Abstract:The spatial and temporal variations in terrestrial carbon storage play a pivotal role in regulating future climate change. However, Earth system models (ESMs), which have coupled the terrestrial biosphere and atmosphere, show great uncertainty in simulating the global land carbon storage. Here, based on multiple global datasets and a traceability analysis, we diagnosed the uncertainty source of terrestrial carbon storage in 22 ESMs that participated in phases 5 and 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5 and CMIP6). The modeled global terrestrial carbon storage has converged among ESMs from CMIP5 (1936.9 ± 739.3 PgC) to CMIP6 (1774.4 ± 439.0 PgC) but is persistently lower than the observation-based estimates (2285 ± 669 PgC). By further decomposing terrestrial carbon storage into net primary production (NPP) and ecosystem carbon residence time ( τ E ), we found that the decreased intermodel spread in land carbon storage primarily resulted from more accurate simulations on NPP among ESMs from CMIP5 to CMIP6. The persistent underestimation of land carbon storage was caused by the biased τ E . In CMIP5 and CMIP6, the modeled τ E was far shorter than the observation-based estimates. The potential reasons for the biased τ E could be the lack of or incomplete representation of nutrient limitation, vertical soil biogeochemistry, and the permafrost carbon cycle. Moreover, the modeled τ E became the key driver for the intermodel spread in global land carbon storage in CMIP6. Overall, our study indicates that CMIP6 models have greatly improved the terrestrial carbon cycle, with a decreased model spread in global terrestrial carbon storage and less uncertain productivity. However, more efforts are needed to understand and reduce the persistent data–model disagreement on carbon storage and residence time in the terrestrial biosphere. The spatial and temporal variations in terrestrial carbon storage play a pivotal role in regulating future climate change. However, Earth system models (ESMs), which have coupled the terrestrial biosphere and atmosphere, show great uncertainty in simulating the global land carbon storage. Here, based on multiple global datasets and a traceability analysis, we diagnosed the uncertainty source of terrestrial carbon storage in 22 ESMs that participated in phases 5 and 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5 and CMIP6). The modeled global terrestrial carbon storage has converged among ESMs from CMIP5 (1936.9 ± 739.3 PgC) to CMIP6 (1774.4 ± 439.0 PgC) but is persistently lower than the observation-based estimates (2285 ± 669 PgC). By further decomposing terrestrial carbon storage into net primary production (NPP) and ecosystem carbon residence time ( τ E ), we found that the decreased intermodel spread in land carbon storage primarily resulted from more accurate simulations on NPP among ESMs from CMIP5 to CMIP6. The persistent underestimation of land carbon storage was caused by the biased τ E . In CMIP5 and CMIP6, the modeled τ E was far shorter than the observation-based estimates. The potential reasons for the biased τ E could be the lack of or incomplete representation of nutrient limitation, vertical soil biogeochemistry, and the permafrost carbon cycle. Moreover, the modeled τ E became the key driver for the intermodel spread in global land carbon storage in CMIP6. Overall, our study indicates that CMIP6 models have greatly improved the terrestrial carbon cycle, with a decreased model spread in global terrestrial carbon storage and less uncertain productivity. However, more efforts are needed to understand and reduce the persistent data–model disagreement on carbon storage and residence time in the terrestrial biosphere.

Considerable Uncertainties in Simulating Land Carbon Sinks Induced by Different Precipitation Products

Evolution of Uncertainty in Terrestrial Carbon Storage in Earth System Models from CMIP5 to CMIP6

Large Uncertainties in Precipitation Exert Considerable Impact on Land Surface Temperature Modeling over the Tibetan Plateau

Reconciling Global Terrestrial Evapotranspiration Estimates From Multi‐Product Intercomparison and Evaluation

Sensitivity of Global Terrestrial Gross Primary Production to Hydrologic States Simulated by the Community Land Model Using Two Runoff Parameterizations

Climate Extreme Versus Carbon Extreme: Responses of Terrestrial Carbon Fluxes to Temperature and Precipitation

Effects of Improved Simulation of Precipitation on Evapotranspiration and Its Partitioning over Land

Different uncertainty in tropical oceanic and land precipitation sensitivities under global warming

Variations of Carbon Allocation and Turnover Time Across Tropical Forests

Uncertainty in the response of terrestrial carbon sink to environmental drivers undermines carbon-climate feedback predictions.

Conflicting Drivers of Land Carbon Uptake Variability Reconciled by Land-Atmosphere Coupling

Evaluating the uncertainty of terrestrial water budget components over High Mountain Asia

Uncertainty propagation in a global biogeochemical model driven by leaf area data

Global Assessment of Atmospheric Forcing Uncertainties in The Common Land Model 2024 Simulations

Sources of Uncertainty in Modeled Land Carbon Storage Within and Across Three MIPs: Diagnosis with Three New Techniques

Assessment of Uncertainty Sources in Snow Cover Simulation in the Tibetan Plateau

Positive Asymmetric Responses Indicate Larger Carbon Sink with Increase in Precipitation Variability in Global Terrestrial Ecosystems

A Model for Estimating Transpiration from Remotely Sensed Solar-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence

Improving Simulations of Vegetation Dynamics over the Tibetan Plateau: Role of Atmospheric Forcing Data and Spatial Resolution

Assessing Global Transpiration Estimates: Insights from Tree-Scale Sap Flow Analysis

Hydrodynamics-driven uncertainty study in simulating terrestrial carbon cycle with a coupled water-carbon cycle model