Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 244

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of FLUXNET in the Community Land Model development

Stöckli, R., Lawrence, D. M., Niu, G.‐Y., Oleson, K. W., Thornton, P. E., Yang, Z.‐L., Bonan, G. B., Denning, A. S., Running, S. W.·2008·Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences

Abstract

The Community Land Model version 3 (CLM3.0) simulates land‐atmosphere exchanges in response to climatic forcings. CLM3.0 has known biases in the surface energy partitioning as a result of deficiencies in its hydrological and biophysical parameterizations. Such models, however, need to be robust for multidecadal global climate simulations. FLUXNET now provides an extensive data source of carbon, water and energy exchanges for investigating land processes, and it encompasses a global range of ecosystem‐climate interactions. Data from 15 FLUXNET sites are used to identify and improve model deficiencies. Including a prognostic aquifer, a bare soil evaporation resistance formulation and numerous other changes in the model result in a significantly improved soil hydrology and energy partitioning. Terrestrial water storage increased by up to 300 mm in warm climates and decreased in cold climates. Nitrogen control of photosynthesis is revealed as another missing process in the model. These improvements increase the correlation coefficient of hourly and monthly latent heat fluxes from a range of 0.5–0.6 to the range of 0.7–0.9. RMSE of the simulated sensible heat fluxes decrease by 20–50%. Primary production is overestimated during the wet season in mediterranean and tropical ecosystems. This might be related to missing carbon‐nitrogen dynamics as well as to site‐specific parameters. The new model (CLM3.5) with an improved terrestrial water cycle should lead to more realistic land‐atmosphere exchanges in coupled simulations. FLUXNET is found to be a valuable tool to develop and validate land surface models prior to their application in computationally expensive global simulations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2007jg000562

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 244

Metadata

Authors
Stöckli, R., Lawrence, D. M., Niu, G. ‐., Oleson, K. W., Thornton, P. E., Yang, Z. ‐., Bonan, G. B., Denning, A. S., & Running, S. W.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
Published
2008-03
Volume
113
Issue
G1
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019751319
Cited by
244
References
2
FWCI
20.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use of FLUXNET in the Community Land Model development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2007jg000562
The paper
Stöckli, R., Lawrence, D. M., Niu, G. ‐., Oleson, K. W., Thornton, P. E., Yang, Z. ‐., Bonan, G. B., Denning, A. S., & Running, S. W. (2008). Use of FLUXNET in the Community Land Model development. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jg000562

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.