Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36245670›Full record

ArticleJournal of advances in modeling earth systems2022

Modeling Global Carbon Costs of Plant Nitrogen and Phosphorus Acquisition.

R K Braghiere, J B Fisher, K Allen, E Brzostek, M Shi, X Yang, D M Ricciuto, R A Fisher, Q Zhu, R P Phillips

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advances in modeling earth systems, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Simulated COGlobal change biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Modeling Global Carbon Costs of Plant Nitrogen and Phosphorus Acquisition.Journal of advances in modeling earth systems · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

R K BraghiereJet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7722-717X
J B FisherSchmid College of Science and Technology Chapman University Orange CA USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4734-9085
K AllenManaaki Whenua-Landcare Research Lincoln New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6082-6486
E BrzostekDepartment of Biology West Virginia University Morgantown WV USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2964-0576
M ShiPacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland WA USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2469-4831
X YangEnvironmental Sciences Division and Climate Change Science Institute Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge TN USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2686-745X
D M RicciutoEnvironmental Sciences Division and Climate Change Science Institute Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge TN USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3668-3021
R A FisherCenter for International Climate Research Oslo Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3260-9227
Q ZhuClimate and Ecosystem Sciences Division Climate Sciences Department Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2441-944X
R P PhillipsDepartment of Biology Indiana University Bloomington IN USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1345-4138
Oak Ridge National Laboratory · USCalifornia Institute of Technology · USCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRChapman University · USIndiana University Bloomington · USLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory · USManaaki Whenua – Landcare Research · NZPacific Northwest National Laboratory · USWest Virginia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most Earth system models (ESMs) do not explicitly represent the carbon (C) costs of plant nutrient acquisition, which leads to uncertainty in predictions of the current and future constraints to the land C sink. We integrate a plant productivity-optimizing nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) acquisition model (fixation & uptake of nutrients, FUN) into the energy exascale Earth system (E3SM) land model (ELM). Global plant N and P uptake are dynamically simulated by ELM-FUN based on the C costs of nutrient acquisition from mycorrhizae, direct root uptake, retranslocation from senescing leaves, and biological N fixation. We benchmarked ELM-FUN with three classes of products: ILAMB, a remotely sensed nutrient limitation product, and CMIP6 models; we found significant improvements in C cycle variables, although the lack of more observed nutrient data prevents a comprehensive level of benchmarking. Overall, we found N and P co-limitation for 80% of land area, with the remaining 20% being either predominantly N or P limited. Globally, the new model predicts that plants invested 4.1 Pg C yr

Indexed as

biological nitrogen fixationcarbon costCMIP6E3SM land modelfixation and uptake of nutrientsmycorrhizaenet primary productionnitrogen and phosphorus uptake

Identifiers

PMID36245670
PMCPMC9539603
OpenAlexW4291672626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.