Add mortality and productivity aboveground carbon fluxes as history variables #926
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
aboveground woody productivity for comparison of FATES with forest plot data.
[ Change aboveground to agw (aboveground woody) in history variable names ] Fixes: [NGT-ED Github issue #] User interface changes?: [Yes (describe what changes), No] Code review: [Names] Test suite: [suite name, machine, compilers] Test baseline: Test namelist changes: Test answer changes: [bit for bit, roundoff, climate changing] Test summary:no testing
[ Since AWM and AWP are fluxes of AGB, and AGB includes leaves, add leaves to AWP and AWM calculations. Tidy up names as a result of this change. ] Fixes: [NGT-ED Github issue #] User interface changes?: [Yes (describe what changes), No] Code review: [Names] Test suite: [suite name, machine, compilers] Test baseline: Test namelist changes: Test answer changes: [bit for bit, roundoff, climate changing] Test summary: no testing
[ ] Fixes: [NGT-ED Github issue #] User interface changes?: [Yes (describe what changes), No] Code review: [Names] Test suite: [suite name, machine, compilers] Test baseline: Test namelist changes: Test answer changes: [bit for bit, roundoff, climate changing] Test summary:no testing
[ ] Fixes: [NGT-ED Github issue #] User interface changes?: [Yes (describe what changes), No] Code review: [Names] Test suite: [suite name, machine, compilers] Test baseline: Test namelist changes: Test answer changes: [bit for bit, roundoff, climate changing] Test summary: no testing
[ To be consistent with AGB reproductive carbon isn't included so no need to add it here. ] Fixes: [NGT-ED Github issue #] User interface changes?: [Yes (describe what changes), No] Code review: [Names] Test suite: [suite name, machine, compilers] Test baseline: Test namelist changes: Test answer changes: [bit for bit, roundoff, climate changing] Test summary: no testing
Conflicts: main/FatesHistoryInterfaceMod.F90 main/FatesRestartInterfaceMod.F90
rgknox
approved these changes
Jan 30, 2023
4 tasks
|
Regression testing on cheyenne is complete. I tested this and #971 at the same time by merging them together. All expected tests pass b4b against Folder location: |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description:
This PR adds two new history variables, FATES_ABOVEGROUND_MORT_SZPF and FATES_ABOVEGROUND_PROD_SZPF - aboveground mortality and productivity carbon fluxes. These history variables will allow direct comparisons with the results from Piponiot et al. 2022, and potentially other forest plot data.
https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.17995
Piponiot et al. output AWP and AWM - which they describe as “aboveground woody productivity (AWP), the flux in AGB associated with tree growth and recruitment) and aboveground woody mortality (AWM, the flux from AGB to necromass due to mortality)”.
I think woody here refers to woody plants, rather than woody parts. AWP and AWM are described as AGB fluxes, and AGB is calculated using equations from Chave et al. 2014, and others, which I believe includes leaves (although I’m not totally sure after reading it again). Leaves are probably a very small part of biomass anyway (less than 5% according to Chave et al. 2014). To be consistent with AGB calculations in FATES, I included leaves but not reproductive tissues. Although I'm curious why reproductive tissue isn't included in AGB....
I wanted these variables to be FATES_ABOVEGROUND_MORTALITY_CFLUX_SZPF and FATES_ABOVEGROUND_PRODUCTIVITY_CFLUX_SZPF to be consistent with other history variables but the names were too long and the HLM failed to recognise them. I’m open to suggestions on alternatives.
Results here are based on a 400 year run at BCI. New variables are compared with existing flux variables and with results from Piponiot et al.
Collaborators:
@ckoven @jenniferholm
Expectation of Answer Changes:
No changes expected.
Checklist:
Test Results:
CTSM (or) E3SM (specify which) test hash-tag:
CTSM (or) E3SM (specify which) baseline hash-tag:
FATES baseline hash-tag:
Test Output:
