2019
DOI: 10.1029/2018ms001583
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Community Land Model Version 5: Description of New Features, Benchmarking, and Impact of Forcing Uncertainty

Abstract: The Community Land Model (CLM) is the land component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM) and is used in several global and regional modeling systems. In this paper, we introduce model developments included in CLM version 5 (CLM5), which is the default land component for CESM2. We assess an ensemble of simulations, including prescribed and prognostic vegetation state, multiple forcing data sets, and CLM4, CLM4.5, and CLM5, against a range of metrics including from the International Land Model Benchmarkin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

16
972
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 945 publications
(1,147 citation statements)
references
References 211 publications
16
972
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This result supports the interpretation that the improvements derive mainly from CLM5 developments. Insight into the sources of improvement is provided in Lawrence et al (2019) and Wieder et al (2019). ) and Antarctic ice sheet (bottom row) from statistically downscaled output of the regional atmospheric climate model RACMO2.3p2, and from CESM2(CAM6), CESM2(WACCM6), and CESM1(CAM4).…”
Section: Land Fieldsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This result supports the interpretation that the improvements derive mainly from CLM5 developments. Insight into the sources of improvement is provided in Lawrence et al (2019) and Wieder et al (2019). ) and Antarctic ice sheet (bottom row) from statistically downscaled output of the regional atmospheric climate model RACMO2.3p2, and from CESM2(CAM6), CESM2(WACCM6), and CESM1(CAM4).…”
Section: Land Fieldsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In CESM2(CAM6) and CESM2(WACCM6), the CO 2 fertilization response appears to be more reasonable and, when this is combined with updates to the land use and land-cover change carbon fluxes, results in a late 20th century accumulated carbon trend that agrees well with observationally based estimates. Further discussion on the source of improvement for this feature of CESM2, which is also seen in land-only simulations, is provided in Lawrence et al (2019), Wieder et al (2019), and Bonan et al (2019). In addition to the improved accumulated carbon, CESM2 simulations also show evidence of considerable improvements in the amplitude of the annual cycle of net ecosystem exchange, especially at northern high latitudes (see Carbon Dioxide variable metrics in Figure 19), which translate to improved annual cycle amplitudes of atmospheric CO 2 concentrations in emissions-driven simulations.…”
Section: Journal Of Advances In Modeling Earth Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such differences have been found to have impacts on precipitation and cloud cover responses to external forcing (Chen & Dai, 2019; Wall & Hartmann, 2015), and are expected to affect the surface climate condition and plant carbon uptake in response to various radiation modification approaches. The latest versions of atmosphere and land components used in CESM are CAM6 and CLM5 (e.g., Lawrence et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The amount of nitrogen needed to support vegetation growth is diagnosed and used to downregulate the potential GPP. The carbon‐nitrogen feedback in CLM4 is known to lack some important processes, such as the linkages between nitrogen and hydrological cycle (Lee et al, 2013), that are crucial to realistically represent vegetation response (e.g., Bonan & Levis, 2010; Lawrence et al, 2011, 2019; Thomas et al, 2013). For example, Thomas et al (2013) compared CLM4 simulations with observations at five temperate forest sites and showed inconsistencies of the plant carbon uptake and carbon storage responses to historical nitrogen depositions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The measurements at Poker Flat Research Range are available at https://ameriflux.lbl.gov/sites/ siteinfo/US-Prr (DOI:10.17190/AMF/1246153). The atmospheric forcing data of Climatic Research Unit-National Centers for Environmental Prediction Version 7 (CRUNCEP7) are presented in Lawrence et al (2019) (DOI:10.1029/2018MS001583), and available at https://rda.ucar.edu/datasets/ds314.3/. The North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) is presented in Mesinger et al (2006) (DOI:10.1175 and available at https://ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/ model-data/model-datasets/north-american-regionalreanalysis-narr.…”
Section: Acknowledgmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%