C. Koven
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by C. Koven.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2011
Wang X; Shilong Piao; Philippe Ciais; Junsheng Li; Pierre Friedlingstein; C. Koven; Anping Chen
Understanding how vegetation growth responds to climate change is a critical requirement for projecting future ecosystem dynamics. Parts of North America (NA) have experienced a spring cooling trend over the last three decades, but little is known about the response of vegetation growth to this change. Using observed climate data and satellite-derived Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) data from 1982 to 2006, we investigated changes in spring (April–May) temperature trends and their impact on vegetation growth in NA. A piecewise linear regression approach shows that the trend in spring temperature is not continuous through the 25-year period. In the northwestern region of NA, spring temperature increased until the late 1980s or early 1990s, and stalled or decreased afterwards. In response, a spring vegetation greening trend, which was evident in this region during the 1980s, stalled or reversed recently. Conversely, an opposite phenomenon occurred in the northeastern region of NA due to different spring temperature trends. Additionally, the trends of summer vegetation growth vary between the periods before and after the turning point (TP) of spring temperature trends. This change cannot be fully explained by summer drought stress change alone and is partly explained by changes in the trends of spring temperature as well as those of summer temperature. As reported in previous studies, summer vegetation browning trends have occurred in the northwestern region of NA since the early 1990s, which is consistent with the spring and summer cooling trends in this region during this period.
Global Biogeochemical Cycles | 2016
Yiqi Luo; Anders Ahlström; Steven D. Allison; N.H. Batjes; Victor Brovkin; Nuno Carvalhais; Adrian Chappell; Philippe Ciais; Eric A. Davidson; Adien Finzi; Katerina Georgiou; Bertrand Guenet; Oleksandra Hararuk; Jennifer W. Harden; Yujie He; Francesca M. Hopkins; Lifen Jiang; C. Koven; Robert B. Jackson; Chris D. Jones; Mark J. Lara; J. K. Liang; A. David McGuire; William J. Parton; Changhui Peng; James T. Randerson; Alejandro Salazar; Carlos A. Sierra; Matthew J. Smith; Hanqin Tian
Soil carbon (C) is a critical component of Earth system models (ESMs), and its diverse representations are a major source of the large spread across models in the terrestrial C sink from the third to fifth assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Improving soil C projections is of a high priority for Earth system modeling in the future IPCC and other assessments. To achieve this goal, we suggest that (1) model structures should reflect real-world processes, (2) parameters should be calibrated to match model outputs with observations, and (3) external forcing variables should accurately prescribe the environmental conditions that soils experience. First, most soil C cycle models simulate C input from litter production and C release through decomposition. The latter process has traditionally been represented by first-order decay functions, regulated primarily by temperature, moisture, litter quality, and soil texture. While this formulation well captures macroscopic soil organic C (SOC) dynamics, better understanding is needed of their underlying mechanisms as related to microbial processes, depth-dependent environmental controls, and other processes that strongly affect soil C dynamics. Second, incomplete use of observations in model parameterization is a major cause of bias in soil C projections from ESMs. Optimal parameter calibration with both pool- and flux-based data sets through data assimilation is among the highest priorities for near-term research to reduce biases among ESMs. Third, external variables are represented inconsistently among ESMs, leading to differences in modeled soil C dynamics. We recommend the implementation of traceability analyses to identify how external variables and model parameterizations influence SOC dynamics in different ESMs. Overall, projections of the terrestrial C sink can be substantially improved when reliable data sets are available to select the most representative model structure, constrain parameters, and prescribe forcing fields.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A | 2015
C. Koven; Edward A. G. Schuur; Christina Schädel; Theodore J. Bohn; Eleanor J. Burke; Guangsheng Chen; Xiaodong Chen; Philippe Ciais; Guido Grosse; Jennifer W. Harden; Daniel J. Hayes; Gustaf Hugelius; Elchin Jafarov; Gerhard Krinner; Peter Kuhry; David M. Lawrence; Andrew H. MacDougall; Sergey S. Marchenko; A. D. McGuire; Susan M. Natali; D. J. Nicolsky; David Olefeldt; Shushi Peng; Vladimir E. Romanovsky; Kevin Schaefer; Jens Strauss; Claire C. Treat; Merritt R. Turetsky
We present an approach to estimate the feedback from large-scale thawing of permafrost soils using a simplified, data-constrained model that combines three elements: soil carbon (C) maps and profiles to identify the distribution and type of C in permafrost soils; incubation experiments to quantify the rates of C lost after thaw; and models of soil thermal dynamics in response to climate warming. We call the approach the Permafrost Carbon Network Incubation–Panarctic Thermal scaling approach (PInc-PanTher). The approach assumes that C stocks do not decompose at all when frozen, but once thawed follow set decomposition trajectories as a function of soil temperature. The trajectories are determined according to a three-pool decomposition model fitted to incubation data using parameters specific to soil horizon types. We calculate litterfall C inputs required to maintain steady-state C balance for the current climate, and hold those inputs constant. Soil temperatures are taken from the soil thermal modules of ecosystem model simulations forced by a common set of future climate change anomalies under two warming scenarios over the period 2010 to 2100. Under a medium warming scenario (RCP4.5), the approach projects permafrost soil C losses of 12.2–33.4 Pg C; under a high warming scenario (RCP8.5), the approach projects C losses of 27.9–112.6 Pg C. Projected C losses are roughly linearly proportional to global temperature changes across the two scenarios. These results indicate a global sensitivity of frozen soil C to climate change (γ sensitivity) of −14 to −19 Pg C °C−1 on a 100 year time scale. For CH4 emissions, our approach assumes a fixed saturated area and that increases in CH4 emissions are related to increased heterotrophic respiration in anoxic soil, yielding CH4 emission increases of 7% and 35% for the RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios, respectively, which add an additional greenhouse gas forcing of approximately 10–18%. The simplified approach presented here neglects many important processes that may amplify or mitigate C release from permafrost soils, but serves as a data-constrained estimate on the forced, large-scale permafrost C response to warming.
Environmental Research Letters | 2015
David M. Lawrence; C. Koven; Sean Claude Swenson; William J. Riley; Andrew G. Slater
The fate of currently frozen permafrost carbon as high-latitude climate warms remains highly uncertain and existing models give widely varying estimates of the permafrost carbon-climate feedback. This uncertainty is due to many factors, including the role that permafrost thaw-induced transitions in soil hydrologic conditions will have on organic matter decomposition rates and the proportion of aerobic to anaerobic respiration. Large-scale permafrost thaw, as predicted by the Community Land Model (CLM) under an unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions scenario, results in significant soil drying due to increased drainage following permafrost thaw, even though permafrost domain water inputs are projected to rise (net precipitation minus evaporation >0). CLM predicts that drier soil conditions will accelerate organic matter decomposition, with concomitant increases in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Soil drying, however, strongly suppresses growth in methane (CH4) emissions. Considering the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2 and CH4 emissions together, soil drying weakens the CLM projected GWP associated with carbon fluxes from the permafrost zone by more than 50% compared to a non-drying case. This high sensitivity to hydrologic change highlights the need for better understanding and modeling of landscape-scale changes in soil moisture conditions in response to permafrost thaw in order to more accurately assess the potential magnitude of the permafrost carbon-climate feedback.
Environmental Research Letters | 2013
Umakant Mishra; Julie D. Jastrow; Roser Matamala; Gustaf Hugelius; C. Koven; Jennifer W. Harden; Chien-Lu Ping; G. J. Michaelson; Zhaosheng Fan; R. M. Miller; A. D. McGuire; Charles Tarnocai; Peter Kuhry; William J. Riley; Kevin Schaefer; Edward A. G. Schuur; M.T. Jorgenson; Larry D. Hinzman
The vast amount of organic carbon (OC) stored in soils of the northern circumpolar permafrost region is a potentially vulnerable component of the global carbon cycle. However, estimates of the quan ...
Earth System Science Data | 2014
C. Le Quéré; R. Moriarty; Robbie M. Andrew; Josep G. Canadell; Stephen Sitch; Jan Ivar Korsbakken; Pierre Friedlingstein; Glen P. Peters; Robert J. Andres; Tom Boden; R. A. Houghton; Joanna Isobel House; Ralph F. Keeling; Pieter P. Tans; Almut Arneth; Dorothee C. E. Bakker; Leticia Barbero; Laurent Bopp; F. Chevallier; L P Chini; Philippe Ciais; M. Fader; Richard A. Feely; T. Gkritzalis; Ian Harris; Judith Hauck; Tatiana Ilyina; Atul K. Jain; Etsushi Kato; Vassilis Kitidis
Biogeosciences | 2012
Yiqi Luo; James T. Randerson; Gab Abramowitz; Cédric Bacour; Eleanor Blyth; Nuno Carvalhais; Philippe Ciais; Daniela Dalmonech; Joshua B. Fisher; Rosie Fisher; Pierre Friedlingstein; Kathleen A. Hibbard; Forrest M. Hoffman; Deborah N. Huntzinger; Chris D. Jones; C. Koven; David M. Lawrence; Dejun Li; Miguel D. Mahecha; Shuli Niu; Richard J. Norby; Shilong Piao; Xuan Qi; Philippe Peylin; I. C. Prentice; William J. Riley; Markus Reichstein; Christopher R. Schwalm; Ying-Ping Wang; Jianyang Xia
Biogeosciences | 2013
C. Koven; William J. Riley; Z. M. Subin; J. Y. Tang; Margaret S. Torn; W. D. Collins; Gordon B. Bonan; David M. Lawrence; Sean Claude Swenson
Climatic Change | 2013
Edward A. G. Schuur; Benjamin W. Abbott; William B. Bowden; Victor Brovkin; P. Camill; Josep G. Canadell; Jeffrey P. Chanton; F. S. Chapin; Torben R. Christensen; P. Ciais; Benjamin T. Crosby; Claudia I. Czimczik; Guido Grosse; Jennifer W. Harden; Daniel J. Hayes; Gustaf Hugelius; Julie D. Jastrow; Jeremy B. Jones; Thomas Kleinen; C. Koven; Gerhard Krinner; Peter Kuhry; David M. Lawrence; A. D. McGuire; Susan M. Natali; Jonathan O’Donnell; Chien-Lu Ping; William J. Riley; Annette Rinke; Vladimir E. Romanovsky
Biogeosciences | 2012
A. D. McGuire; Torben R. Christensen; Daniel J. Hayes; Arnaud Heroult; Eugénie S. Euskirchen; John S. Kimball; C. Koven; P.M. Lafleur; Paul A. Miller; Walter C. Oechel; Philippe Peylin; Mathew Williams; Y. Yi