Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

slight mismatch across tissue types of basal respiration rates from Ryan 1991 model #982

Closed
ckoven opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #931
Closed

Comments

@ckoven
Copy link
Contributor

ckoven commented Jan 30, 2023

Hi All, I just noticed (or possibly re-noticed) that the values we are using for the basal respiration rates are very slightly different between leaves, versus stem and roots.

For leaves, the value is currently hardcoded here: https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/biogeophys/FatesPlantRespPhotosynthMod.F90#L530-L531 and the source of that number is described here: https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/biogeophys/FatesPlantRespPhotosynthMod.F90#L278-L285

For all other tissues, the parameter file value is used, which has a slightly different value (2.52e-6 instead of 2.525e-6) here: https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/parameter_files/fates_params_default.cdl#L1404

this parameter gets used for each of the tissues in these spots:
https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/biogeophys/FatesPlantRespPhotosynthMod.F90#L777
https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/biogeophys/FatesPlantRespPhotosynthMod.F90#L797-L799
https://github.com/NGEET/fates/blob/main/biogeophys/FatesPlantRespPhotosynthMod.F90#L758

I would probably plan to use the parameter value in #931 also for the leaf maintenance respiration when using the Ryan 1991 model, but the slight mismatch in values will give non bit-for bit results, so may want to do separately.

@ckoven ckoven changed the title slight mismatch across tissue types of basal respiration rates from Ryan 1991 mode slight mismatch across tissue types of basal respiration rates from Ryan 1991 model Jan 30, 2023
@ckoven
Copy link
Contributor Author

ckoven commented Jan 30, 2023

After brief discussion on today's call, people seemed ok with fixing this in #931 despite it making that PR non bit-for-bit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant