Modelling evapotranspiration during precipitation deficits: identifying critical processes in a land surface model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Surface fluxes from land surface models (LSMs) have traditionally been evaluated against monthly, seasonal or annual mean states. The limited ability of LSMs to reproduce observed evaporative fluxes under water-stressed conditions has been previously noted, but very few studies have systematically evaluated these models during rainfall deficits. We evaluated latent heat fluxes simulated by the Community Atmosphere Biosphere Land Exchange (CABLE) LSM across 20 flux tower sites at sub-annual to inter-annual timescales, in particular focusing on model performance during seasonal-scale rainfall deficits. The importance of key model processes in capturing the latent heat flux was explored by employing alternative representations of hydrology, leaf area index, soil properties and stomatal conductance. We found that the representation of hydrological processes was critical for capturing observed declines in latent heat during rainfall deficits. By contrast, the effects of soil properties, LAI and stomatal conductance were highly site-specific. Whilst the standard model performs reasonably well at annual scales as measured by common metrics, it grossly underestimates latent heat during rainfall deficits. A new version of CABLE, with a more physically consistent representation of hydrology, captures the variation in the latent heat flux during seasonal-scale rainfall deficits better than earlier versions, but remaining biases point to future research needs. Our results highlight the importance of evaluating LSMs under water-stressed conditions and across multiple plant functional types and climate regimes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".