The FLUXNET2015 dataset provides ecosystem-scale data on CO₂, water, and energy exchange between the biosphere and the atmosphere, and other meteorological and biological measurements, from 212 sites around the globe (over 1500 site-years, up to and including year 2014). These sites, independently managed and operated, voluntarily contributed their data to create global datasets. Data were quality controlled and processed using uniform methods, to improve consistency and intercomparability across sites. The dataset is already being used in a number of applications, including ecophysiology studies, remote sensing studies, and development of ecosystem and Earth system models. FLUXNET2015 includes derived-data products, such as gap-filled time series, ecosystem respiration and photosynthetic uptake estimates, estimation of uncertainties, and metadata about the measurements, presented for the first time in this paper. In addition, 206 of these sites are for the first time distributed under a Creative Commons (CC-BY 4.0) license. This paper details this enhanced dataset and the processing methods, now made available as open-source codes, making the dataset more accessible, transparent, and reproducible.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00851-9.

Forest models are instrumental for understanding and projecting the impact of climate change on forests. A considerable number of forest models have been developed in the last decades. However, few systematic and comprehensive model comparisons have been performed in Europe that combine an evaluation of modelled carbon and water fluxes and forest structure. We evaluate 13 widely used, state‐of‐the‐art, stand‐scale forest models against field measurements of forest structure and eddy‐covariance data of carbon and water fluxes over multiple decades across an environmental gradient at nine typical European forest stands. We test the models' performance in three dimensions:accuracy of local predictions(agreement of modelled and observed annual data),realism of environmental responses(agreement of modelled and observed responses of daily gross primary productivity to temperature, radiation and vapour pressure deficit) andgeneral applicability(proportion of European tree species covered). We find that multiple models are available that excel according to our three dimensions of model performance. For the accuracy of local predictions, variables related to forest structure have lower random and systematic errors than annual carbon and water flux variables. Moreover, the multi‐model ensemble mean provided overall more realistic daily productivity responses to environmental drivers across all sites than any single individual model. The general applicability of the models is high, as almost all models are currently able to cover Europe's common tree species. We show that forest models complement each other in their response to environmental drivers and that there are several cases in which individual models outperform the model ensemble. Our framework provides a first step to capturing essential differences between forest models that go beyond the most commonly used accuracy of predictions. Overall, this study provides a point of reference for future model work aimed at predicting climate impacts and supporting climate mitigation and adaptation measures in forests.

This study evaluates the performances of the new version (v.5.1) of 3D-CMCC Forest Ecosystem Model (FEM) in simulating gross primary productivity (GPP), against eddy covariance GPP data for 10 FLUXNET forest sites across Europe. A new carbon allocation module, coupled with new both phenological and autotrophic respiration schemes, was implemented in this new daily version. Model ability in reproducing timing and magnitude of daily and monthly GPP fluctuations is validated at intra-annual and inter-annual scale, including extreme anomalous seasons. With the purpose to test the 3D-CMCC FEM applicability over Europe without a site-related calibration, the model has been deliberately parametrized with a single set of species-specific parametrizations for each forest ecosystem. The model consistently reproduces both in timing and in magnitude daily and monthly GPP variability across all sites, with the exception of the two Mediterranean sites. We find that 3D-CMCC FEM tends to better simulate the timing of inter-annual anomalies than their magnitude within measurements' uncertainty. In six of eight sites where data are available, the model well reproduces the 2003 summer drought event. Finally, for three sites we evaluate whether a more accurate representation of forest structural characteristics (i.e. cohorts, forest layers) and species composition can improve model results. In two of the three sites results reveal that model slightly increases its performances although, statistically speaking, not in a relevant way.