Accounting for Winter Warming Events in the Ecosystem Model LPJ-GUESS : Evaluation and Outlook

• Published in: Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
• Main Authors: Pascual, D., Johansson, M., Pongracz, A., Tang, J.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2024
• Subjects: Physical Geography; Climate Research; arctic ecosystems; carbon cycle; climate extremes; modeling; rain on snow; winter warming events; Arctic; Subarctic
• Online Access: https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/408c1f69-3dc6-463f-8ae7-a74e6a35fe3f; https://doi.org/10.1029/2023JG007464

Winter warming events (WWEs) are short-lasting events of unusually warm weather, occasionally combined with rainfall, which can cause severe ecosystem impacts by altering ground temperatures and water fluxes. Despite their importance, how large-scale ecosystem models perform in depicting the impacts of WWEs remain largely unknown. The frequency and intensity of WWEs will likely increase further in the future, making it necessary to understand their potential impacts on high-latitude ecosystems. In this study, we evaluated the ability of the dynamic ecosystem model Lund-Potsdam-Jena General Ecosystem Simulator (LPJ-GUESS) to represent the responses of subarctic ecosystems to future WWEs, and identified model gaps hindering more accurate estimates of these responses. In response to WWEs, the model simulated substantial ground cooling (up to 2°C in winter) due to reduced snow depth (insulation), with rain on snow (ROS) exerting a marginal influence on the ground temperature responses: these modeled responses are in apparent contradiction with the strong ground warming effect of ROS reported in most observational studies. The simulated ground cooling led to changes in biogeochemical fluxes that were substantial and often comparable in magnitude (but often opposite in direction) to those from altered winter climatologies. The mismatch between the modeled and the observed ground temperature responses to WWEs highlights LPJ-GUESS's current limitations in realistically simulating some of the effects of WWEs. These limitations likely stem from the (a) absence of a surface energy balance, (b) lack of snow-vegetation interactions, (c) daily time-step, and (d) simplistic water retention scheme in LPJ-GUESS.