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.

A spatial emergent constraint on the sensitivity of soil carbon turnover to global warming

Reducing Uncertainties of Future Global Soil Carbon Responses to Climate and Land Use Change with Emergent Constraints

Evaluation of soil carbon simulation in CMIP6 Earth System Models

An estimate of equilibrium sensitivity of global terrestrial carbon cycle using NCAR CCSM4

A tighter constraint on Earth-system sensitivity from long-term temperature and carbon-cycle observations

How Uncertainties in Future Climate Change Predictions Translate into Future Terrestrial Carbon Fluxes

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

Emergent temperature sensitivity of soil organic carbon driven by mineral associations

Saturation of Global Terrestrial Carbon Sink under a High Warming Scenario

Projected Soil Carbon Loss with Warming in Constrained Earth System Models

Constraining future terrestrial carbon cycle projections using observation‐based water and carbon flux estimates

Reduced carbon use efficiency and increased microbial turnover with soil warming

Quantifying Uncertainties in Soil Carbon Responses to Changes in Global Mean Temperature and Precipitation

Emergent constraints on carbon budgets as a function of global warming

Large influence of soil moisture on long-term terrestrial carbon uptake

Carbon cycle confidence and uncertainty: Exploring variation among soil biogeochemical models

Evaluating the simulated mean soil carbon transit times by Earth system models using observations

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

Carbon system state determines warming potential of emissions

Uncertain predictions of soil carbon change during the 21st century

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