The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate‐carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs)
Abstract
This study tests the ability of five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs), forced with observed climatology and atmospheric CO 2, to model the contemporary global carbon cycle. The DGVMs are also coupled to a fast ‘climate analogue model’, based on the Hadley Centre General Circulation Model (GCM), and run into the future for four Special Report Emission Scenarios (SRES): A1FI, A2, B1, B2. Results show that all DGVMs are consistent with the contemporary global land carbon budget. Under the more extreme projections of future environmental change, the responses of the DGVMs diverge markedly. In particular, large uncertainties are associated with the response of tropical vegetation to drought and boreal ecosystems to elevated temperatures and changing soil moisture status. The DGVMs show more divergence in their response to regional changes in climate than to increases in atmospheric CO 2 content. All models simulate a release of land carbon in response to climate, when physiological effects of elevated atmospheric CO 2 on plant production are not considered, implying a positive terrestrial climate‐carbon cycle feedback. All DGVMs simulate a reduction in global net primary production (NPP) and a decrease in soil residence time in the tropics and extra‐tropics in response to future climate. When both counteracting effects of climate and atmospheric CO 2 on ecosystem function are considered, all the DGVMs simulate cumulative net land carbon uptake over the 21st century for the four SRES emission scenarios. However, for the most extreme A1FI emissions scenario, three out of five DGVMs simulate an annual net source of CO 2 from the land to the atmosphere in the final decades of the 21st century. For this scenario, cumulative land uptake differs by 494 Pg C among DGVMs over the 21st century. This uncertainty is equivalent to over 50 years of anthropogenic emissions at current levels.
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
Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change
Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04514 · Cited by 6,919
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Self-citationIncreasing shrub abundance in the Arctic
Sturm, M., Racine, C., & Tape, K. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35079180 · Cited by 1,349
Cited by
Friedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Hauck, J., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., et al. (2020) · Earth System Science Data · doi:10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020 · Cited by 2,544
Self-citationScenarios for Global Biodiversity in the 21st Century
Pereira, H. M., Leadley, P. W., Proença, V., Alkemade, R., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Fernandez-Manjarrés, J. F., Araújo, M. B., Balvanera, P., Biggs, R., Cheung, W. W. L., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1196624 · Cited by 2,077
Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Hauck, J., Pongratz, J., Pickers, P. A., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., Canadell, J. G., et al. (2018) · Earth System Science Data · doi:10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018 · Cited by 1,645
Self-citationFriedlingstein, P., O'Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Landschützer, P., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Peters, G. P., et al. (2023) · Earth System Science Data · doi:10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023 · Cited by 1,500
Self-citationWU, Z., DIJKSTRA, P., KOCH, G. W., PEÑUELAS, J., & HUNGATE, B. A. (2011) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02302.x · Cited by 1,379
Metadata
- Authors
- SITCH, S., HUNTINGFORD, C., GEDNEY, N., LEVY, P. E., LOMAS, M., PIAO, S. L., BETTS, R., CIAIS, P., COX, P., FRIEDLINGSTEIN, P., JONES, C. D., PRENTICE, I. C., & WOODWARD, F. I.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-08-06
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2015-2039
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W1966715855
- Cited by
- 1,317
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 58.46
- 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: Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate‐carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01626.x
- The paper
- SITCH, S., HUNTINGFORD, C., GEDNEY, N., LEVY, P. E., LOMAS, M., PIAO, S. L., BETTS, R., CIAIS, P., COX, P., FRIEDLINGSTEIN, P., JONES, C. D., PRENTICE, I. C., & WOODWARD, F. I. (2008). Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate‐carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs). Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01626.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.