[Response: Some dynamic
vegetation models do take the diffuse / direct light ratios into account, but these aren't in widespread use for long millennial runs.
Not exact matches
«Most climate
models that incorporate
vegetation are built on short - term observations, for example of photosynthesis, but they are used to predict long - term events,» said Bond - Lamberty, who works at the Joint Global Change Research Institute, a collaboration between PNNL and the University of Maryland in College Park, Md. «We need to understand forests in the long term, but forests change slowly and researchers don't live that long.»
General circulation
models have generally excluded the feedback between climate and the biosphere, using static
vegetation distributions and CO2 concentrations from simple carbon - cycle
models that
do not include climate change6.
Paleoclimate
Modelling Intercomparison Project 2 (PMIP - 2) simulations shown in bottom left and right panels
do not include the radiative influences of LGM changes in mineral dust or
vegetation.
This setup consists of an atmospheric
model with a simple mixed - layer ocean
model, but that doesn't include chemistry, aerosol
vegetation or dynamic ice sheet modules.
General circulation
models have generally excluded the feedback between climate and the biosphere, using static
vegetation distributions and CO2 concentrations from simple carbon - cycle
models that
do not include climate change6.
Finally I attempt a suggestion that perhaps one solution to the problem that the solar impact on climate is underestimated by
models might be because EBM and GCM, like GISS,
do not contain CO2 and CH4 cycle mechanisms that might be partially effected by the Sun, and other mechanisms are missing or uncertain (water vapor, cloud cover,
vegetation, bacteria respiration, UV radiation, cosmic ray effects etc.).
«The novelty of our
model is it
does account for some interdisciplinary transfers of water, such as feedbacks between groundwater storage and, for example,
vegetation at the land surface.
5 looked in more detail at the responses of three of these DGVMs in the Amazon region, and found that although all three
models simulated reductions in
vegetation carbon, they
did this for different reasons.
«Most Earth system
models don't predict this, which means they overestimate the amount of carbon that high - latitude
vegetation will store in the future,» he adds.
Different
vegetation models driven with similar climate projections also show Amazon dieback (82), but other global climate
models (83) project smaller reductions (or increases) of precipitation and, therefore,
do not produce dieback (84).
Using complex computer
models, the team concluded that on average,
vegetation absorbs 11 billion fewer metric tons of carbon dioxide than it would in a climate that doesn't experience extreme weather events.
In the version of this Letter originally published, in the final paragraph, the section of text including «Earth system
models should... nutrient cycling)» was misleading and should have been: «Models simulating the dynamics of the terrestrial biosphere currently consider the effects of nitrogen on vegetation and soils25, 26 but they still do not consider the effects of other nutrients such as phosphorus or pota
models should... nutrient cycling)» was misleading and should have been: «
Models simulating the dynamics of the terrestrial biosphere currently consider the effects of nitrogen on vegetation and soils25, 26 but they still do not consider the effects of other nutrients such as phosphorus or pota
Models simulating the dynamics of the terrestrial biosphere currently consider the effects of nitrogen on
vegetation and soils25, 26 but they still
do not consider the effects of other nutrients such as phosphorus or potassium.
In order to
do this they downscale output from a global climate
model using a regional climate
model that can simulate
vegetation dynamics.
Does the
model these temperatures are based on have a good handle on
vegetation cover?
When
done so, proxy records and climate
models indicate that the response to past global warming was profound, with evidence for global reorganisation of the hydrological cycle and profound local increases and decreases in rainfall; combined with elevated temperatures and terrestrial
vegetation change, this appears to often result in warming - enhanced soil organic matter oxidation, chemical weathering and nutrient cycling.
But once you took all of this into account, you might as well throw in the carbon cycle,
vegetation (albedo), soil (albedo), cloud formation (albedo, etc.), evaporation from soil, the spectra for the sun and its luminosity, solar cycles, and once you
do that you pretty much have the entire climate
model, including how it evolves over time — or there abouts.
Climate
models today are extremely flexible and configurable tools that can include all these Earth System modules (including those mentioned above, but also full carbon cycles and dynamic
vegetation), but depending on the application, often don't need to.