Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 682

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

Improving canopy processes in the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) using global flux fields empirically inferred from FLUXNET data

Open access
Bonan, Gordon B., Lawrence, Peter J., Oleson, Keith W., Levis, Samuel, Jung, Martin, Reichstein, Markus, Lawrence, David M., Swenson, Sean C.·2011·Journal of Geophysical Research

Abstract

[1] The Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) overestimates gross primary production (GPP) compared with data-driven estimates and other process models. We use global, spatially gridded GPP and latent heat flux upscaled from the FLUXNET network of eddy covariance towers to evaluate and improve canopy processes in CLM4. We investigate differences in GPP and latent heat flux arising from model parameterizations (termed model structural error) and from uncertainty in the photosynthetic parameter Vcmax (termed model parameter uncertainty). Model structural errors entail radiative transfer, leaf photosynthesis and stomatal conductance, and canopy scaling of leaf processes. Model structural revisions reduce global GPP over the period 1982–2004 from 165 Pg C yr−1 to 130 Pg C yr−1, and global evapotranspiration decreases from 68,000 km3 yr−1 to 65,000 km3 yr−1, within the uncertainty of FLUXNET-based estimates. Colimitation of photosynthesis is a cause of the improvements, as are revisions to photosynthetic parameters and their temperature dependency. Improvements are seen in all regions and seasonally over the course of the year. Similar improvements occur in latent heat flux. Uncertainty in Vcmax produces effects of comparable magnitude as model structural errors, but of offsetting sign. This suggests that model structural errors can be compensated by parameter adjustment, and this may explain the lack of consensus in values for Vcmax used in terrestrial biosphere models. Our analyses show that despite inherent uncertainties global flux fields empirically inferred from FLUXNET data are a valuable tool to guide terrestrial biosphere model development and evaluation.

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 · 10.1029/2010jg001593

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 682

Metadata

Authors
Bonan, G. B., Lawrence, P. J., Oleson, K. W., Levis, S., Jung, M., Reichstein, M., Lawrence, D. M., & Swenson, S. C.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research
Published
2011-05-18
Volume
116
Issue
G2
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1980901385
Cited by
682
References
2
FWCI
32.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Improving canopy processes in the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) using global flux fields empirically inferred from FLUXNET data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2010jg001593
The paper
Bonan, G. B., Lawrence, P. J., Oleson, K. W., Levis, S., Jung, M., Reichstein, M., Lawrence, D. M., & Swenson, S. C. (2011). Improving canopy processes in the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) using global flux fields empirically inferred from FLUXNET data. Journal of Geophysical Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jg001593

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.