Journal Article

PreJuSER-21346

http://join2-wiki.gsi.de/foswiki/pub/Main/Artwork/join2_logo100x88.png A multi-model comparison of soil carbon assessment of a coniferous forest stand

Palosuo, T. ; Foereid, B. ; Svensson, M. ; Shurpali, N. ; Lehtonen, A. ; Herbst, M.FZJ* ; Linkosalo, T. ; Ortiz, C. ; Todorovic, G. R. ; Marcinkonis, S. ; Li, C. S. ; Jandl, R.

2012
Elsevier Science Amsterdam [u.a.]

This record in other databases:    

Please use a persistent id in citations: doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.02.004

Abstract: We simulated soil carbon stock dynamics of an Austrian coniferous forest stand with five soil-only models (Q, ROMUL, RothC, SoilCO2/RothC and Yasso07) and three plant soil models (CENTURY, Coup-Model and Forest-DNDC) for an 18-year period and the decomposition of a litter pulse over a 100-year period. The objectives of the study were to assess the consistency in soil carbon estimates applying a multi-model comparison and to present and discuss the sources of uncertainties that create the differences in model results. Additionally, we discuss the applicability of different modelling approaches from the view point of large-scale carbon assessments.Our simulation results showed a wide range in soil carbon stocks and stock change estimates reflecting substantial uncertainties in model estimates. The measured stock change estimate decreased much more than the model predictions. Model results varied not only due to the model structure and applied parameters, but also due to different input information and assumptions applied during the modelling processes. Initialization procedures applied with the models induced large differences among the modelled soil carbon stocks and stock change estimates. Decomposition estimates of the litter pulse driven by model structures and parameters also varied considerably.Our results support the use of relatively simple soil-only models with low data requirements in inventory type of large-scale carbon assessments. It is important that the modelling processes within the national inventories are transparently reported and special emphasis is put on how the models are used, which assumptions are applied and what is the quality of data used both as input and to calibrate the models. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keyword(s): J ; Carbon balance (auto) ; Forest (auto) ; Model comparison (auto) ; Soil carbon (auto) ; Simulation model (auto) ; Uncertainty (auto)

Note: This study was initiated in a modelling workshop of COST639 in Vienna, Austria, in May 2009 and discussions were continued in Vilnius in September 2009. T. Palosuo was funded through the Agriyasso Research Project funded by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland and by MTT strategic funds of the IAM-Tools and MITAG projects. We wish to thank Reimund Rotter and three anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments on the manuscript.

---

Contributing Institute(s):

1. Agrosphäre (IBG-3)

Research Program(s):

1. Terrestrische Umwelt (P24)

Appears in the scientific report 2012

---

Database coverage:
Current Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences ; JCR ; Nationallizenz ; SCOPUS ; Science Citation Index Expanded ; Thomson Reuters Master Journal List ; Web of Science Core Collection

---