Engineering topics

Weng, Ensheng

Publications and source records attributed to Weng, Ensheng.

6 records

DOE OSTI2025

Demography, dynamics and data: building confidence for simulating changes in the world's forests

Vegetation demographic models (VDMs) are advanced tools for simulating forest responses to climate and land-use changes, and are essential for projecting carbon cycling and large-scale forest management strategies. Despite their increasing incorporation into Earth System Models, VDMs differ in their demographic assumptions, with no prior quantitative comparison of their performance. We benchmarked nine VDMs against observational data from boreal, temperate and tropical sites, assessing their accuracy in predicting tree growth, carbon turnover, biomass stocks and size distributions. Models were simulated under consistent climate conditions with postdisturbance recovery monitored for at least 420 yr. Postdisturbance carbon recovery trajectories showed significant variability while remaining within observational ranges. Initial regrowth rates varied substantially (0.03-0.60, 0.18-0.70 and 0.35-1.10 kgCm-2 yr-1 for boreal, temperate and tropical sites, respectively), influenced by each model's initial forest state. Models captured mature forest carbon content but showed compensating effects between overestimated growth and underestimated mortality rates. This first multi-model benchmarking identifies growth and mortality rates as critical calibration targets and highlights the need to refine postdisturbance establishment conditions for model development. We outline specific benchmarking variables needed to improve predictions of forest responses to environmental change.

demographic vegetation model benchmarking↗

DOE OSTI2023

Accounting for herbaceous communities in process‐based models will advance our understanding of “grassy” ecosystems

Abstract Grassland and other herbaceous communities cover significant portions of Earth's terrestrial surface and provide many critical services, such as carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, and food production. Forecasts of global change impacts on these services will require predictive tools, such as process‐based dynamic vegetation models. Yet, model representation of herbaceous communities and ecosystems lags substantially behind that of tree communities and forests. The limited representation of herbaceous communities within models arises from two important knowledge gaps: first, our empirical understanding of the principles governing herbaceous vegetation dynamics is either incomplete or does not provide mechanistic information necessary to drive herbaceous community processes with models; second, current model structure and parameterization of grass and other herbaceous plant functional types limits the ability of models to predict outcomes of competition and growth for herbaceous vegetation. In this review, we provide direction for addressing these gaps by: (1) presenting a brief history of how vegetation dynamics have been developed and incorporated into earth system models, (2) reporting on a model simulation activity to evaluate current model capability to represent herbaceous vegetation dynamics and ecosystem function, and (3) detailing several ecological properties and phenomena that should be a focus for both empiricists and modelers to improve representation of herbaceous vegetation in models. Together, empiricists and modelers can improve representation of herbaceous ecosystem processes within models. In so doing, we will greatly enhance our ability to forecast future states of the earth system, which is of high importance given the rapid rate of environmental change on our planet.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

A New Approach to Evaluate and Reduce Uncertainty of Model-Based Biodiversity Projections for Conservation Policy Formulation

Biodiversity projections with uncertainty estimates under different climate, land-use, and policy scenarios are essential to setting and achieving international targets to mitigate biodiversity loss. Evaluating and improving biodiversity predictions to better inform policy decisions remains a central conservation goal and challenge. A comprehensive strategy to evaluate and reduce uncertainty of model outputs against observed measurements and multiple models would help to produce more robust biodiversity predictions. We propose an approach that integrates biodiversity models and emerging remote sensing and in-situ data streams to evaluate and reduce uncertainty with the goal of improving policy-relevant biodiversity predictions. In this work, we describe a multivariate approach to directly and indirectly evaluate and constrain model uncertainty, demonstrate a proof of concept of this approach, embed the concept within the broader context of model evaluation and scenario analysis for conservation policy, and highlight lessons from other modeling communities.

essential biodiversity variables↗

DOE OSTI2020

Improving collaborations between empiricists and modelers to advance grassland community dynamics in ecosystem models

Climate change, increasing atmospheric CO 2 , and land use change have altered biogeochemical and hydrologic cycles world-wide, with grassland systems being particularly vulnerable to resulting vegetation shifts (Komatsu et al., 2019). Therefore, incorporating plant community dynamics into ecosystem models is critical for accurate forecasting of ecosystem responses to global change (Levine, 2016). Process-based ecosystem models, which simulate the biogeochemical transfers of mass and energy among biota, the subsurface, and atmosphere, require representation of dynamic composition of organisms within ecosystems. For example, these models simulate leaf and plant-level characteristics, such as electron transport rate and allometry of carbon (C) allocation, to predict how net primary productivity and other ecosystem processes respond to abiotic drivers. These models are particularly useful in scaling from organismal to ecosystem levels but are still underdeveloped in their ability to capture community change, especially in grassland ecosystems. To represent compositional changes, these models must simulate competition, mortality, establishment, and reproduction of plant populations within communities. Yet, current ecosystem modeling approaches to forecast plant community change have derived from studies of forested systems and are either too coarse to capture fine-scale community dynamics (e.g. dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs)) or too complex to be used at large spatial scales (e.g. forest gap models).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2019

Increasing Impacts of Extreme Droughts on Vegetation Productivity Under Climate Change

Terrestrial gross primary production (GPP) is the basis of vegetation growth and food production globally and plays a critical role in regulating atmospheric CO2 through its impact on ecosystem carbon balance. Even though higher CO2 concentrations in future decades can increase GPP, low soil water availability, heat stress and disturbances associated with droughts could reduce the benefits of such CO2 fertilization. Here we analysed outputs of 13 Earth system models to show an increasingly stronger impact on GPP by extreme droughts than by mild and moderate droughts over the twenty-first century. Due to a dramatic increase in the frequency of extreme droughts, the magnitude of globally averaged reductions in GPP associated with extreme droughts was projected to be nearly tripled by the last quarter of this century (2075-2099) relative to that of the historical period (1850-1999) under both high and intermediate GHG emission scenarios. By contrast, the magnitude of GPP reductions associated with mild and moderate droughts was not projected to increase substantially. Our analysis indicates a high risk of extreme droughts to the global carbon cycle with atmospheric warming; however, this risk can be potentially mitigated by positive anomalies of GPP associated with favourable environmental conditions.

Xu, Chonggang↗

NASA NTRS2018

Carbon-Nitrogen Coupling Under Three Schemes of Model Representation: A Traceability Analysis

The interaction between terrestrial carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles has been incorporated into more and more land surface models. However, the scheme of C-N coupling differs greatly among models, and how these diverse representations of C-N interactions will affect C-cycle modeling remains unclear. In this study, we explored how the simulated ecosystem C storage capacity in the terrestrial ecosystem (TECO) model varied with three different commonly used schemes of C-N coupling. The three schemes (SM1, SM2, and SM3) have been used in three different coupled C-N models (i.e., TECO-CN, CLM 4.5, and O-CN, respectively). They differ mainly in the stoichiometry of C and N in vegetation and soils, plant N uptake strategies, down regulation of photosynthesis, and the pathways of N import. We incorporated the three C-N coupling schemes into the C-only version of the TECO model and evaluated their impacts on the C cycle with a traceability framework. Our results showed that all three of the C-N schemes caused significant reductions in steady-state C storage capacity compared with the C-only version with magnitudes of −23%, −30%, and −54% for SM1, SM2, and SM3, respectively. This reduced C storage capacity was mainly derived from the combined effects of decreases in net primary productivity (NPP; −29%, −15%, and −45%) and changes in mean C residence time (MRT; 9%, −17%, and −17%) for SM1, SM2, and SM3, respectively. The differences in NPP are mainly attributed to the different assumptions on plant N uptake, plant tissue C : N ratio, down regulation of photosynthesis, and biological N fixation. In comparison, the alternative representations of the plant vs. microbe competition strategy and the plant N uptake, combined with the flexible C : N ratio in vegetation and soils, led to a notable spread in MRT. These results highlight the fact that the diverse assumptions on N processes represented by different C-N coupled models could cause additional uncertainty for land surface models. Understanding their difference can help us improve the capability of models to predict future biogeochemical cycles of terrestrial ecosystems.

Du, Zhenggang↗