Topic 7

Ecosystem Modeling and

Sustainable Ecosystem Management
‣ Readings: Bonan Ch. 25, 33
First Generation Models

w0 =
0.75*(field
capacity)

‣ No explicit vegetation and simplified hydrology

‣ Prescribed albedo, surface roughness and no
canopy radiative transfer
‣ Single bulk aerodynamic conductance
‣ Latent heat modulated by soil wetness factor
(β)
 Second Generation Models
‣ Single-layer two-source canopy
‣ Include biological controls of ET and gs, e.g., Jarvis [1976]:

Bonan
Ch.17, 25
 Third Generation Models
‣ Directly linked photosynthesis and stomatal conductance, e.g.,
Farquhar-Ball-Berry model, so biogeophysical and
biogeochemical processes can be coupled to various extents.
‣ Required more plant physiological and biogeochemical
representation and parameters (Vcmax, Jmax, etc.)
‣ Integration of leaf photosynthesis over canopy via detailed
scaling parameterization (e.g., using fsun(x), fn(x))
‣ Some models include photosynthesis mainly for the sake of
computing biogeophysical fluxes and surface energy balance.
Current generation of Earth system models may further include
dynamic biogeochemical and ecosystem processes, e.g.,
carbon and nitrogen cycles, vegetation dynamics, ecosystem
disturbances, land use and urbanization.
 “Top-down” Biogeographical Model

Land ecosystem processes are

not explicitly represented…

[Moorcroft]

Limitations of biogeographical approaches to modeling global vegetation

patterns led to the development of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs)
that take a “bottom-up” approach to predicting global vegetation distribution.
Dynamic Global Vegetation Model

Key variables:
[Moorcroft] • Leaf area
index (LAI)
• Stem area
index (SAI)
• Canopy height
• Fractional
coverage of
plant functional
types (PFTs)
Dynamic Global Vegetation Model
“Big leaf” model
In contrast to earlier biogeographic
schemes that use a “top-down”
approach by correlating biome type
to crude measures of climate,
DGVMs predict large-scale
distribution of ecosystems via a
“bottom-up” approach. It involves
modeling fast dynamics of
photosynthesis (minutes to months)
of different PFTs, which then
compete for light, water and
nutrients to grow (months to
decades). Ecosystem structure (in
terms of LAI, PFT, etc.) may then
change accordingly.

[Sellers 1996]
 Merits of DGVM Approach
‣ Bottom-up approach of DGVMs represents mechanistically the
actual ways in which temperature, soil moisture, humidity and
CO2 affect plants, rather than relying on crude correlations
between occurrence of a particular ecosystem and average
climate statistics.
‣ This mechanistic approach should yield more realistic
predictions of vegetation changes (types, productivity) since
existing correlations between ecosystems and climate may not
hold under future climate regimes.
‣ Since DGVMs incorporate explicit representation of
biogeophysics/biogeochemistry of the land surface and track
long-term ecosystem changes, they can account for possible
feedback mechanisms.
‣ As a result, DGVMs allow us to produce predictions for the
effects of climate change that are both physically and
biologically consistent.
 Limitations of DGVM Approach
‣ Diversity: Each of the major biomes is represented by a single
PFT, whereas in reality ecosystems are heterogeneous. Lack
of diversity is troubling because it is likely the source of
ecosystem resilience to environmental perturbations.

[Moorcroft]

‣ Parameterization: DGVMs contain many parameters that need

to be estimated and constrained. Doing so is challenging, in
particular because of the coarse climatological grid scale at
which they are formulated.
Land-Atmosphere Interactions in Earth System Models

[Bonan, 2008]
 Land Cover Representation
‣ Vegetation is represented by different vegetation types,
biomes or plant function types, each with their albedo,
roughness, conductances, fractional coverage, canopy
height, LAI, root profile, etc., prescribed or simulated.
‣ Soil is represented by different soil classes, each with
their own thermal and hydraulic properties.
‣ Earlier models represented each model grid cell with
a single, dominant homogeneous vegetation type.
‣ Current models often use the mosaic
approach to represent surface
heterogeneity by dividing a grid cell
into smaller patches of homogeneous
vegetation or soil columns, each
individually modeled; grid cell
average is the weighted average of
individual patches or columns.
 Global Land Cover Data
ESA Satellite
GLOBCARBON LAI
Land-Atmosphere Coupling Experiments
Land-Atmosphere Interactions in Earth System Models
Coupled Earth System Modeling Framework
Global Climate Model

Physical processes,
atmospheric and
ocean circulation, …

Atmospheric Biosphere Model

Chemistry Model

Chemical Terrestrial
processes, processes,
emissions, carbon cycle,
deposition, … hydrology, …
Geoengineering: Intentionally Modifying Climate

Forest and
agricultural
management

[Pearson Education 2009]

1. Solar radiation management 2. CO2 removal

Geoengineering: Iron Fertilization in Ocean
[Armbrust 2009]

‣ Large-scale fertilization of iron in “high nutrient, low

chlorophyll” (HNLC) oceanic regions to promote
phytoplankton bloom and accelerate carbon sink via the
biological bump. Potential side effects?
Climate Services of Terrestrial Ecosystems
‣ Tropical afforestation, Negative service = Positive service =
warming cooling
reforestation and
avoided deforestation
are the most effective to
mitigate climate change.
‣ Reduced surface albedo
(increased solar
absorption) in temperate
and boreal forests
diminishes the benefit of
carbon uptake.

Climate services over a 50-year period, [Bonan

relative to bare ground: Fig. 33.2]
• Biogeophysical = evaporative cooling
+ radiative warming
• Biogeochemical = greenhouse gas
uptake + emissions
Climate Effects of Afforestation in Croplands
Temperature effects
of converting currently
existing croplands into
different forest types
in the corresponding
regions [Bonan Fig.
33.5]
Normalized effects
(per million km2
afforested):
Northern temperate
and boreal: −0.02°C
Tropical: −0.06°C
Note also that
conversion to
deciduous trees has
a larger climate
benefit than to
conifers
Climate Change: Troubles with Trees

‣ https://youtu.be/WRgv4V1ZxN4
‣ https://youtu.be/EXkbdELr4EQ
[FAO, 2017]
Climate-Driven Risks to Climate Mitigation Potential of Forests

[Anderegg et al.,
Science, 368, 2020]

‣ Effective use of forests-based

natural climate solutions (F-
NCSs) depends on
accounting for climate-driven
risks, such as fire and
drought. Leveraging cutting-
edge scientific tools holds
great promise for improving
and guiding the use of forests
as natural climate solutions,
both in estimating the
potential of carbon storage
and in estimating the risks to
forest carbon storage.
Current Status of Forest-Based Natural Climate Solutions
Climate-Driven Risks to Climate Mitigation Potential of Forests
Future of Forest-Based Natural Climate Solutions
Agricultural Management Practices
No-till farming (reduced soil
disturbances):
• Store more soil carbon
• Increase albedo (crop residues
have higher albedo than soil)
• Retain organic carbon, nutrients
and water → improve crop yield →
reduce need of cropland expansion

Intercropping (e.g. growing one crop

alongside soybean, which fixes
nitrogen):
• Reduce fertilizer use and N2O
emission
• Improve yield and land use
efficiency → reduce need of
cropland expansion
Soybean is an important
cash crop

[HM Lam]
Soybean is important for sustainable agriculture
(symbiotic nitrogen fixation: 100 kg N ha−1 yr−1) :
Used in crop rotation and intercropping

[HM Lam]

http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/concepts/soil_biology/
World map of soybean cultivation

[HM Lam] 41
Overuse of nitrogen fertilizer leads to pollution
and increase in greenhouse gases
137.5

110.

N Fertilizer Consumption
Million tonnes

82.5 China
World

55.

27.5

[HM Lam]
0.
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

World consumption: From 86 million tons in

2002 to 105 million tons in 2009
➢ ⻄瓜/⼤⾖ ➢ ⻄瓜/⼤⾖/早熟⼤⾖
[HM Lam]

⽢肃⾼台县，2009 宁夏贺兰县，2009
➢ 孜然/⼤⾖ ➢ 胡⿇/⼤⾖

⽢肃酒泉，2008 ⽢肃酒泉，2008
 Zero tillage: Crop production system without
disturbing the soil through tillage

Maize Soybean

[HM Lam]
http://intainforma.inta.gov.ar/wp-
content/uploads/2013/08/DSC_1324.jpg
http://staticf5b.lavozdelinterior.com.ar/sites/default/files/styles/landscape_642_366/pub
Climate Effects of Biofuel Cultivation

Switchgrass Miscanthus Sugarcane

‣ Biofuel cultivation for ethanol production:

• Renewable energy → reduce fossil fuel CO2 emissions
• Compete with food production → increase need for
agricultural expansion and intensification (esp. for maize)
‣ Biogeophysical effects of biofuel cultivation:
• Biofuel crops generally have higher albedo and
evaporative cooling than food crops
Concluding Thoughts

[Bonan
Fig. 1.3]
 Concluding Thoughts

Summer
Research
Internship
Final Year
Project
THANK YOU!!! [Bonan
Fig. 1.4]