Abstract: Highlights • New method to investigate biogeochemical model structure performance. • Process based hydrological modelling can improve biogeochemical model predictions. • Modelling efficiency dramatically drops with multiple objectives. Abstract This work presents a novel way for assessing and comparing different hydro-biogeochemical model structures and their performances. We used the LandscapeDNDC modelling framework to set up four models of different complexity, considering two soil-biogeochemical and two hydrological modules. The performance of each model combination was assessed using long-term (8 years) data and applying different thresholds, considering multiple criteria and objective functions. Our results show that each model combination had its strength for particular criteria. However, only 0.01% of all model runs passed the complete rejectionist framework. In contrast, our comparatively applied assessments of single thresholds, as frequently used in other studies, lead to a much higher acceptance rate of 40–70%. Therefore, our study indicates that models can be right for the wrong reasons, i.e., matching GHG emissions while at the same time failing to simulate other criteria such as soil moisture or plant biomass dynamics.

Abstract: Models are increasingly used to estimate greenhouse gas emissions at site to regional and national scales and are outlined as the most advanced methodology for national emission reporting in the framework of UNFCCC. Process-based models incorporate the major processes of the carbon and nitrogen cycle and are thus thought to be widely applicable at various spatial and temporal scales. The definition of the spatial scale is determined by the objectives. GHG emission reporting requests spatially and temporally aggregated information whereas for the assessment of mitigation options on hot spots and hot moments of emissions a high spatial simulation resolution is required. In addition, other input data also determine the simulation scale. Low resolution simulations needs less effort in computation and data management, but important details could be lost during the process of data aggregation associated with high uncertainties of the simulation results. This study presents the aggregation effects of climate input data on the simulations of soil N2O emissions and nitrate leaching by comparing different biogeochemistry models. Using process-based models (DailyDayCent, LandscapeDNDC, Stics, Mode, Coup, Epic), we simulated a 30-year cropping system for two crops (winter wheat and maize monocultures) under water- and nutrient-limited conditions based on a 1 km resolution climate dataset. We aggregated the climate data to resolutions of 10, 25, 50, and 100 km and repeated the simulations on these spatial scales. We calculated the N2O emissions as well as the nitrate leaching on all scales. Results will be presented and discussed.

Abstract: Soils are a significant source for the secondary greenhouse gas NO and assumed to be a significant source of tropospheric NOx in rural areas. Here we tested the LandscapeDNDC model for its capability to simulate magnitudes and dynamics of soil NO emissions for 22 sites differing in land use (arable, grassland and forest) and edaphic as well as climatic conditions. Overall, LandscapeDNDC simulated mean soil NO emissions agreed well with observations (r(2) = 0.82). However, simulated day to day variations of NO did only agree weakly with high temporal resolution measurements, though agreement between simulations and measurements significantly increased if data were aggregated to weekly, monthly and seasonal time scales. The model reproduced NO emissions from high and low emitting sites, and responded to fertilization (mineral and organic) events with pulse emissions. After evaluation, we linked the LandscapeDNDC model to a GIS database holding spatially explicit data on climate, land use, soil and management to quantify the contribution of soil biogenic NO emissions to the total NOx budget for the State of Saxony, Germany. Our calculations show that soils of both agricultural and forest systems are significant sources and contribute to about 8% (uncertainty range: 6 -13%) to the total annual tropospheric NO, budget for Saxony. However, the contributions of soil NO emission to total tropospheric NO, showed a high spatial variability and in some rural regions such as the Ore Mts., simulated soil NO emissions were by far more important than anthropogenic sources. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.