Can CMIP6 Models Accurately Reproduce Terrestrial Evapotranspiration Across China?

被引:0
|
作者
Shen, Hui [1 ]
Li, Jianduo [2 ,3 ]
Wu, Guocan [1 ]
Ye, Aizhong [1 ]
Mao, Yuna [1 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Normal Univ, Fac Geog Sci, State Key Lab Earth Surface Proc & Resource Ecol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] CMA Earth Syst Modeling & Predict Ctr, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Acad Meteorol Sci, State Key Lab Severe Weather, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
China; CMIP6; models; evapotranspiration; model evaluation; WATER-BALANCE; CLIMATE; UNCERTAINTY; EVAPORATION; TRENDS; PRECIPITATION; PRODUCTS; DROUGHT; BASIN; GLEAM;
D O I
10.1002/joc.8794
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
Terrestrial evapotranspiration (ET) plays a fundamental role in the climate system. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) provides a valuable framework for assessing global climate model performance, but gaps remain in evaluating its ET estimates, particularly in China. To fill this gap, we employed the Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model (GLEAM) and the water balance ET method to validate the CMIP6 ET outputs from 1980 to 2014 at both national and river basin scales. Key findings include: (1) GLEAM ET performs comparably to the water balance method, making it reliable for validating CMIP6 ET outputs. From 1980 to 2014, the annual mean ET in GLEAM for China ranges from 355 to 411 mm/year. In contrast, most CMIP6 models overestimate ET, with the multi-model ensemble (MME) mean ranging from 524 to 542 mm/year, showing considerable variation among models. Spatially, the MME overestimates ET across over 90% of China. Bayesian model averaging (BMA) results align closely with reference data, with overestimation concentrated in southwest China. (2) At the national scale, CMIP6 trends range from -0.36 to 0.58 mm/year2, which contrasts sharply with the GLEAM trend of 1.27 mm/year2. At the basin scale, most models overestimate annual ET compared to GLEAM, with discrepancies particularly evident in the major river basins. The smallest difference in ET trend simulation occurs in the Northwest River basin, where model distributions are more concentrated, while the largest discrepancies appear in the Pearl River basin, where model performance is more scattered. Furthermore, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) analysis reveals high ensemble consistency in regions such as the Haihe, Yellow, Yangtze, Pearl and Songliao River basins, indicating more reliable model performance in these areas. This study contributes to enhancing the reliability and accuracy of climate projections, which is essential for informed decision-making and policy formulation in atmospheric science.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] MJO Propagation Across the Maritime Continent: Are CMIP6 Models Better Than CMIP5 Models?
    Ahn, Min-Seop
    Kim, Daehyun
    Kang, Daehyun
    Lee, Jiwoo
    Sperber, Kenneth R.
    Gleckler, Peter J.
    Jiang, Xianan
    Ham, Yoo-Geun
    Kim, Hyemi
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 47 (11)
  • [32] Future changes of dry-wet climate regions and its contributing climatic factors in China based on CMIP6 models
    Kou, Yu
    Tong, Siqin
    Mei, Li
    Bao, Yuhai
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY, 2023, 43 (08) : 3570 - 3589
  • [33] A Cloudier Picture of Ice-Albedo Feedback in CMIP6 Models
    Sledd, Anne
    L'Ecuyer, Tristan S.
    FRONTIERS IN EARTH SCIENCE, 2021, 9
  • [34] Tropospheric cooling induces annual wet biases over China in CMIP6 models
    Wang, Liquan
    Liu, Zhaochen
    Jiang, Dabang
    CLIMATE DYNAMICS, 2024, 62 (10) : 9673 - 9685
  • [35] Future Changes in Global Atmospheric Rivers Projected by CMIP6 Models
    Zhang, Lujia
    Zhao, Yang
    Cheng, Tat Fan
    Lu, Mengqian
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES, 2024, 129 (03)
  • [36] Ensemble of CMIP6 derived reference and potential evapotranspiration with radiative and advective components
    Bjarke, Nels
    Barsugli, Joseph
    Livneh, Ben
    SCIENTIFIC DATA, 2023, 10 (01)
  • [37] Future changes in daily snowfall events over China based on CMIP6 models
    Chen, Huopo
    Sun, Jianqi
    ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC SCIENCE LETTERS, 2022, 15 (05)
  • [38] Evaluation of CMIP6 models in reproducing observed rainfall over Ethiopia
    Berhanu, Daniel
    Alamirew, Tena
    Taye, Meron Teferi
    Tibebe, Degefi
    Gebrehiwot, Solomon
    Zeleke, Gete
    JOURNAL OF WATER AND CLIMATE CHANGE, 2023, 14 (08) : 2583 - 2605
  • [39] Evaluation and future projection of compound extreme events in China using CMIP6 models
    Liu, Yuxin
    Fang, Jian
    Mu, Sha
    Zhang, Yihan
    Wang, Xiaoli
    Lyu, Lili
    CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2025, 178 (02)
  • [40] Divergent Representation of Precipitation Recycling in the Amazon and the Congo in CMIP6 Models
    Baker, J. C. A.
    Spracklen, D., V
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2022, 49 (10)