Abstract: Eddy covariance data from four European grassland sites are used to probabilistically invert the CARAIB (CARbon Assimilation In the Biosphere) dynamic vegetation model (DVM) with 10 unknown parameters, using the DREAM((ZS)) (DiffeRential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampler. We focus on comparing model inversions, considering both homoscedastic and heteroscedastic eddy covariance residual errors, with variances either fixed a priori or jointly inferred together with the model parameters. Agreements between measured and simulated data during calibration are comparable with previous studies, with root mean square errors (RMSEs) of simulated daily gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (RECO) and evapotranspiration (ET) ranging from 1.73 to 2.19, 1.04 to 1.56 g C m(-2) day(-1) and 0.50 to 1.28 mm day(-1), respectively. For the calibration period, using a homoscedastic eddy covariance residual error model resulted in a better agreement between measured and modelled data than using a heteroscedastic residual error model. However, a model validation experiment showed that CARAIB models calibrated considering heteroscedastic residual errors perform better. Posterior parameter distributions derived from using a heteroscedastic model of the residuals thus appear to be more robust. This is the case even though the classical linear heteroscedastic error model assumed herein did not fully remove heteroscedasticity of the GPP residuals. Despite the fact that the calibrated model is generally capable of fitting the data within measurement errors, systematic bias in the model simulations are observed. These are likely due to model inadequacies such as shortcomings in the photosynthesis modelling. Besides the residual error treatment, differences between model parameter posterior distributions among the four grassland sites are also investigated. It is shown that the marginal distributions of the specific leaf area and characteristic mortality time parameters can be explained by site-specific ecophysiological characteristics.

Abstract: Dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) are important tools for modelling impacts of global change on ecosystem services. However, most models do not take full account of human land management and land use and land cover changes (LULCCs). We integrated croplands and pasture and their management and natural vegetation recovery and succession following cropland abandonment into the LPJ-GUESS DGVM. The revised model was applied to Africa as a case study to investigate the implications of accounting for land use on net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) and the skill of the model in describing agricultural production and reproducing trends and patterns in vegetation structure and function. The seasonality of modelled monthly fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (FPAR) was shown to agree well with satellite-inferred normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI). In regions with a large proportion of cropland, the managed land addition improved the FPAR vs. NDVI fit significantly. Modelled 1991-1995 average yields for the seven most important African crops, representing potential optimal yields limited only by climate forcings, were generally higher than reported FAO yields by a factor of 2-6, similar to previous yield gap estimates. Modelled inter-annual yield variations during 1971-2005 generally agreed well with FAO statistics, especially in regions with pronounced climate seasonality. Modelled land-atmosphere carbon fluxes for Africa associated with land use change (0.07 PgC yr(-1) release to the atmosphere for the 1980s) agreed well with previous estimates. Cropland management options (residue removal, grass as cover crop) were shown to be important to the land-atmosphere carbon flux for the 20th century.

Abstract: We present protocols and input data for Phase 1 of the Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison, a project of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP). The project includes global simulations of yields, phenologies, and many land-surface fluxes using 12-15 modeling groups for many crops, climate forcing data sets, and scenarios over the historical period from 1948 to 2012. The primary outcomes of the project include (1) a detailed comparison of the major differences and similarities among global models commonly used for large-scale climate impact assessment, (2) an evaluation of model and ensemble hindcasting skill, (3) quantification of key uncertainties from climate input data, model choice, and other sources, and (4) a multi-model analysis of the agricultural impacts of large-scale climate extremes from the historical record.