Abstract
Two land‐surface parameterization schemes (ISBA (Interactions Soil‐Biosphere‐Atmosphere) and LAPS (Land‐Air‐Parameterization‐Scheme)) of differing complexity were implemented into a 1‐D atmospheric boundary layer model and evaluated utilizing the special observational data collected during the summer of 1987 from the FIFE measurements. Results from two case studies were analyzed during which boundary layer processes dominated the lower atmospheric processes. In the first case study (6 June 1987), we found that differences in the estimation of stomatal resistance in the two land‐surface models (LSMs) triggered many of the differences in results obtained using the two LSMs. In the second case study (11 July 1987), only minor differences existed between respective net radiation and stomatal resistance estimations, leading to similar boundary layer structures. Diagnostic results indicate that in both case studies growth rates of and depths of atmospheric boundary layers and vertical profiles of virtual potential temperatures, water vapor mixing ratio, and horizontal winds are very similar in LAPS and ISBA. Our future studies are directed at evaluating these two schemes using a regional climate version of the WRF model. Copyright © 2006 Royal Meteorological Society.