6533b822fe1ef96bd127ce07

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Compensatory water effects link yearly global land CO2 sink changes to temperature

Nicolas ViovyYing-ping WangGianluca TramontanaKazuhito IchiiKazuhito IchiiAlmut ArnethChristopher R. SchwalmMarkus ReichsteinDario PapalePhilippe CiaisSönke ZaehleFabian GansNing ZengChris HuntingfordBotond RádulyEtsushi KatoAnders AhlströmStephen SitchUlrich WeberPierre FriedlingsteinMartin JungBen PoulterGustau Camps-vallsChristian RödenbeckAtul K. Jain

subject

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmospheregeographyMultidisciplinarygeography.geographical_feature_category010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciencesMeteorology0208 environmental biotechnologyEddy covarianceCarbon sink[PHYS.PHYS.PHYS-GEO-PH]Physics [physics]/Physics [physics]/Geophysics [physics.geo-ph]02 engineering and technology15. Life on landAtmospheric sciences01 natural sciencesSink (geography)020801 environmental engineeringCarbon cycle13. Climate action[SDE]Environmental SciencesEnvironmental scienceTerrestrial ecosystemEcosystemTemporal scalesComputingMilieux_MISCELLANEOUS0105 earth and related environmental sciences

description

Large interannual variations in the measured growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) originate primarily from fluctuations in carbon uptake by land ecosystems1–3. It remains uncertain, however, to what extent temperature and water availability control the carbon balance of land ecosystems across spatial and temporal scales3–14. Here we use empirical models based on eddy covariance data15 and process-based models16,17 to investigate the effect of changes in temperature and water availability on gross primary productivity (GPP), terrestrial ecosystem respiration (TER) and net ecosystem exchange (NEE) at local and global scales. We find that water availability is the dominant driver of the local interannual variability in GPP and TER. To a lesser extent this is true also for NEE at the local scale, but when integrated globally, temporal NEE variability is mostly driven by temperature fluctuations. We suggest that this apparent paradox can be explained by two compensatory water effects. Temporal waterdriven GPP and TER variations compensate locally, dampening water-driven NEE variability. Spatial water availability anomalies also compensate, leaving a dominant temperature signal in the yearto- year fluctuations of the land carbon sink. These findings help to reconcile seemingly contradictory reports regarding the importance of temperature and water in controlling the interannual variability of the terrestrial carbon balance3–6,9,11,12,14. Our study indicates that spatial climate covariation drives the global carbon cycle response.

10.1038/nature20780http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature20780