TY - JOUR
T1 - Process-oriented analysis of dominant sources of uncertainty in the land carbon sink
AU - O’Sullivan, Michael
AU - Friedlingstein, Pierre
AU - Sitch, Stephen
AU - Anthoni, Peter
AU - Arneth, Almut
AU - Arora, Vivek K.
AU - Bastrikov, Vladislav
AU - Delire, Christine
AU - Goll, Daniel S.
AU - Jain, Atul
AU - Kato, Etsushi
AU - Kennedy, Daniel
AU - Knauer, Jürgen
AU - Lienert, Sebastian
AU - Lombardozzi, Danica
AU - McGuire, Patrick C.
AU - Melton, Joe R.
AU - Nabel, Julia E.M.S.
AU - Pongratz, Julia
AU - Poulter, Benjamin
AU - Séférian, Roland
AU - Tian, Hanqin
AU - Vuichard, Nicolas
AU - Walker, Anthony P.
AU - Yuan, Wenping
AU - Yue, Xu
AU - Zaehle, Sönke
N1 - M.O.S., P.F. and S.S. have received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 821003 (project 4 C).
AR was supported by grant number T32HS026121 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Other authors have no pertinent conflicts of interest to report.
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - The observed global net land carbon sink is captured by current land models. All models agree that atmospheric CO2 and nitrogen deposition driven gains in carbon stocks are partially offset by climate and land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) losses. However, there is a lack of consensus in the partitioning of the sink between vegetation and soil, where models do not even agree on the direction of change in carbon stocks over the past 60 years. This uncertainty is driven by plant productivity, allocation, and turnover response to atmospheric CO2 (and to a smaller extent to LULCC), and the response of soil to LULCC (and to a lesser extent climate). Overall, differences in turnover explain ~70% of model spread in both vegetation and soil carbon changes. Further analysis of internal plant and soil (individual pools) cycling is needed to reduce uncertainty in the controlling processes behind the global land carbon sink.
AB - The observed global net land carbon sink is captured by current land models. All models agree that atmospheric CO2 and nitrogen deposition driven gains in carbon stocks are partially offset by climate and land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) losses. However, there is a lack of consensus in the partitioning of the sink between vegetation and soil, where models do not even agree on the direction of change in carbon stocks over the past 60 years. This uncertainty is driven by plant productivity, allocation, and turnover response to atmospheric CO2 (and to a smaller extent to LULCC), and the response of soil to LULCC (and to a lesser extent climate). Overall, differences in turnover explain ~70% of model spread in both vegetation and soil carbon changes. Further analysis of internal plant and soil (individual pools) cycling is needed to reduce uncertainty in the controlling processes behind the global land carbon sink.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85136032027&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85136032027&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41467-022-32416-8
DO - 10.1038/s41467-022-32416-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 35970991
AN - SCOPUS:85136032027
SN - 2041-1723
VL - 13
JO - Nature communications
JF - Nature communications
IS - 1
M1 - 4781
ER -