Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPowell, Thomas L
dc.contributor.authorGalbraith, David R.
dc.contributor.authorChristoffersen, Bradley O.
dc.contributor.authorHarper, Anna
dc.contributor.authorImbuzeiro, Hewlley M. A.
dc.contributor.authorRowland, Lucy
dc.contributor.authorAlmeida, Samuel
dc.contributor.authorBrando, Paulo M.
dc.contributor.authorda Costa, Antonio Carlos Lola
dc.contributor.authorCosta, Marcos Heil
dc.contributor.authorHerrera, Naomi Marcil
dc.contributor.authorMalhi, Yadvinder
dc.contributor.authorSaleska, Scott R.
dc.contributor.authorSotta, Eleneide
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Mathew
dc.contributor.authorMeir, Patrick
dc.contributor.authorMoorcroft, Paul R
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-13T17:32:03Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifierQuick submit: 2013-07-12T14:27:35-04:00
dc.identifier.citationPowell, Thomas L., David R. Galbraith, Bradley O. Christoffersen, Anna Harper, Hewlley M. A. Imbuzeiro, Lucy Rowland, Samuel Almeida, et al. 2013. Confronting model predictions of carbon fluxes with measurements of Amazon forests subjected to experimental drought. New Phytologist 200, no. 2: 350-365.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0028-646Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:32116899
dc.description.abstractConsiderable uncertainty surrounds the fate of Amazon rainforests in response to climate change. Here, carbon (C) flux predictions of five terrestrial biosphere models (Community Land Model version 3.5 (CLM3.5), Ecosystem Demography model version 2.1 (ED2), Integrated BIosphere Simulator version 2.6.4 (IBIS), Joint UK Land Environment Simulator version 2.1 (JULES) and Simple Biosphere model version 3 (SiB3)) and a hydrodynamic terrestrial ecosystem model (the Soil–Plant–Atmosphere (SPA) model) were evaluated against measurements from two large-scale Amazon drought experiments. Model predictions agreed with the observed C fluxes in the control plots of both experiments, but poorly replicated the responses to the drought treatments. Most notably, with the exception of ED2, the models predicted negligible reductions in aboveground biomass in response to the drought treatments, which was in contrast to an observed c. 20% reduction at both sites. For ED2, the timing of the decline in aboveground biomass was accurate, but the magnitude was too high for one site and too low for the other. Three key findings indicate critical areas for future research and model development. First, the models predicted declines in autotrophic respiration under prolonged drought in contrast to measured increases at one of the sites. Secondly, models lacking a phenological response to drought introduced bias in the sensitivity of canopy productivity and respiration to drought. Thirdly, the phenomenological water-stress functions used by the terrestrial biosphere models to represent the effects of soil moisture on stomatal conductance yielded unrealistic diurnal and seasonal responses to drought.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipOrganismic and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherWiley Blackwellen_US
dc.relation.isversionofdoi:10.1111/nph.12390en_US
dash.licenseMETA_ONLY
dc.subjectAmazonen_US
dc.subjectcarbon cycleen_US
dc.subjectdroughten_US
dc.subjectterrestrial biosphere modelen_US
dc.subjectthroughfall exclusionen_US
dc.subjecttropical rainforesten_US
dc.titleConfronting Model Predictions of Carbon Fluxes with Measurements of Amazon Forests Subjected to Experimental Droughten_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.date.updated2013-07-12T18:28:04Z
dc.description.versionVersion of Recorden_US
dc.rights.holderPowell et al
dc.relation.journalNew Phytologisten_US
dash.depositing.authorMoorcroft, Paul R
dash.embargo.until10000-01-01
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/nph.12390*
dash.authorsorderedfalse
dash.contributor.affiliatedPowell, Thomas L
dash.contributor.affiliatedHerrera, Naomi Marcil
dash.contributor.affiliatedMoorcroft, Paul


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record