Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 159

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

OGÉE, J., BRUNET, Y., LOUSTAU, D., BERBIGIER, P., DELZON, S.·2003·Global Change Biology

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00628.x

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 159

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.