Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: a model‐data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites

De Kauwe, Martin G., Medlyn, Belinda E., Zaehle, Sönke, Walker, Anthony P., Dietze, Michael C., Hickler, Thomas, Jain, Atul K., Luo, Yiqi, Parton, William J., Prentice, I. Colin, Smith, Benjamin, Thornton, Peter E., Wang, Shusen, Wang, Ying‐Ping, Wårlind, David, Weng, Ensheng, Crous, Kristine Y., Ellsworth, David S., Hanson, Paul J., Seok Kim, Hyun‐, Warren, Jeffrey M., Oren, Ram, Norby, Richard J.·2013·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Predicted responses of transpiration to elevated atmospheric CO 2 concentration (eCO 2) are highly variable amongst process‐based models. To better understand and constrain this variability amongst models, we conducted an intercomparison of 11 ecosystem models applied to data from two forest free‐air CO 2 enrichment (FACE) experiments at Duke University and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. We analysed model structures to identify the key underlying assumptions causing differences in model predictions of transpiration and canopy water use efficiency. We then compared the models against data to identify model assumptions that are incorrect or are large sources of uncertainty. We found that model‐to‐model and model‐to‐observations differences resulted from four key sets of assumptions, namely (i) the nature of the stomatal response to elevated CO 2 (coupling between photosynthesis and stomata was supported by the data); (ii) the roles of the leaf and atmospheric boundary layer (models which assumed multiple conductance terms in series predicted more decoupled fluxes than observed at the broadleaf site); (iii) the treatment of canopy interception (large intermodel variability, 2–15%); and (iv) the impact of soil moisture stress (process uncertainty in how models limit carbon and water fluxes during moisture stress). Overall, model predictions of the CO 2 effect on WUE were reasonable (intermodel μ = approximately 28% ± 10%) compared to the observations (μ = approximately 30% ± 13%) at the well‐coupled coniferous site (Duke), but poor (intermodel μ = approximately 24% ± 6%; observations μ = approximately 38% ± 7%) at the broadleaf site (Oak Ridge). The study yields a framework for analysing and interpreting model predictions of transpiration responses to eCO 2, and highlights key improvements to these types of models.

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 · 10.1111/gcb.12164

Cites

93 of 93 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 93 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
De Kauwe, M. G., Medlyn, B. E., Zaehle, S., Walker, A. P., Dietze, M. C., Hickler, T., Jain, A. K., Luo, Y., Parton, W. J., Prentice, I. C., Smith, B., Thornton, P. E., Wang, S., Wang, Y., Wårlind, D., Weng, E., Crous, K. Y., Ellsworth, D. S., Hanson, P. J., Seok Kim, H., Warren, J. M., Oren, R., & Norby, R. J.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-25
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
1759-1779
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2166572146
Cited by
384
References
93
FWCI
29.21
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: Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: a model‐data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/gcb.12164
The paper
De Kauwe, M. G., Medlyn, B. E., Zaehle, S., Walker, A. P., Dietze, M. C., Hickler, T., Jain, A. K., Luo, Y., Parton, W. J., Prentice, I. C., Smith, B., Thornton, P. E., Wang, S., Wang, Y., Wårlind, D., Weng, E., Crous, K. Y., Ellsworth, D. S., Hanson, P. J., . . . Norby, R. J. (2013). Forest water use and water use efficiency at elevated CO2: a model‐data intercomparison at two contrasting temperate forest FACE sites. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12164

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.