4.6 Article

Comparison of Soil Water and Heat Transfer Modeling Over the Tibetan Plateau Using Two Community Land Surface Model (CLM) Versions

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2020MS002189

关键词

land surface model; Tibetan Plateau; soil moisture; soil temperature

资金

  1. Chinese National Science Foundation Programs [41822501, 91837209, 41930759, 91537214, 41775016, 41975012, 42075089, 41675157]
  2. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA23060601]
  3. Chinese Academy of Youth Innovation and Promotion, CAS [2014384874]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil water and heat transfer is one of the most important parts of water and energy partition between atmosphere and land surface, and it is more complicated over the cold regions. In this study, the observed soil moisture and temperature are selected from four sites over the Tibetan Plateau (TP) to evaluate the performances two versions of Community Land Model (CLM), that is, CLM4.5 and CLM5.0. In addition, soil temperature observations from 67 sites and soil moisture observations from Maqu and Naqu monitoring network over the TP were used to evaluate the performances of regional simulations. The results indicated that the simulated soil temperature generally coincided with that of the observed, while CLM5.0 outputs are closer to the observed soil temperature in the arid and semiarid regions compared to CLM4.5. Generally, CLM5.0 tended to overestimate soil moisture at most sites at four soil depths (5, 10, 20, and 40 cm) but got some improvements at Maqu site. The overestimation of soil moisture was mainly caused by the introduction of a dry surface layer-based (DSL) soil evaporation resistance parameterization in CLM5.0, which improves the soil evaporation simulation over the TP, especially in the semiarid region. Moreover, we tried to distinguish the factors that affect the soil water and heat transfer in the models. The results showed that soil property data play a main role in soil water and heat transfer modeling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据