SummaryConsiderable 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.

To predict forest response to long-term climate change with high confidence requires that dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) be successfully tested against ecosystem response to short-term variations in environmental drivers, including regular seasonal patterns. Here, we used an integrated dataset from four forests in the Brasil flux network, spanning a range of dry-season intensities and lengths, to determine how well four state-of-the-art models (IBIS, ED2, JULES, and CLM3.5) simulated the seasonality of carbon exchanges in Amazonian tropical forests. We found that most DGVMs poorly represented the annual cycle of gross primary productivity (GPP), of photosynthetic capacity (Pc), and of other fluxes and pools. Models simulated consistent dry-season declines in GPP in the equatorial Amazon (Manaus K34, Santarem K67, and Caxiuanã CAX); a contrast to observed GPP increases. Model simulated dry-season GPP reductions were driven by an external environmental factor, 'soil water stress' and consequently by a constant or decreasing photosynthetic infrastructure (Pc), while observed dry-season GPP resulted from a combination of internal biological (leaf-flush and abscission and increased Pc) and environmental (incoming radiation) causes. Moreover, we found models generally overestimated observed seasonal net ecosystem exchange (NEE) and respiration (R ) at equatorial locations. In contrast, a southern Amazon forest (Jarú RJA) exhibited dry-season declines in GPP and R consistent with most DGVMs simulations. While water limitation was represented in models and the primary driver of seasonal photosynthesis in southern Amazonia, changes in internal biophysical processes, light-harvesting adaptations (e.g., variations in leaf area index (LAI) and increasing leaf-level assimilation rate related to leaf demography), and allocation lags between leaf and wood, dominated equatorial Amazon carbon flux dynamics and were deficient or absent from current model formulations. Correctly simulating flux seasonality at tropical forests requires a greater understanding and the incorporation of internal biophysical mechanisms in future model developments.

No abstract

A mosaic of protected areas, including indigenous lands, sustainable-use production forests and reserves and strictly protected forests is the cornerstone of conservation in the Amazon, with almost 50 per cent of the region now protected. However, recent research indicates that isolation from direct deforestation or degradation may not be sufficient to maintain the ecological integrity of Amazon forests over the next several decades. Large-scale changes in fire and drought regimes occurring as a result of deforestation and greenhouse gas increases may result in forest degradation, regardless of protected status. How severe or widespread these feedbacks will be is uncertain, but the arc of deforestation in south–southeastern Amazonia appears to be particularly vulnerable owing to high current deforestation rates and ecological sensitivity to climate change. Maintaining forest ecosystem integrity may require significant strengthening of forest conservation on private property, which can in part be accomplished by leveraging existing policy mechanisms.

A fundamental question connecting terrestrial ecology and global climate change is the sensitivity of key terrestrial biomes to climatic variability and change. The Amazon region is such a key biome: it contains unparalleled biological diversity, a globally significant store of organic carbon, and it is a potent engine driving global cycles of water and energy. The importance of understanding how land surface dynamics of the Amazon region respond to climatic variability and change is widely appreciated, but despite significant recent advances, large gaps in our understanding remain. Understanding of energy and carbon exchange between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere can be improved through direct observations and experiments, as well as through modeling activities. Land surface/ecosystem models have become important tools for extrapolating local observations and understanding to much larger terrestrial regions. They are also valuable tools to test hypothesis on ecosystem functioning. Funded by NASA under the auspices of the LBA (the Large-Scale Biosphere-Atmosphere Experiment in Amazonia), the LBA Data Model Intercomparison Project (LBA-DMIP) uses a comprehensive data set from an observational network of flux towers across the Amazon, and an ecosystem modeling community engaged in ongoing studies using a suite of different land surface and terrestrial ecosystem models to understand Amazon forest function. Here an overview of this project is presented accompanied by a description of the measurement sites, data, models and protocol.

No abstract

The Amazon rain forest constitutes one of the major global stocks of carbon. Recent studies, including the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and the Coupled Climate Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project, have suggested that it may reduce in size and lose biomass during the twenty-first century through a savannization process. A better understanding of how this ecosystem structure, dynamics, and carbon balance may respond to future climate changes is needed. This article investigates how well a fully coupled atmosphere-biosphere model can reproduce vegetation structure and dynamics in Amazonia to the extent permitted by available data. The accurate representation of the coupled climate-biosphere dynamics requires the accurate representation of climate, net primary production (NPP), and its partition among the several carbon pool components. The simulated climate is validated against precipitation (within 5% of four datasets) and incident solar radiation (within 7% of observations). The authors also validate (i) simulated land cover, which reproduces well the observed patterns; (ii) NPP, within 5% of observations; and (iii) respiration rates, within 15% of observations. The performance of simulated variables that depend on carbon allocation, like NPP partitioning, leaf area index, and aboveground live biomass, although good on a regional mean, is significantly low when spatial patterns are considered. These errors may be attributed to fixed carbon allocation and residence time parameters assumed by the model. Carbon allocation apparently varies spatially, and to simulate this spatial variability is quite a challenge.

No abstract