temperature sensitivity of vegetation growth over NH, interacted with drought variability and nonlinear responses of photosynthesis to temperature. Our findings call for an improved characterization of the nonlinear effects of temperature variability on vegetation growth within global ecosystem models. , Key Points It shows consistent decrease in temperature sensitivity of vegetation growth by temperature variability for all vegetation types Larger decrease in temperature sensitivity of vegetation growth by temperature variability is found in forest and shrub in dry regions Drier condition adds further decrease in temperature sensitivity of vegetation growth by temperature variability for forest and shrub in dry regions

Abstract Increasing atmospheric methane (CH 4 ) concentrations have contributed to approximately 20% of anthropogenic climate change. Despite the importance of CH 4 as a greenhouse gas, its atmospheric growth rate and dynamics over the past two decades, which include a stabilization period (1999–2006), followed by renewed growth starting in 2007, remain poorly understood. We provide an updated estimate of CH 4 emissions from wetlands, the largest natural global CH 4 source, for 2000–2012 using an ensemble of biogeochemical models constrained with remote sensing surface inundation and inventory-based wetland area data. Between 2000–2012, boreal wetland CH 4 emissions increased by 1.2 Tg yr −1 (−0.2–3.5 Tg yr −1 ), tropical emissions decreased by 0.9 Tg yr −1 (−3.2−1.1 Tg yr −1 ), yet globally, emissions remained unchanged at 184 ± 22 Tg yr −1 . Changing air temperature was responsible for increasing high-latitude emissions whereas declines in low-latitude wetland area decreased tropical emissions; both dynamics are consistent with features of predicted centennial-scale climate change impacts on wetland CH 4 emissions. Despite uncertainties in wetland area mapping, our study shows that global wetland CH 4 emissions have not contributed significantly to the period of renewed atmospheric CH 4 growth, and is consistent with findings from studies that indicate some combination of increasing fossil fuel and agriculture-related CH 4 emissions, and a decrease in the atmospheric oxidative sink.

Abstract Changes in rainfall amounts and patterns have been observed and are expected to continue in the near future with potentially significant ecological and societal consequences. Modelling vegetation responses to changes in rainfall is thus crucial to project water and carbon cycles in the future. In this study, we present the results of a new model‐data intercomparison project, where we tested the ability of 10 terrestrial biosphere models to reproduce the observed sensitivity of ecosystem productivity to rainfall changes at 10 sites across the globe, in nine of which, rainfall exclusion and/or irrigation experiments had been performed. The key results are as follows: (a) Inter‐model variation is generally large and model agreement varies with timescales. In severely water‐limited sites, models only agree on the interannual variability of evapotranspiration and to a smaller extent on gross primary productivity. In more mesic sites, model agreement for both water and carbon fluxes is typically higher on fine (daily–monthly) timescales and reduces on longer (seasonal–annual) scales. (b) Models on average overestimate the relationship between ecosystem productivity and mean rainfall amounts across sites (in space) and have a low capacity in reproducing the temporal (interannual) sensitivity of vegetation productivity to annual rainfall at a given site, even though observation uncertainty is comparable to inter‐model variability. (c) Most models reproduced the sign of the observed patterns in productivity changes in rainfall manipulation experiments but had a low capacity in reproducing the observed magnitude of productivity changes. Models better reproduced the observed productivity responses due to rainfall exclusion than addition. (d) All models attribute ecosystem productivity changes to the intensity of vegetation stress and peak leaf area, whereas the impact of the change in growing season length is negligible. The relative contribution of the peak leaf area and vegetation stress intensity was highly variable among models.

Abstract. Field measurements of aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) in temperate grasslands suggest that both positive and negative asymmetric responses to changes in precipitation (P) may occur. Under normal range of precipitation variability, wet years typically result in ANPP gains being larger than ANPP declines in dry years (positive asymmetry), whereas increases in ANPP are lower in magnitude in extreme wet years compared to reductions during extreme drought (negative asymmetry). Whether the current generation of ecosystem models with a coupled carbon–water system in grasslands are capable of simulating these asymmetric ANPP responses is an unresolved question. In this study, we evaluated the simulated responses of temperate grassland primary productivity to scenarios of altered precipitation with 14 ecosystem models at three sites: Shortgrass steppe (SGS), Konza Prairie (KNZ) and Stubai Valley meadow (STU), spanning a rainfall gradient from dry to moist. We found that (1) the spatial slopes derived from modeled primary productivity and precipitation across sites were steeper than the temporal slopes obtained from inter-annual variations, which was consistent with empirical data; (2) the asymmetry of the responses of modeled primary productivity under normal inter-annual precipitation variability differed among models, and the mean of the model ensemble suggested a negative asymmetry across the three sites, which was contrary to empirical evidence based on filed observations; (3) the mean sensitivity of modeled productivity to rainfall suggested greater negative response with reduced precipitation than positive response to an increased precipitation under extreme conditions at the three sites; and (4) gross primary productivity (GPP), net primary productivity (NPP), aboveground NPP (ANPP) and belowground NPP (BNPP) all showed concave-down nonlinear responses to altered precipitation in all the models, but with different curvatures and mean values. Our results indicated that most models overestimate the negative drought effects and/or underestimate the positive effects of increased precipitation on primary productivity under normal climate conditions, highlighting the need for improving eco-hydrological processes in those models in the future.