The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MuSICA, a CO2, water and energy multilayer, multileaf pine forest model: evaluation from hourly to yearly time scales and sensitivity analysis
Abstract
The current emphasis on global climate studies has led the scientific community to set up a number of sites for measuring long‐term biospheric fluxes, and to develop a wide range of biosphere–atmosphere exchange models. This paper presents a new model of this type, which has been developed for a pine forest canopy. In most coniferous species the canopy layer is well separated from the understorey and several cohorts of needles coexist. It was therefore found necessary to distinguish several vegetation layers and, in each layer, several leaf classes defined not only by their light regime and wetness status but also by their age. This model, named MuSICA, is a multilayer, multileaf process‐based model. Each submodel is first independently parameterized using data collected at a EUROFLUX site near Bordeaux (Southwestern France). Particular care is brought to identify the seasonal variations in the various physiological parameters. The full model is then evaluated using a two‐year long data set, split up into 12 day‐type classes defined by the season, the weather type and the soil water status. Beyond the good overall agreement obtained between measured and modelled values at various time scales, several points of further improvement are identified. They concern the seasonal variations in the stomatal response of needles and the soil/litter respiration, as well as their interaction with soil or litter moisture. A sensitivity analysis to some of the model features (in‐canopy turbulent transfer scheme, leaf age classes, water retention, distinction between shaded and sunlit leaves, number of layers) is finally performed in order to evaluate whether significant simplifications can be brought to such a model with little loss in its predictive quality. The distinction between several leaf classes is crucial if one is to compute biospheric fluxes accurately. It is also evidenced that accounting for in‐canopy turbulent transfer leads to better estimates of the sensible heat flux.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species
Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., & Berry, J. A. (1980) · Planta · doi:10.1007/bf00386231 · Cited by 8,796
Cited by
Evaluating theories of drought‐induced vegetation mortality using a multimodel–experiment framework
McDowell, N. G., Fisher, R. A., Xu, C., Domec, J. C., Hölttä, T., Mackay, D. S., Sperry, J. S., Boutz, A., Dickman, L., Gehres, N., et al. (2013) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.12465 · Cited by 420
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- OGÉE, J., BRUNET, Y., LOUSTAU, D., BERBIGIER, P., & DELZON, S.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-05
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 697-717
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2030519523
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.84
- 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: MuSICA, a CO2, water and energy multilayer, multileaf pine forest model: evaluation from hourly to yearly time scales and sensitivity analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00628.x
- The paper
- OGÉE, J., BRUNET, Y., LOUSTAU, D., BERBIGIER, P., & DELZON, S. (2003). MuSICA, a CO2, water and energy multilayer, multileaf pine forest model: evaluation from hourly to yearly time scales and sensitivity analysis. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00628.x
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.