Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-626
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-626
30 Mar 2026
 | 30 Mar 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).

Earth system models might overestimate the local plant productivity response to temperature–moisture extremes

Moritz Adam, Elisa Ziegler, Björn Gonzalez, Nils Weitzel, and Kira Rehfeld

Abstract. Compound temperature-moisture extremes, such as droughts or hot-wet extremes, have a pronounced and sometimes long-lasting impact on vegetation productivity. Accurate simulation of the involved processes by emission-driven Earth system models (ESMs) is crucial for inferring future terrestrial carbon uptake. However, ESMs often exhibit biases in the frequency and intensity of climate and weather extremes. Their ability to reproduce observed impacts of extreme atmospheric conditions on gross primary productivity (GPP) is therefore unclear. Comprehensive assessments of the statistical link between compound events and vegetation productivity beyond individual regions or event types are rare. Here, we scrutinize the relationship between temperature-moisture extremes and exceptionally low or high vegetation productivity in two state-of-the-art ESMs, CESM2 and MPI-ESM1.2, and gauge their performance relative to observation-constrained data. We find that temperature-moisture extremes modulate vegetation productivity in observations and models. The global-scale strength and timing of the statistical relationship agree well between observation-based data and model output. However, this agreement deteriorates towards smaller spatial scales, especially in the low latitudes. Here, an overestimated coupling strength by both models, likely related to biased rates of soil moisture change, suggests potentially unrealistic evaporative feedbacks, exaggerated drainage, or inadequate effective water-holding capacity in ESMs. Nevertheless, all data sources identify coherent significant relationships for all combinations of temperature-moisture and GPP extremes. This result highlights both beneficial and detrimental influences of temperature-moisture compound events on vegetation productivity and the importance of comprehensive assessments beyond single event types for capturing the net effect of climatic extremes on the biosphere. Further research should examine whether overestimated plant productivity responses to extreme conditions are a recurring phenomenon across all Earth system models. It could also investigate non-stationarity and nonlinearity of the relationships between climatic and vegetation extremes under climate change.

Competing interests: Kira Rehfeld is a member of the editorial board of Earth System Dynamics. Besides, the authors have no other competing interests to declare.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Moritz Adam, Elisa Ziegler, Björn Gonzalez, Nils Weitzel, and Kira Rehfeld

Status: open (until 11 May 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Moritz Adam, Elisa Ziegler, Björn Gonzalez, Nils Weitzel, and Kira Rehfeld
Moritz Adam, Elisa Ziegler, Björn Gonzalez, Nils Weitzel, and Kira Rehfeld
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 31 Mar 2026
Download
Short summary
As plants take up Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere, they buffer climate change. They are vulnerable to extreme weather and climate. When temperature and moisture extremes happen simultaneously, they strongly affect how plants grow. We use complex computer models to understand impacts of extremes on plants. We compared the models to observations. The models do well globally and okay in many regions. Locally, they need improvement because modeling how water moves through the soil is difficult.
Share