Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The carbon cycle in the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS-ESM1) – Part 1: Model description and pre-industrial simulation

Open access
Law, Rachel M., Ziehn, Tilo, Matear, Richard J., Lenton, Andrew, Chamberlain, Matthew A., Stevens, Lauren E., Wang, Ying-Ping, Srbinovsky, Jhan, Bi, Daohua, Yan, Hailin, Vohralik, Peter F.·2017·Geoscientific Model Development

Abstract

Abstract. Earth system models (ESMs) that incorporate carbon–climate feedbacks represent the present state of the art in climate modelling. Here, we describe the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS)-ESM1, which comprises atmosphere (UM7.3), land (CABLE), ocean (MOM4p1), and sea-ice (CICE4.1) components with OASIS-MCT coupling, to which ocean and land carbon modules have been added. The land carbon model (as part of CABLE) can optionally include both nitrogen and phosphorous limitation on the land carbon uptake. The ocean carbon model (WOMBAT, added to MOM) simulates the evolution of phosphate, oxygen, dissolved inorganic carbon, alkalinity and iron with one class of phytoplankton and zooplankton. We perform multi-centennial pre-industrial simulations with a fixed atmospheric CO2 concentration and different land carbon model configurations (prescribed or prognostic leaf area index). We evaluate the equilibration of the carbon cycle and present the spatial and temporal variability in key carbon exchanges. Simulating leaf area index results in a slight warming of the atmosphere relative to the prescribed leaf area index case. Seasonal and interannual variations in land carbon exchange are sensitive to whether leaf area index is simulated, with interannual variations driven by variability in precipitation and temperature. We find that the response of the ocean carbon cycle shows reasonable agreement with observations. While our model overestimates surface phosphate values, the global primary productivity agrees well with observations. Our analysis highlights some deficiencies inherent in the carbon models and where the carbon simulation is negatively impacted by known biases in the underlying physical model and consequent limits on the applicability of this model version. We conclude the study with a brief discussion of key developments required to further improve the realism of our model simulation.

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 · 10.5194/gmd-10-2567-2017

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Law, R. M., Ziehn, T., Matear, R. J., Lenton, A., Chamberlain, M. A., Stevens, L. E., Wang, Y.-P., Srbinovsky, J., Bi, D., Yan, H., & Vohralik, P. F.
Venue
Geoscientific Model Development
Published
2017-07-06
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
2567-2590
ISSN
  • 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
  • 1991-9603
OpenAlex
W1947572947
Cited by
183
References
4
FWCI
5.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: The carbon cycle in the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS-ESM1) – Part 1: Model description and pre-industrial simulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/gmd-10-2567-2017
The paper
Law, R. M., Ziehn, T., Matear, R. J., Lenton, A., Chamberlain, M. A., Stevens, L. E., Wang, Y.-P., Srbinovsky, J., Bi, D., Yan, H., & Vohralik, P. F. (2017). The carbon cycle in the Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS-ESM1) – Part 1: Model description and pre-industrial simulation. Geoscientific Model Development. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2567-2017

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.