Taking off the training wheels: the properties of a dynamic vegetation model without climate envelopes, CLM4.5(ED)
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract. We describe an implementation of the Ecosystem Demography (ED) concept in the Community Land Model. The structure of CLM(ED) and the physiological and structural modifications applied to the CLM are presented. A major motivation of this development is to allow the prediction of biome boundaries directly from plant physiological traits via their competitive interactions. Here we investigate the performance of the model for an example biome boundary in eastern North America. We explore the sensitivity of the predicted biome boundaries and ecosystem properties to the variation of leaf properties using the parameter space defined by the GLOPNET global leaf trait database. Furthermore, we investigate the impact of four sequential alterations to the structural assumptions in the model governing the relative carbon economy of deciduous and evergreen plants. The default assumption is that the costs and benefits of deciduous vs. evergreen leaf strategies, in terms of carbon assimilation and expenditure, can reproduce the geographical structure of biome boundaries and ecosystem functioning. We find some support for this assumption, but only under particular combinations of model traits and structural assumptions. Many questions remain regarding the preferred methods for deployment of plant trait information in land surface models. In some cases, plant traits might best be closely linked to each other, but we also find support for direct linkages to environmental conditions. We advocate intensified study of the costs and benefits of plant life history strategies in different environments and the increased use of parametric and structural ensembles in the development and analysis of complex vegetation models.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
As models improve their representation of vegetation, simulation of fire mortality also improves.
“As models improve their representation of vegetation such as with the incorporation of plant physiology, growth, and size-structure (Fisher et al., 2018) and traitbased modelling (Fisher et al., 2015), simulation of fire mortality also improves.”
From Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers (2020) · cites this paper as Fisher et al., 2015
Cites
Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems
GILL, R. A., & JACKSON, R. B. (2000) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00681.x · Cited by 1,300 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers
McLauchlan, K. K., Higuera, P. E., Miesel, J., Rogers, B. M., Schweitzer, J., Shuman, J. K., Tepley, A. J., Varner, J. M., Veblen, T. T., Adalsteinsson, S. A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13403 · Cited by 729 · see citing works
“As models improve their representation of vegetation such as with the incorporation of plant physiology, growth, and size-structure (Fisher et al., 2018) and trait-based modelling (Fisher et al., 2015), simulation of fire mortality also improves.”
Self-citationClimate, ecosystems, and planetary futures: The challenge to predict life in Earth system models
Bonan, G. B., & Doney, S. C. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aam8328 · Cited by 698 · see citing works
Self-citationRobust leaf trait relationships across species under global environmental changes
Cui, E., Weng, E., Yan, E., & Xia, J. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16839-9 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fisher, R. A., Muszala, S., Verteinstein, M., Lawrence, P., Xu, C., McDowell, N. G., Knox, R. G., Koven, C., Holm, J., Rogers, B. M., Spessa, A., Lawrence, D., & Bonan, G.
- Affiliations
- NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
- Los Alamos National Laboratory (US)
- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
- Woodwell Climate Research Center (US)
- The Open University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Fisher, R. A.
- Muszala, S.
- Verteinstein, M.
- Lawrence, P.
- Xu, C.
- McDowell, N. G.
- Knox, R. G.
- Koven, C.
- Holm, J.
- Rogers, B. M.
- Spessa, A.
- Lawrence, D.
- Bonan, G.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Geoscientific Model Development
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2015-11-06
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3593-3619
- ISSN
- 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
- 1991-9603
- OpenAlex
- W2148626738
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 8
- FWCI
- 19.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Geoscientific model development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- U.S. Department of Energy
- National Center for Atmospheric Research
- Office of Science
- Laboratory Directed Research and Development
- Los Alamos National Laboratory
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
- Keywords
- Community Land Model, dynamic global vegetation models, biome boundaries, plant functional traits, leaf traits, carbon economy, plant competition, climate envelope, eastern North America, land surface modeling
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