Impact of soil moisture‐climate feedbacks on CMIP5 projections: First results from the GLACE‐CMIP5 experiment

Seneviratne, Sonia I.; Wilhelm, Micah; Stanelle, Tanja; Hurk, Bart van den; Hagemann, Stefan; Berg, Alexis; Chéruy, F.; Higgins, M.; Meier, H. E. Markus; Brovkin, Victor; Claußen, Martin; Ducharne, Agnès; Dufresne, Jean‐Louis; Findell, Kirsten L.; Ghattas, Joséfine; Lawrence, David M.; Malyshev, Sergey; Rummukainen, Markku; Smith, Benjamin

doi:10.1002/grl.50956

Cited by 356 publications

(366 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

348

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They concluded that the potential changes in ET would be better described by GCMs than "off-line" PET models (such as the two models used in this study), as GCMs can explicitly consider more complex atmospheric processes, such as the interaction between CO 2 and stomatal conductance. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the current reliability of GCMs in simulating ET is also questionable, due to the uncertainty in representing soil moisture and radiative energy at the evaporative surface (e.g., Seneviratne et al, 2013;Boé and Terray, 2008;Barella-Ortiz et al, 2013). In addition, due to the coarse scale of GCM output, downscaling is generally required to post-process output for use at local and regional scales, which often adds further bias and uncertainties to the GCM simulation and largely limits their applicability (e.g., Chen et al, 2012;Diaz-Nieto and Wilby, 2005).…”

Section: Analyses Of Pet Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity of potential evapotranspiration to changes in climate variables for different Australian climatic zones

Guo

Westra

Maier

2017

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Assessing the factors that have an impact on potential evapotranspiration (PET) sensitivity to changes in different climate variables is critical to understanding the possible implications of climatic changes on the catchment water balance. Using a global sensitivity analysis, this study assessed the implications of baseline climate conditions on the sensitivity of PET to a large range of plausible changes in temperature (T ), relative humidity (RH), solar radiation (R s ) and wind speed (u z ). The analysis was conducted at 30 Australian locations representing different climatic zones, using the Penman-Monteith and Priestley-Taylor PET models. Results from both models suggest that the baseline climate can have a substantial impact on overall PET sensitivity. In particular, approximately 2-fold greater changes in PET were observed in cool-climate energy-limited locations compared to other locations in Australia, indicating the potential for elevated water loss as a result of increasing actual evapotranspiration (AET) in these locations. The two PET models consistently indicated temperature to be the most important variable for PET, but showed large differences in the relative importance of the remaining climate variables. In particular for the Penman-Monteith model, wind and relative humidity were the second-most important variables for dry and humid catchments, respectively, whereas for the PriestleyTaylor model solar radiation was the second-most important variable, with the greatest influence in warmer catchments. This information can be useful to inform the selection of suitable PET models to estimate future PET for different climate conditions, providing evidence on both the structural plausibility and input uncertainty for the alternative models.

show abstract

Section: Analyses Of Pet Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity of potential evapotranspiration to changes in climate variables for different Australian climatic zones

Guo

Westra

Maier

2017

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also found that improved simulation of solar radiation and precipitation leads to more accurate soil moisture simulations. Although the CMIP5 models have been used to investigate land-atmosphere interactions (Dirmeyer et al, 2013;Seneviratne et al, 2013;May et al, 2015;Lorenz et al, 2016), to date, there has not been a comprehensive evaluation of the accuracy of the CMIP5 soil moisture simulations in the United States. Therefore, this paper will address this knowledge gap.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of soil moisture in CMIP5 simulations over the contiguous United States using in situ and satellite observations

Yuan

Quiring

2017

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of soil moisture simulations in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) extended historical experiment (2003 to 2012). Soil moisture from in situ and satellite sources is used to evaluate CMIP5 simulations in the contiguous United States (CONUS). Both near-surface (0-10 cm) and soil column (0-100 cm) simulations from more than 14 CMIP5 models are evaluated during the warm season (April-September). Multimodel ensemble means and the performance of individual models are assessed at a monthly timescale. Our results indicate that CMIP5 models can reproduce the seasonal variability in soil moisture over CONUS. However, the models tend to overestimate the amount of both near-surface and soil column soil moisture in the western US and underestimate it in the eastern US. There are large variations across models, especially for the near-surface soil moisture. There are significant regional variations in performance as well. Results of a regional analysis show that in the deeper soil layers, the CMIP5 soil moisture simulations tend to be most skillful in the southern US. Based on both the satellite-derived and in situ soil moisture, CESM1, CCSM4 and GFDL-ESM2M perform best in the 0-10 cm soil layer and CESM1, CCSM4, GFDL-ESM2M and HadGEM2-ES perform best in the 0-100 cm soil layer.

show abstract

“…An axis of analysis that has not been investigated in great detail is how a particular model's regional land-atmosphere coupling strength signature (Guo et al, 2006;Koster et al, 2004;Seneviratne et al, 2010Seneviratne et al, , 2013) affects simulations of the climate impact of land-use change. One can hypothesize that LULCC in a region where the land is tightly coupled to the atmosphere, generally due to the presence of a soil moisture-limited evapotranspiration regime (Koster et al, 2004;Seneviratne et al, 2010), will result in a stronger climate response than the same LULCC in a region where the atmosphere is not sensitive to land conditions.…”

Section: Radiative Forcingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) contribution to CMIP6: rationale and experimental design

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Human land-use activities have resulted in large changes to the Earth's surface, with resulting implications for climate. In the future, land-use activities are likely to expand and intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) aims to further advance understanding of the impacts of land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) on climate, specifically addressing the following questions.(1) What are the effects of LULCC on climate and biogeochemical cycling (past-future)? (2) What are the impacts of land management on surface fluxes of carbon, water, and energy, and are there regional land-management strategies with the promise to help mitigate climate change? In addressing these questions, LUMIP will also address a range of more detailed science questions to get at process-level attribution, uncertainty, data requirements, and other related issues in more depth and sophistication than possible in a multi-model context to date. There will be particular focus on the separation and quantification of the effects on climate from LULCC relative to all forcings, separation of biogeochemical from biogeophysical effects of land use, the unique impacts of land-cover change vs. land-management change, modulation of land-use impact on climate by land-atmosphere coupling strength, and the extent to which impacts of enhanced CO 2 concentrations on plant photosynthesis are modulated by past and future land use.LUMIP involves three major sets of science activities: (1) development of an updated and expanded historical and future land-use data set, (2) an experimental protocol for specific LUMIP experiments for CMIP6, and (3) definition of metrics and diagnostic protocols that quantify model performance, and related sensitivities, with respect to LULCC. In this paper, we describe LUMIP activity (2), i.e., the LU-MIP simulations that will formally be part of CMIP6. These experiments are explicitly designed to be complementary to simulations requested in the CMIP6 DECK and historical simulations and other CMIP6 MIPs including ScenarioMIP, C4MIP, LS3MIP, and DAMIP. LUMIP includes a twophase experimental design. Phase one features idealized coupled and land-only model simulations designed to advance process-level understanding of LULCC impacts on climate, as well as to quantify model sensitivity to potential landcover and land-use change. Phase two experiments focus on quantification of the historic impact of land use and the poPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. tential for future land management decisions to aid in mitigation of climate change. This paper documents these simulations in detail, explains their rationale, outlines plans for analysis, and describes a new subgrid land-use tile data request for selected variables (reporting model output data separately for primary and secondary land, crops, pasture, and urban land-use types). It is essential that modeling groups participating in LUMIP adhere to t...

show abstract

Impact of soil moisture‐climate feedbacks on CMIP5 projections: First results from the GLACE‐CMIP5 experiment

Cited by 356 publications

References 35 publications

Sensitivity of potential evapotranspiration to changes in climate variables for different Australian climatic zones

Sensitivity of potential evapotranspiration to changes in climate variables for different Australian climatic zones

Evaluation of soil moisture in CMIP5 simulations over the contiguous United States using in situ and satellite observations

The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) contribution to CMIP6: rationale and experimental design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About