Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data
<p>Reliable, robust, and consistent data are essential foundations for analysis of carbon cycle feedbacks. Here, we consider the data from multiple Earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We identify a mass conservation issue in th...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Geoscientific Model Development |
| Online Access: | https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/18/2111/2025/gmd-18-2111-2025.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850216600759697408 |
|---|---|
| author | G. Tang G. Tang Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls C. Jones C. Jones T. Gasser A. Norton T. Ziehn A. Romero-Prieto M. Meinshausen M. Meinshausen |
| author_facet | G. Tang G. Tang Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls C. Jones C. Jones T. Gasser A. Norton T. Ziehn A. Romero-Prieto M. Meinshausen M. Meinshausen |
| author_sort | G. Tang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Reliable, robust, and consistent data are essential foundations for analysis of carbon cycle feedbacks. Here, we consider the data from multiple Earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We identify a mass conservation issue in the reported carbon and nitrogen data, with a few exceptions for specific models and reporting levels. The accumulated mass imbalance in the reported data can amount to hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen by the end of the simulated period, largely exceeding the total carbon–nitrogen pool size changes over the same period. Nitrogen mass imbalance is evident across all reported organic and inorganic pools, with mineral nitrogen exhibiting the most significant cumulative mass imbalance. Due to a lack of detail in the reported data, we cannot uniquely identify the cause of this imbalance. However, we postulate that the carbon mass imbalance primarily arises from missing fluxes in the reported data and inconsistencies between these data and the definitions provided by the C4MIP protocol (e.g., land-use and fire emissions), rather than from an underlying mass conservation issue in the models themselves. Our findings suggest that future CMIP reporting protocols should consider incorporating mass conservation into their data validation processes so that such issues are caught before users have to deal with them, rather than forcing all users to handle this issue in their own way. In addition, attention from model groups to the detailed diagnostic request and definitions, along with their own quality control, will also help to avoid such issues in future. Given that no additional CMIP6 data are currently being published and none are expected in the future, we recommend that data users that rely on a closed carbon–nitrogen cycle address potential flux imbalances by using the workarounds provided in this study.</p> |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-3442c660a5c047c59014f97d6188741e |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 1991-959X 1991-9603 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-04-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Geoscientific Model Development |
| spelling | doaj-art-3442c660a5c047c59014f97d6188741e2025-08-20T02:08:15ZengCopernicus PublicationsGeoscientific Model Development1991-959X1991-96032025-04-01182111213610.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model dataG. Tang0G. Tang1Z. Nicholls2Z. Nicholls3Z. Nicholls4C. Jones5C. Jones6T. Gasser7A. Norton8T. Ziehn9A. Romero-Prieto10M. Meinshausen11M. Meinshausen12School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, AustraliaDepartment of Biogeochemical Signals, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, GermanySchool of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, AustraliaInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, AustriaClimate Resource, Fitzroy North, AustraliaMet Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, United KingdomSchool of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United KingdomInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, AustriaResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, AustraliaCSIRO Environment, Aspendale, AustraliaSchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, United KingdomSchool of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, AustraliaClimate Resource, Fitzroy North, Australia<p>Reliable, robust, and consistent data are essential foundations for analysis of carbon cycle feedbacks. Here, we consider the data from multiple Earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We identify a mass conservation issue in the reported carbon and nitrogen data, with a few exceptions for specific models and reporting levels. The accumulated mass imbalance in the reported data can amount to hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen by the end of the simulated period, largely exceeding the total carbon–nitrogen pool size changes over the same period. Nitrogen mass imbalance is evident across all reported organic and inorganic pools, with mineral nitrogen exhibiting the most significant cumulative mass imbalance. Due to a lack of detail in the reported data, we cannot uniquely identify the cause of this imbalance. However, we postulate that the carbon mass imbalance primarily arises from missing fluxes in the reported data and inconsistencies between these data and the definitions provided by the C4MIP protocol (e.g., land-use and fire emissions), rather than from an underlying mass conservation issue in the models themselves. Our findings suggest that future CMIP reporting protocols should consider incorporating mass conservation into their data validation processes so that such issues are caught before users have to deal with them, rather than forcing all users to handle this issue in their own way. In addition, attention from model groups to the detailed diagnostic request and definitions, along with their own quality control, will also help to avoid such issues in future. Given that no additional CMIP6 data are currently being published and none are expected in the future, we recommend that data users that rely on a closed carbon–nitrogen cycle address potential flux imbalances by using the workarounds provided in this study.</p>https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/18/2111/2025/gmd-18-2111-2025.pdf |
| spellingShingle | G. Tang G. Tang Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls Z. Nicholls C. Jones C. Jones T. Gasser A. Norton T. Ziehn A. Romero-Prieto M. Meinshausen M. Meinshausen Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data Geoscientific Model Development |
| title | Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data |
| title_full | Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data |
| title_fullStr | Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data |
| title_short | Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data |
| title_sort | investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported cmip6 earth system model data |
| url | https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/18/2111/2025/gmd-18-2111-2025.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gtang investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT gtang investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT znicholls investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT znicholls investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT znicholls investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT cjones investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT cjones investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT tgasser investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT anorton investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT tziehn investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT aromeroprieto investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT mmeinshausen investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata AT mmeinshausen investigatingcarbonandnitrogenconservationinreportedcmip6earthsystemmodeldata |