surface datafile compatibility between HLM and FATES?

[jenniferholm]

Hi all!
I should probably know the answer to this, but I wanted to double check. Are there certain surfdata files that are and are NOT compatible with FATES?
For example, the surfdata files that might have a longer list of PFTs (e.g., surfdata_360x720cru_50pfts_simyr1850_c250604.nc). Is this compatible with our hlm pft mapping? Or do some resolutions not work?

Lastly, what about the landuse.timeseries files shared between HLMs and FATES land-use? Maybe there is documentation on this for the FATES specific land use files and I missed it....(landuse.timeseries_r025_CMIP7_HIST_simyr1850-2024_c250723.nc?)

If we could get a list of working surface datafiles that are currently being used and shared by the FATES community, I think that would be really helpful for tracking and testing!

What do others think? :)

[ckoven]

Hi @jenniferholm I believe that all of the surface dataset files should work with FATES, but it is probably best to check. Nothing should be resolution dependent. For land use, none of the landuse.timeseries files will work, the data flow is fundamentally different in FATES.

[jenniferholm]

Great, thanks Charlie for the clarification! Yea, I think most (all?) surface dataset files should work with FATES, but wanted to check. There are ELM files "with_TOP", which is the topographic unit structure used in default ELM. It would be interesting to check if these work. Something I'm thinking about, and could try to test with others.

Thanks for the reminder about the different data flows for land use data in FATES! (duh, haha)