Journal cover Journal topic
Geoscientific Model Development An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.154 IF 5.154
  • IF 5-year value: 5.697 IF 5-year
    5.697
  • CiteScore value: 5.56 CiteScore
    5.56
  • SNIP value: 1.761 SNIP 1.761
  • IPP value: 5.30 IPP 5.30
  • SJR value: 3.164 SJR 3.164
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 59 Scimago H
    index 59
  • h5-index value: 49 h5-index 49
Volume 10, issue 9
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3499–3517, 2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3499-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3499–3517, 2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3499-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Model evaluation paper 22 Sep 2017

Model evaluation paper | 22 Sep 2017

Evaluating the effect of alternative carbon allocation schemes in a land surface model (CLM4.5) on carbon fluxes, pools, and turnover in temperate forests

Francesc Montané et al.
Download
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Peer review completion
AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Francesc Montane on behalf of the Authors (04 Jul 2017)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (08 Jul 2017) by Carlos Sierra
AR by Francesc Montane on behalf of the Authors (18 Jul 2017)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Publish as is (30 Jul 2017) by Carlos Sierra
AR by Francesc Montane on behalf of the Authors (08 Aug 2017)  Author's response    Manuscript
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
How carbon is allocated to different plant tissues (leaves, stem, and roots) determines carbon residence time and thus remains a central challenge for understanding the global carbon cycle. In this paper, we compared standard and novel carbon allocation schemes in CLM4.5 and evaluated them using eddy covariance wood and leaf biomass. The dynamic scheme based on work by Litton improved model performance, but this was dependent on model assumptions about woody turnover.
How carbon is allocated to different plant tissues (leaves, stem, and roots) determines carbon...
Citation