Climate change will impact forest productivity worldwide. Forecasting the magnitude of such impact, with multiple environmental stressors changing simultaneously, is only possible with the help of process-based models. In order to assess their performance, such models require careful evaluation against measurements. However, direct comparison of model outputs against observational data is often not reliable, as models may provide the right answers due to the wrong reasons. This would severely hinder forecasting abilities under unprecedented climate conditions. Here, we present a methodology for model assessment, which supplements the traditional output-to-observation model validation. It evaluates model performance through its ability to reproduce observed seasonal changes of the most limiting environmental driver (MLED) for a given process, here daily gross primary productivity (GPP). We analyzed seasonal changes of the MLED for GPP in two contrasting pine forests, the Mediterranean Pinus halepensis Mill. Yatir (Israel) and the boreal Pinus sylvestris L. Hyytiälä (Finland) from three years of eddy-covariance flux data. Then, we simulated the same period with a state-of-the-art process-based simulation model (LandscapeDNDC). Finally, we assessed if the model was able to reproduce both GPP observations and MLED seasonality. We found that the model reproduced the seasonality of GPP in both stands, but it was slightly overestimated without sitespecific fine-tuning. Interestingly, although LandscapeDNDC properly captured the main MLED in Hyytiälä (temperature) and in Yatir (soil water availability), it failed to reproduce high-temperature and high-vapor pressure limitations of GPP in Yatir during spring and summer. We deduced that the most likely reason for this divergence is an incomplete description of stomatal behavior. In summary, this study validates the MLED approach as a model evaluation tool, and opens up new possibilities for model improvement.

Forests are important components of the greenhouse gas balance of Europe. There is considerable uncertainty about how predicted changes to climate and nitrogen deposition will perturb the carbon and nitrogen cycles of European forests and thereby alter forest growth, carbon sequestration and N₂O emission. The present study aimed to quantify the carbon and nitrogen balance, including the exchange of greenhouse gases, of European forests over the period 2010–2030, with a particular emphasis on the spatial variability of change. The analysis was carried out for two tree species: European beech and Scots pine. For this purpose, four different dynamic models were used: BASFOR, DailyDayCent, INTEGRATOR and Landscape-DNDC. These models span a range from semi-empirical to complex mechanistic. Comparison of these models allowed assessment of the extent to which model predictions depended on differences in model inputs and structure. We found a European average carbon sink of 0.160 ± 0.020 kgC m⁻² yr⁻¹ (pine) and 0.138 ± 0.062 kgC m⁻² yr⁻¹ (beech) and N₂O source of 0.285 ± 0.125 kgN ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ (pine) and 0.575 ± 0.105 kgN ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ (beech). The European average greenhouse gas potential of the carbon source was 18 (pine) and 8 (beech) times that of the N₂O source. Carbon sequestration was larger in the trees than in the soil. Carbon sequestration and forest growth were largest in central Europe and lowest in northern Sweden and Finland, N. Poland and S. Spain. No single driver was found to dominate change across Europe. Forests were found to be most sensitive to change in environmental drivers where the drivers were limiting growth, where changes were particularly large or where changes acted in concert. The models disagreed as to which environmental changes were most significant for the geographical variation in forest growth and as to which tree species showed the largest rate of carbon sequestration. Pine and beech forests were found to have differing sensitivities to environmental change, in particular the response to changes in nitrogen and precipitation, with beech forest more vulnerable to drought. There was considerable uncertainty about the geographical location of N₂O emissions. Two of the models BASFOR and LandscapeDNDC had largest emissions in central Europe where nitrogen deposition and soil nitrogen were largest whereas the two other models identified different regions with large N₂O emission. N₂O emissions were found to be larger from beech than pine forests and were found to be particularly sensitive to forest growth

Process-based biogeochemical models are valuable tools to evaluate impacts of environmental or management changes on the greenhouse gas (GHG) balance of forest ecosystems. We evaluated LandscapeDNDC, a process-based model developed to simulate carbon (C), nitrogen (N) and water cycling at ecosystem and regional scales, against eddy covariance and soil chamber measurements of CO2 and N2O fluxes in an 80-year-old deciduous oak forest. We compared two LandscapeDNDC vegetation modules: PSIM (Physiological Simulation Model), which includes the understorey explicitly, and PnET (Photosynthesis–Evapotranspiration Model), which does not. Species parameters for both modules were adjusted to match local measurements. LandscapeDNDC was able to reproduce daily micro-climatic conditions, which serve as input for the vegetation modules. The PSIM and PnET modules reproduced mean annual net CO2 uptake to within 1% and 15% of the measured values by balancing gains and losses in seasonal patterns with respect to measurements, although inter-annual variations were not well reproduced. The PSIM module indicated that the understorey contributed up to 21% to CO2 fluxes. Mean annual soil CO2 fluxes were underestimated by 32% using PnET and overestimated by 26% with PSIM; both modules simulated annual soil N2O fluxes within the measured range but with less interannual variation. Including stand structure information improved the model, but further improvements are required for the model to predict forest GHG balances and their inter-annual variability following climatic or management changes.

BiogeosciencesCorrigendum to "Process-based simulation of seasonality and drought stress in monoterpene emission models" published in Biogeosciences, 7,