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
GMD | Articles | Volume 12, issue 2
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 597-611, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-597-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 597-611, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-597-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Model experiment description paper 06 Feb 2019

Model experiment description paper | 06 Feb 2019

Limitations of the 1 % experiment as the benchmark idealized experiment for carbon cycle intercomparison in C4MIP

Andrew Hugh MacDougall
Related authors  
The Zero Emission Commitment Model Intercomparison Project (ZECMIP) contribution to CMIP6: Quantifying committed climate changes following zero carbon emissions
Chris D. Jones, Thomas L. Frölicher, Charles Koven, Andrew H. MacDougall, H. Damon Matthews, Kirsten Zickfeld, Joeri Rogelj, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, Nathan Gillett, Tatiana Ilyina, Malte Meinshausen, Nadine Mengis, Roland Seferian, and Michael Eby
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-153,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-153, 2019
Manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary
Lower boundary conditions in Land Surface Models. Effects on the permafrost and the carbon pools
Ignacio Hermoso de Mendoza, Hugo Beltrami, Andrew H. MacDougall, and Jean-Claude Mareschal
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2018-233,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2018-233, 2018
Revised manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary
Projecting the release of carbon from permafrost soils using a perturbed parameter ensemble modelling approach
Andrew H. MacDougall and Reto Knutti
Biogeosciences, 13, 2123-2136, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-2123-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-2123-2016, 2016
Short summary
Related subject area  
Climate and Earth System Modeling
How can the First ISLSCP Field Experiment contribute to present-day efforts to evaluate water stress in JULESv5.0?
Karina E. Williams, Anna B. Harper, Chris Huntingford, Lina M. Mercado, Camilla T. Mathison, Pete D. Falloon, Peter M. Cox, and Joon Kim
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3207-3240, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3207-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3207-2019, 2019
Short summary
Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP)
Oliver Gutjahr, Dian Putrasahan, Katja Lohmann, Johann H. Jungclaus, Jin-Song von Storch, Nils Brüggemann, Helmuth Haak, and Achim Stössel
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3241-3281, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019, 2019
Short summary
The DeepMIP contribution to PMIP4: methodologies for selection, compilation and analysis of latest Paleocene and early Eocene climate proxy data, incorporating version 0.1 of the DeepMIP database
Christopher J. Hollis, Tom Dunkley Jones, Eleni Anagnostou, Peter K. Bijl, Margot J. Cramwinckel, Ying Cui, Gerald R. Dickens, Kirsty M. Edgar, Yvette Eley, David Evans, Gavin L. Foster, Joost Frieling, Gordon N. Inglis, Elizabeth M. Kennedy, Reinhard Kozdon, Vittoria Lauretano, Caroline H. Lear, Kate Littler, Lucas Lourens, A. Nele Meckler, B. David A. Naafs, Heiko Pälike, Richard D. Pancost, Paul N. Pearson, Ursula Röhl, Dana L. Royer, Ulrich Salzmann, Brian A. Schubert, Hannu Seebeck, Appy Sluijs, Robert P. Speijer, Peter Stassen, Jessica Tierney, Aradhna Tripati, Bridget Wade, Thomas Westerhold, Caitlyn Witkowski, James C. Zachos, Yi Ge Zhang, Matthew Huber, and Daniel J. Lunt
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3149-3206, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3149-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3149-2019, 2019
Short summary
How to use mixed precision in ocean models: exploring a potential reduction of numerical precision in NEMO 4.0 and ROMS 3.6
Oriol Tintó Prims, Mario C. Acosta, Andrew M. Moore, Miguel Castrillo, Kim Serradell, Ana Cortés, and Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3135-3148, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3135-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3135-2019, 2019
Short summary
Comparison of different sequential assimilation algorithms for satellite-derived leaf area index using the Data Assimilation Research Testbed (version Lanai)
Xiao-Lu Ling, Cong-Bin Fu, Zong-Liang Yang, and Wei-Dong Guo
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3119-3133, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3119-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3119-2019, 2019
Short summary
Cited articles  
Archer, D.: A data-driven model of the global calcite lysocline, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 10, 511–526, 1996. a, b
Arora, V. K., Boer, G. J., Friedlingstein, P., Eby, M., Jones, C. D., Christian, J. R., Bonan, G., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., andTatiana Ilyina, T. H., Lindsay, K., Tjiputra, J. F., and Wu, T.: Carbon–Concentration and Carbon–Climate Feedbacks in CMIP5 Earth System Models, J. Climate, 26, 5289–5314, 2013. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k
Berryman, A. A.: The Origins and Evolution of Predator-Prey Theory, Ecology, 73, 1530–1535, 1992. a
Boucher, O., Halloran, P. R., Burke, E. J., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Jones, C. D., Lowe, J., Ringer, M. A., Robertson, E., and Wu, P.: Reversibility in an Earth System model in response to CO2 concentration changes, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 024013, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/2/024013, 2012. a, b, c
Broecker, W. and Peng, T.: Tracers in the Sea, Eldigio Press, Palisades, New York, 1982. a
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
The 1 % per year exponential change in CO2 concentration experiment is an idealized climate change scenario that has traditionally been used to facilitate comparison of different climate models and to create benchmark statistics. Here, we examine the limitations of this experiment for assessing the global carbon cycle and propose an alternative idealized experiment.
The 1 % per year exponential change in CO2 concentration experiment is an idealized climate...
Citation