Soil is the largest organic carbon (C) pool of terrestrial ecosystems, and C loss from soil accounts for a large proportion of land‐atmosphere C exchange. Therefore, a small change in soil organic C (SOC) can affect atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentration and climate change. In the past decades, a wide variety of studies have been conducted to quantify global SOC stocks and soil C exchange with the atmosphere through site measurements, inventories, and empirical/process‐based modeling. However, these estimates are highly uncertain, and identifying major driving forces controlling soil C dynamics remains a key research challenge. This study has compiled century‐long (1901–2010) estimates of SOC storage and heterotrophic respiration (Rh) from 10 terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) in the Multi‐scale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project and two observation‐based data sets. The 10 TBM ensemble shows that global SOC estimate ranges from 425 to 2111 Pg C (1 Pg = 10¹⁵ g) with a median value of 1158 Pg C in 2010. The models estimate a broad range of Rh from 35 to 69 Pg C yr⁻¹ with a median value of 51 Pg C yr⁻¹ during 2001–2010. The largest uncertainty in SOC stocks exists in the 40–65°N latitude whereas the largest cross‐model divergence in Rh are in the tropics. The modeled SOC change during 1901–2010 ranges from −70 Pg C to 86 Pg C, but in some models the SOC change has a different sign from the change of total C stock, implying very different contribution of vegetation and soil pools in determining the terrestrial C budget among models. The model ensemble‐estimated mean residence time of SOC shows a reduction of 3.4 years over the past century, which accelerate C cycling through the land biosphere. All the models agreed that climate and land use changes decreased SOC stocks, while elevated atmospheric CO₂ and nitrogen deposition over intact ecosystems increased SOC stocks—even though the responses varied significantly among models. Model representations of temperature and moisture sensitivity, nutrient limitation, and land use partially explain the divergent estimates of global SOC stocks and soil C fluxes in this study. In addition, a major source of systematic error in model estimations relates to nonmodeled SOC storage in wetlands and peatlands, as well as to old C storage in deep soil layers.

Understanding the role of climate extremes and their impact on the carbon (C) cycle is increasingly a focus of Earth system science. Climate extremes such as droughts, heat waves, or heavy precipitation events can cause substantial changes in terrestrial C fluxes. On the other hand, extreme changes in C fluxes are often, but not always, driven by extreme climate conditions. Here we present an analysis of how extremes in temperature and precipitation, and extreme changes in terrestrial C fluxes are related to each other in 10 state‐of‐the‐art terrestrial carbon models, all driven by the same climate forcing. We use model outputs from the North American Carbon Program Multi‐scale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project (MsTMIP). A global‐scale analysis shows that both droughts and heat waves translate into anomalous net releases of CO₂ from the land surface via different mechanisms: Droughts largely decrease gross primary production (GPP) and to a lower extent total respiration (TR), while heat waves slightly decrease GPP but increase TR. Cold and wet periods have a smaller opposite effect. Analyzing extremes in C fluxes reveals that extreme changes in GPP and TR are often caused by strong shifts in water availability, but for extremes in TR shifts in temperature are also important. Extremes in net CO₂ exchange are equally strongly driven by deviations in temperature and precipitation. Models mostly agree on the sign of the C flux response to climate extremes, but model spread is large. In tropical forests, C cycle extremes are driven by water availability, whereas in boreal forests temperature plays a more important role. Models are particularly uncertain about the C flux response to extreme heat in boreal forests.

Afforestation and deforestation as human disturbances to vegetation have profound impacts on ecohydrological processes influencing both water and carbon cycles and ecosystem sustainability. Since 1999, large‐scale revegetation activities such as “Grain‐to‐Green Program” have been implemented across China's Loess Plateau. However, negative ecohydrological consequences, including streamflow decline and soil drying have emerged. Here we estimate the equilibrium vegetation cover over the Loess Plateau based on an ecohydrological model and assess the water balance under the equilibrium and actual vegetation cover over the past decade. Results show that the current vegetation cover (0.48 on average) has already exceeded the climate‐defined equilibrium vegetation cover (0.43 on average) in many parts of the Loess Plateau, especially in the middle‐to‐east regions. This indicates a widespread overplanting, which is found to primarily responsible for soil drying in the area. Additionally, both the equilibrium vegetation cover and soil moisture tend to decrease under future (i.e., 2011–2050) climate scenarios due to declined atmospheric water supply (i.e., precipitation) and increased atmospheric water demand (i.e., potential evapotranspiration). Our findings suggest that further revegetation on the Loess Plateau should be applied with caution. To maintain a sustainable ecohydrological environment in the region, a revegetation threshold is urgently needed to guide future revegetation activities.

Terrestrial ecosystems play a vital role in regulating the accumulation of carbon (C) in the atmosphere. Understanding the factors controlling land C uptake is critical for reducing uncertainties in projections of future climate. The relative importance of changing climate, rising atmospheric CO₂, and other factors, however, remains unclear despite decades of research. Here, we use an ensemble of land models to show that models disagree on the primary driver of cumulative C uptake for 85% of vegetated land area. Disagreement is largest in model sensitivity to rising atmospheric CO₂ which shows almost twice the variability in cumulative land uptake since 1901 (1 s.d. of 212.8 PgC vs. 138.5 PgC, respectively). We find that variability in CO₂ and temperature sensitivity is attributable, in part, to their compensatory effects on C uptake, whereby comparable estimates of C uptake can arise by invoking different sensitivities to key environmental conditions. Conversely, divergent estimates of C uptake can occur despite being based on the same environmental sensitivities. Together, these findings imply an important limitation to the predictability of C cycling and climate under unprecedented environmental conditions. We suggest that the carbon modeling community prioritize a probabilistic multi-model approach to generate more robust C cycle projections.

Terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) have become an integral tool for extrapolating local observations and understanding of land–atmosphere carbon exchange to larger regions. The North American Carbon Program (NACP) Multi-scale synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project (MsTMIP) is a formal model intercomparison and evaluation effort focused on improving the diagnosis and attribution of carbon exchange at regional and global scales. MsTMIP builds upon current and past synthesis activities, and has a unique framework designed to isolate, interpret, and inform understanding of how model structural differences impact estimates of carbon uptake and release. Here we provide an overview of the MsTMIP effort and describe how the MsTMIP experimental design enables the assessment and quantification of TBM structural uncertainty. Model structure refers to the types of processes considered (e.g., nutrient cycling, disturbance, lateral transport of carbon), and how these processes are represented (e.g., photosynthetic formulation, temperature sensitivity, respiration) in the models. By prescribing a common experimental protocol with standard spin-up procedures and driver data sets, we isolate any biases and variability in TBM estimates of regional and global carbon budgets resulting from differences in the models themselves (i.e., model structure) and model-specific parameter values. An initial intercomparison of model structural differences is represented using hierarchical cluster diagrams (a.k.a. dendrograms), which highlight similarities and differences in how models account for carbon cycle, vegetation, energy, and nitrogen cycle dynamics. We show that, despite the standardized protocol used to derive initial conditions, models show a high degree of variation for GPP, total living biomass, and total soil carbon, underscoring the influence of differences in model structure and parameterization on model estimates.