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.

Understanding the uncertainty in global forest carbon turnover

Variations of Carbon Allocation and Turnover Time Across Tropical Forests

Climate related large scale variation in forest carbon turnover rate Evaluating global vegetation models using remote sensing products of biomass and NPP

Importance of Vegetation Dynamics for Future Terrestrial Carbon Cycling

Overlooked branch turnover creates a widespread bias in forest carbon accounting

Evaluation of Climate-Related Carbon Turnover Processes in Global Vegetation Models for Boreal and Temperate Forests.

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

Evaluating changes of biomass in global vegetation models: the role of turnover fluctuations and ENSO events

Global Evaluation of Vegetation Carbon Residence Times as Simulated by ISI IMP2 Global Vegetation Models (GVMs) Using a Data Product based on Satellite and Eddy Covariance Flux …

Evaluation of CMIP5 Earth System Models for the Spatial Patterns of Biomass and Soil Carbon Turnover Times and Their Linkage with Climate

Important role of forest disturbances in the global biomass turnover and carbon sinks

Methodological Uncertainty in Estimating Carbon Turnover Times of Soil Fractions

Underestimated ecosystem carbon turnover time and sequestration under the steady state assumption: A perspective from long-term data assimilation

Changes in Biomass Turnover Times in Tropical Forests and Their Environmental Drivers from 2001 to 2012

Carbon Residence Time Dominates Uncertainty In Terrestrial Vegetation Responses To Future Climate And Atmospheric Co2

Biogeographic Pattern of Living Vegetation Carbon Turnover Time in Mature Forests Across Continents

Global Patterns of Woody Residence Time and Its Influence on Model Simulation of Aboveground Biomass

Observation‐based global soil heterotrophic respiration indicates underestimated turnover and sequestration of soil carbon by terrestrial ecosystem models

Soil and vegetation carbon turnover times from tropical to boreal forests

Decomposing Uncertainties in the Future Terrestrial Carbon Budget Associated with Emission Scenarios, Climate Projections, and Ecosystem Simulations Using the ISI-MIP Results

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