This review compares traditional and microbial-explicit models for simulating carbon pools, indicating gaps to improve accuracy.
Forests play a pivotal role in the global carbon cycle, yet accurately simulating forest soil carbon dynamics remains a significant challenge for process-based models. This review systematically compares the mechanistic foundations of traditional models (e.g., Century, CLM5) with emerging microbial-explicit models (e.g., MEND), highlighting key differences in mathematical formulation (first-order kinetics vs. Michaelis–Menten kinetics), carbon pools partitioning (measurable vs. non-measurable experimentally), and the representation of soil carbon stabilization mechanisms (inherent recalcitrance, physical protection, and chemical protection). Despite advances in process-based models in predicting forest soil organic carbon (SOC), improving prediction accuracy, and assessing SOC response to climate change, current research still faces several challenges. These include difficulties in capturing depth-dependent variations in critical microbial parameters such as microbial carbon use efficiency (CUE), limited capacity to distinguish the relative contributions of aboveground and belowground litter inputs to SOC formation, and a general lack of long-term observational data across soil profiles. To address these limitations, this study emphasizes the importance of integrating remote sensing data and refining cross-scale simulation approaches. Such improvements are essential for enhancing model predictive accuracy and establishing a more robust theoretical basis for forest carbon management and climate change mitigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: