# The Cretaceous physiological adaptation of angiosperms to a declining pCO2: a modeling approach emulating paleo-traits

Julia Bres, Pierre Sepulchre, Nicolas Viovy, N. Vuichard

► To cite this version:

Julia Bres, Pierre Sepulchre, Nicolas Viovy, N. Vuichard. The Cretaceous physiological adaptation of angiosperms to a declining pCO2: a modeling approach emulating paleo-traits. Biogeosciences, 2021, 18 (20), pp.5729-5750. 10.5194/bg-18-5729-2021. hal-03401548

HAL Id: hal-03401548

https://hal.science/hal-03401548

Submitted on 25 Oct 2021

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# The Cretaceous physiological adaptation of angiosperms to a declining pCO₂: a modeling approach emulating paleo-traits

Julia Bres, Pierre Sepulchre, Nicolas Viovy, and Nicolas Vuichard

Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, LSCE/IPSL, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay,
91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

Correspondence: Julia Bres (julia.bres@lsce.ipsl.fr)

Received: 25 May 2021 – Discussion started: 4 June 2021
Revised: 20 September 2021 – Accepted: 30 September 2021 – Published: 25 October 2021

**Abstract.** The Cretaceous evolution of angiosperm leaves towards higher vein densities enables unprecedented leaf stomatal conductance. Still, simulating and quantifying the impact of such change on plant productivity and transpiration in the specific environmental conditions of the Cretaceous remain challenging. Here, we address this issue by combining a paleo proxy-based model with a full atmosphere-vegetation model that couples stomatal conductance to carbon assimilation. Based on the fossil record, we build and evaluate three consistent proto-angiosperm vegetation parameterizations under two end-member scenarios of pCO₂ (280 and 1120 ppm) for the mid-Cretaceous: a reduction of leaf hydraulic or photosynthetic capacity and a combination of both, supported by a likely coevolution of stomatal conductance and photosynthetic biochemistry. Our results suggest that decreasing leaf hydraulic and/or photosynthetic capacities always generates a reduction of transpiration that is predominantly the result of plant productivity variations modulated by light, water availability in the soil, atmospheric evapotranspiration demand and pCO₂. The high pCO₂ acts as a fertilizer on plant productivity that strengthens plant transpiration and water-use efficiency. However, we show that proto-angiosperm physiology does not allow vegetation to grow under low pCO₂ because of a positive feedback between leaf stomatal conductance and leaf area index. Our modeling approach stresses the need to better represent paleovegetation physiological traits. It also confirms the hypothesis of a likely evolution of angiosperms from a state of low leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities at high pCO₂ to a state of high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities linked to leaves with more and more veins together with a more efficient biochemistry at low pCO₂.

## 1 Introduction

Vegetation plays a pivotal role in the climate system as it controls water and energy fluxes at the interface between land surfaces and the atmosphere through albedo (Charney et al., 1975; Port et al., 2016; Brovkin et al., 2009), roughness length and evapotranspiration capabilities (e.g., Bathany et al., 2010; Betts et al., 1997; Kleidon et al., 2000; Gibbard et al., 2005). Specifically, evapotranspiration, i.e., the sum of soil evaporation, vegetation evaporation and vegetation transpiration fluxes, is a key term in the continental hydrological cycle and has been shown to control moisture convergence and convection and thereby precipitation patterns in the tropics either in present-day-like configurations (Sun and Barros, 2015; Fraedrich et al., 1999) or for past climates (e.g., Braconnot et al., 1999; Brovkin et al., 2006). It is therefore mandatory that Earth system models designed to simulate climate evolution, either in the past or in the future, account for plant traits that alter these fluxes, despite the numerous challenges involved (Fisher and Koven, 2020). Including vegetation traits in land surface models is a growing field of research (Kattge et al., 2020) but mostly dedicated to better represent present-day vegetation and its response to human-induced climate change (Scheiter et al., 2013; Dury et al., 2018; Peng et al., 2020; Davin and de Noblet-Ducoudré, 2010). The problem has an additional degree of complexity for million-year-old (“deetime”) climates, for which the vegetation physiological traits have been very different from the present. As shown recently for the extinct vegetation of the late Paleozoic, fossil plants provide invaluable information regarding “paleo-traits” that can be in turn included in land surface models (White et al., 2020; Richey et al., 2021).
Another case study for testing the impact of pivotal
changes in physiological traits on the vegetation character-
istics is the Cretaceous angiosperm radiation (Boyce and
Lee, 2010; Boyce et al., 2010; De Boer et al., 2012). With
more than 295 000 species described, angiosperms represent
more than 95 % of modern terrestrial vascular plant diversity
(Christenhusz and Byng, 2016). One of the most emblematic
changes in vegetation through Earth history is their diversifi-
cation at the expense of gymnosperms during the Cretaceous
(Condamine et al., 2020). The macroflora fossil record re-
veals significant changes in leaf anatomy between the early
Cretaceous and the late Cretaceous associated with the rise
of angiosperms. Specifically, measurements on fossil leaves
show that vein density ($D_v$; see Table 1 for more information
about variable abbreviation, definition and unit) increased
from 3.1 mm mm⁻² [leaf] for the oldest angiosperms leaves
from the Aptian–Albian (115 Ma) to 9.8 mm mm⁻² [leaf] by
the Maastrichtian–Paleocene (66 Ma), while gymnosperms
$D_v$ remained centered around 2.4 mm mm⁻² [leaf] over the
same period (Feild et al., 2011a). Contemporaneous changes
in stomatal density (size), hereafter called $D_s$ (S), are ob-
served in the fossil record, showing a strong positive (neg-
ative) correlation with vein density (De Boer et al., 2012).
While veins allow the plants to efficiently transport water
from the soil close to the site of transpiration (i.e., stomata),
the site of transpiration allows the leaves to efficiently ex-
change carbon and water with the atmosphere. Studies have
already shown that $D_v$ is a reliable marker of leaf hydraulic
capacity (Brodribb et al., 2007; Brodribb and Feild, 2010;
Feild et al., 2011a, b; Boyce et al., 2010; Lee and Boyce,
2010; Boyce et al., 2009; Boyce and Lee, 2010, 2017), and
pioneer modeling studies have explored the impact of such a
variation in vein density on the transpiration rate in present-
day conditions (Boyce et al., 2010; Lee and Boyce, 2010;
Boyce and Lee, 2010, 2017). Based on the closed link be-
tween vein density, leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capac-
ities (Brodribb et al., 2007), linear relationships have been
inferred between $D_v$ and (i) the transpiration rate on one
hand (Boyce et al., 2009; Boyce and Lee, 2017; Boyce et al.,
2010) and (ii) the maximum rate of carboxylation ($V_{cmax}$),
involved in photosynthesis, on the other hand (Boyce and
Lee, 2010; Lee and Boyce, 2010). Sensitivity tests carried
out with a land surface model coupled to an atmospheric cir-
culation model showed that angiosperms with modern traits
strengthen the current hydrological cycle, ensuring season-
ally high levels of transpiration and precipitation rates in the
tropics (Lee and Boyce, 2010; Boyce and Lee, 2010, 2017;
Boyce et al., 2010).

Paleobotanical data show that several traits from the
soil–plant–atmosphere continuum have evolved during the
Cretaceous. Specifically, root thickness and wood structure
have evolved towards greater hydraulic efficiency (Brundrett,
2002; Wheeler and Baas, 2019). In this paper, we focus on
the upper part of this continuum, considering changes in
leaf stomatal conductance and leaf photosynthetic capacity.

In particular our approach relies on the integration of fac-
tors emulating evolution of fossil leaf traits in a land surface
model to quantify how transpiration and photosynthesis re-
sponded to the angiosperm leaf trait evolution in the specific
environmental conditions of the Cretaceous (different paleo-
geography and high atmospheric CO2 concentrations). Land
surface models used in climate modeling do not explicitly
represent traits such as vein densities but rather directly sim-
ulate the operational stomatal conductance at the leaf scale
($g_s$) (Farquhar et al., 1980; Ball et al., 1987; Krinner et al.,
2005; Yin and Struik, 2009). However, based on the relation-
ship obtained from extant and fossil leaves that links max-
imal anatomic stomatal conductance to H2O ($g_{anat}^{max}$) to $D_v$
(Brodribb et al., 2007; Brodribb and Feild, 2010), they can
be parameterized to represent the changes in stomatal con-
ductance that occurred with the angiosperm radiation. De-
pending on their design, these parameterizations can reflect
changes on leaf traits controlling leaf hydraulic capacity, leaf
photosynthetic capacity or both. The latter is supported by
our knowledge of modern plant processes and in particular
of a coevolution between stomatal conductance and $V_{cmax}$
(Franks and Beerling, 2009a; De Boer et al., 2012). Al-
though there is no fossil evidence of changes in leaf pho-
tosynthetic capacity, we assume that this covariation is a
time-invariant property and that such a relationship was the
same in the past. Moreover, atmospheric CO2 concentra-
tion (*pCO₂*) is known to be one of the drivers that con-
trol the stomatal opening and closing in the very short term
(Jarvis et al., 1999). Several studies have reported that the
$g_s/g_{anat}^{max}$ ratio is relatively stable around 20%-40%, an op-
timal range within which changes in guard cell turgor pres-
sure are most efficient in controlling quick stomatal conduc-
tance changes (Dow et al., 2014; Dow and Bergmann, 2014;
McElwain et al., 2016). Therefore, it is likely that *pCO₂* also
drives changes in $g_{anat}^{max}$ on long timescales. Paleo-CO₂ re-
constructions based on proxies (plant fossils and isotopes)
and geochemical models show that, despite a large spread,
*pCO₂* was high throughout the Cretaceous, ranging from
500 to 2000 ppm. Values peaked during the mid-Cretaceous
(Cenomanian–Turonian, ca. 95 Ma) and then steadily de-
clined towards the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary (Fletcher
et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2014). It is thus important to con-
sider this varying *pCO₂* when exploring the mechanisms of
the angiosperm physiological changes.

Finally, the goal of our study is to evaluate the com-
bined environmentally and physiologically induced response
of Cretaceous vegetation to a low $D_v$ representative of proto-
angiosperms. Our experimental design considers both reduc-
ing leaf hydraulic and/or photosynthetic capacities and ap-
plying different *pCO₂* scenarios in a coupled atmosphere–
vegetation model. The modeled $g_s$ allows us to account for
long-term plant adaptation to their changing environment.
We evaluate the physiological response of the vegetation to
low hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities at the leaf scale
and then at the global scale. It leads us to evaluate water and
carbon exchanges between the land surface and the atmosphere.

## 2 Methods

### 2.1 IPSL atmosphere-land surface model

In this study, we use LMDZ and ORCHIDEE versions embedded in the IPSL-CM5A2 model (Sepulchre et al., 2020). LMDZ is the atmosphere general circulation model of the Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace Earth system model. LMDZ couples a dynamical core solving the primitive equations of conservation with a set of physical parameterizations of the radiative and convective schemes. The spatial resolution of LMDZ is the regular 3.75° × 1.875° longitude–latitude grid. LMDZ has 39 vertical levels to describe vertical processes (Hourdin et al., 2013). ORCHIDEE is the land surface component of the IPSL Earth system model (Krinner et al., 2005). When coupled with LMDZ, it has the same horizontal resolution and a global 4 m soil water depth represented with a two-layer bucket model, which is adequate to simulate evapotranspiration fluxes consistent with the data (Guimberteau et al., 2014). ORCHIDEE simulates water and energy exchanges (Rosnay and Polcher, 1998; Ducoudré et al., 1993) and the key processes of the terrestrial carbon cycle such as photosynthesis, carbon allocation or soil organic matter decomposition for 13 plant functional types (PFTs). Each PFT gathers a set of plant species with similar functional characteristics that will be translated into a common set of parameter values. Photosynthesis, respiration, water and energy exchanges are computed every 30 min, while slow carbon-related processes (leaf phenology and carbon allocation) are computed on a daily basis (Krinner et al., 2005; Sitch et al., 2003).

#### 2.1.1 Stomatal conductance in ORCHIDEE

Stomatal conductance is computed per canopy layer, with layer depth increasing exponentially from top to bottom of the canopy. This feature enables us to account for the response to light radiation extinction through the canopy. Leaf stomatal conductance is coupled to photosynthesis based on original formulations from Ball et al. (1987) and Leuning et al. (1995). Within the model used in ORCHIDEE (Yin and Struik, 2009), leaf operational stomatal conductance to H₂O ($g_s$ in mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) depends on the net carbon assimilation ($A$ in mol CO₂ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹), the daily respiration ($R_d$ in mol CO₂ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹), the intercellular CO₂ partial pressure ($C_i$ in bar), the $C_i$-based CO₂ compensation point in the absence of $R_d$ ($C_i^*$ in bar) and the residual stomatal conductance to H₂O ($g_0$ in mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹), to account for a non-zero conductance when the carbon assimilation is zero (Farquhar et al., 1980; Ball et al., 1987; Yin and Struik, 2009). Finally, the leaf operational stomatal conductance to H₂O is modulated by a factor $f_{cpl}$, describing the strength of the coupling between $A$ and $g_s$, which is a function of the

leaf-to-air vapor pressure deficit (kPa) and that we will further name “leaf hydraulic capacity”:

$$g_s = g_0 + \frac{A + R_d}{C_i - C_i^*} \cdot f_{cpl}. \qquad (1)$$

The intercellular CO₂ partial pressure is dependent on the leaf boundary layer conductance and the ambient air CO₂ partial pressure. The coupling factor relies on two empirical constants $A_1$ (unitless) and $B_1$ (kPa⁻¹):

$$f_{cpl} = \frac{1}{\frac{1}{(A_1 - B_1 \cdot \text{VPD})} - 1}. \qquad (2)$$

The photosynthesis scheme proposed by Yin and Struik (2009) analytically solves the net assimilation, the stomatal conductance and the leaf intercellular CO₂ concentration. The semi-empirical formalism of $g_s$ allows us to account for both the structural conductance, linked to the morphologic and physiologic traits of leaves (e.g., $D_v$, $D_s$ and $S$) developed over the long-term plant evolution history, and the dynamical conductance, related to the short-term stomatal opening and closing depending on the environment. $A$ is limited by either the Rubisco enzyme (RuBP) activity ($V_c$) or the electron transport ($V_j$):

$$A = \min(V_c, V_j). \qquad (3)$$

$V_c$ (mol CO₂ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) represents the ability of the RuBP to fix CO₂ and initiate the Calvin cycle. It relies on $V_{cmax}$ (mol CO₂ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹); $K_c$ and $K_o$, the Michaelis–Menten constants of Rubisco for CO₂ and O₂, respectively (bar); and O the oxygen partial pressure (bar):

$$V_c = \left[ \frac{(C_i - C_i^*) V_{cmax}}{C_i + K_c \left(1 + \frac{Q}{K_o}\right)} - R_d \right] \cdot \left[1 - w_{\text{soil}}^{\text{lim}}\right]. \qquad (4)$$

$V_{cmax}$ is parameterized for each PFT as a function of leaf age (Krinner et al., 2005). $V_j$ (mol CO₂ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) represents the regeneration rate of the RuBP. The latter depends on the radiation and the electron transport:

$$V_j = \left[ \frac{(C_i - C_i^*) J}{4C_i + 8C_i^*} - R_d \right] \cdot \left[1 - w_{\text{soil}}^{\text{lim}}\right], \qquad (5)$$

where $J$ (mol e⁻ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) is the actual rate of electron transport (Yin and Struik, 2009), dependent on irradiance and $V_{jmax}$, the maximum rate of electron transport at saturating light (mol e⁻ m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹). $V_{jmax}$ is directly proportional to $V_{cmax}$ with the ratio $V_{cmax}/V_{jmax}$ varying with surface monthly temperature (Kattge and Knorr, 2007). Then, when discussing the changes in $V_{cmax}$, we consider the proportional changes in $V_{jmax}$, in the following. $A$ increases with $V_{cmax}$ and pCO₂, until reaching a plateau where light and temperature become the limiting factors. Both $V_c$ and $V_j$ are a function of the soil moisture stress for transpiration
<table><caption>**Table 1.** List of main variables used in the models and their units.</caption><thead><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Definition</th><th>Units</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>A</td><td>Net carbon assimilation</td><td>mol CO₂ m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>A<sub>1</sub></td><td>Empirical constant</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>α</td><td>Factor describing changes in leaf hydraulic capacity</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>B<sub>1</sub></td><td>Empirical constant</td><td>kPa<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>β</td><td>Factor describing changes in leaf photosynthetic capacity</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>C<sub>i</sub></td><td>Intercellular CO₂ partial pressure</td><td>bar</td></tr><tr><td>C<sub>i</sub><sup>*</sup></td><td>C<sub>i</sub>-based CO₂ compensation point in the absence of R<sub>d</sub></td><td>bar</td></tr><tr><td>ΔΨ<sub>leaf</sub></td><td>Leaf water potential gradient</td><td>MPa</td></tr><tr><td>D<sub>v</sub></td><td>Vein density</td><td>mm mm<sup>-2</sup> [leaf]</td></tr><tr><td>fcpl</td><td>Parameter for describing the effect of external forcing on g<sub>s</sub></td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>g<sub>0</sub></td><td>Residual operating stomatal conductance when irradiance approaches zero</td><td>mol m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>g<sub>c</sub></td><td>Operating canopy stomatal conductance</td><td>mol m<sup>-2</sup> [ground] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>g<sub>anat</sub><sup>max</sup></td><td>Maximal anatomic stomatal conductance</td><td>mol m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>GPP</td><td>Gross primary productivity</td><td>kgC m<sup>-2</sup> [ground] yr<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>g<sub>s</sub></td><td>Operating leaf stomatal conductance</td><td>mol m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>J</td><td>Rate of e<sup>-</sup> transport</td><td>mol e<sup>-</sup> m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>K<sub>c</sub></td><td>Michaelis–Menten constant of Rubisco for CO₂</td><td>bar</td></tr><tr><td>K<sub>o</sub></td><td>Michaelis–Menten constant of Rubisco for O₂</td><td>bar</td></tr><tr><td>LAI</td><td>Leaf area index</td><td>m<sup>2</sup> [leaf] m<sup>-2</sup> [ground]</td></tr><tr><td>O</td><td>Oxygen partial pressure</td><td>bar</td></tr><tr><td>ρ</td><td>Air density</td><td>kg m<sup>-3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>q</td><td>Specific humidity of the surrounding air</td><td>kg kg<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>q<sub>s</sub><sup>*</sup></td><td>Saturation specific humidity of the evaporating surface</td><td>kg kg<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>r<sub>a</sub></td><td>Aerodynamic resistance</td><td>s m<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>r<sub>c</sub></td><td>Canopy resistance</td><td>s m<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>R<sub>d</sub></td><td>Daily respiration (respiratory CO₂ release other than by photorespiration)</td><td>mol CO₂ m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Tr</td><td>Transpiration rate</td><td>mm d<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>VPD</td><td>Leaf-to-air vapor pressure deficit</td><td>kPa or MPa</td></tr><tr><td>V<sub>c</sub></td><td>Rubisco enzyme activity</td><td>mol CO₂ m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>V<sub>cmax</sub></td><td>Maximum rate of Rubisco-activity-limited carboxylation</td><td>mol CO₂ m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>V<sub>j</sub></td><td>Regeneration rate of the Rubisco</td><td>mol CO₂ m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>V<sub>jmax</sub></td><td>Maximum value of J under saturated light</td><td>mol e<sup>-</sup> m<sup>-2</sup> [leaf] s<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>w<sub>soil</sub><sup>lim</sup></td><td>Soil moisture stress for transpiration</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>y</td><td>Distance from vein terminals to epidermis</td><td>µm</td></tr></tbody></table>

$w_{\text{soil}}^{\text{lim}}$, which ultimately controls photosynthesis. This factor depends on both the soil moisture and the root profile given per PFT, with trees having deeper roots than grasses. $w_{\text{soil}}^{\text{lim}}$ is unitless and ranges between 0 for fully moist soil and 1 for maximal water stress. The transpiration rate Tr (mm d⁻¹) is a function of the potential evapotranspiration, that is, the atmospheric evaporative demand, modulated by a series of resistances:

$$ \text{Tr} = \frac{1}{r_c + r_a} \rho(q_s^* - q), \qquad (6) $$

where $r_a$ and $r_c$ are the aerodynamic and canopy resistances, respectively (s m⁻¹), $\rho$ is the air density (kg m⁻³), $q_s^*$ is the saturation-specific humidity of the evaporating surface (kg kg⁻¹) as a function of the temperature, and $q$ is the specific humidity of the surrounding air (kg kg⁻¹). Calculation of the transpiration requires the integration of $g_s$ at the

canopy level, which is $g_c$ (mol H₂O m⁻² [ground] s⁻¹), over the leaf area index (LAI) and expressed as

$$ \begin{align} g_c &= \int_{l=0}^{l=\text{LAI}} g_s(l) \, dl \notag \\ g_c &= \frac{1}{r_c}. \tag{7} \end{align} $$

## 2.1.2 Summary of dynamical coupling between stomatal conductance and photosynthesis in a given environment

At the leaf level, the structural resistance (Fig. 1, in orange) represents traits (veins and stomata) that evolve at long timescales. The structural resistance drives the maximum theoretical conductance of water ($g_{\text{anat}}^{\text{max}}$). The dynam-
ical resistance (Fig. 1, in dark blue) controls the stomatal closure on a very short timescale, depending to the external forcing: pCO₂, light, vapor pressure deficit and soil moisture stress for transpiration (Fig. 1, in light blue). However, the structural resistance defines the upper boundary condition that constrains the dynamical resistance. The coupling factor (fcpl) controls the sensitivity of stomatal conductance to the surrounding environment: a low fcpl implies that gs is less sensitive to Cᵢ, A and the vapor pressure deficit than a high fcpl. Plants can also slightly adapt their Vcmax and Vjmax, in the absence of nitrogen stress, on a seasonal timescale and in a greater range on long evolutionary timescales. The OR-CHIDEE version used in this study does not include the nitrogen cycle, as we do not have good constraints regarding the C:N ratio of Cretaceous vegetation and soils. The end limit of the assimilation process is the available energy from light that controls the quantity of RuBP that can be regenerated (Vⱼ in Eq. 5). At high pCO₂, Cᵢ is maintained at a sufficient level to feed the carboxylation rate (Vc), and then, for a sufficient Vcmax, light becomes the main limiting factor even for a small conductance (Eqs. 3 to 5). So, the structural resistance is not a limiting factor, and plants will close the stomata to limit the water loss. Likewise, Vc rate increases, with both Cᵢ and Vcmax, and the level of Vcmax for which Vⱼ becomes the main limiting factor decreases (Eq. 3). Because nitrogen acquisition and RuBP protein maintenance consume a lot of energy, plants tend to optimize the Vcmax and Vjmax to reach the point where Vc and Vⱼ are colimiting (Maire et al., 2012; Stocker et al., 2020). Conversely, at low pCO₂, structural conductance (which drives the maximum conductance) can become a limiting factor since, even with full stomata opening, it can limit Cᵢ under the level to feed the carboxylation rate. Vcmax and Vjmax should also be increased to maintain a sufficient level of carboxylation (Vc) (lower efficiency of the oxidation / carboxylation ratio).

At the canopy level (Fig. 1), the canopy conductance gs depends on both leaf level conductance gs and LAI. As LAI is a function of plant productivity, there is an additional positive feedback: a change in gs will impact GPP and then LAI in the same direction, which will amplify the initial effect of gs on gs. Another external forcing is the soil water availability ($w_{soil}^{lim}$). In the model used, water stress acts directly on Vcmax and Vjmax, as supported by previous studies (Keenan et al., 2009, 2010; Egea et al., 2011). A low soil water content will induce a water stress limiting the Vcmax and Vjmax that will indirectly also reduce gs. Hence, arid ecosystems will be less sensitive to structural change in gs than ecosystems without a large hydric stress. Conversely, they will be affected in the same way for direct changes on Vcmax and Vjmax.

## 2.2 Fossil evidence of increasing angiosperm leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities

Vein density as well as stomatal size and density are both used to reconstruct past variations in $g_{anat}^{max}$ (Franks and Beerling, 2009a, b; Brodribb et al., 2007; Brodribb and Feild, 2010; De Boer et al., 2012; Franks and Farquhar, 2001). Here, we have chosen to account for Dv changes rather than Ds and S. Indeed, using Dv is a good proxy to constrain $g_{anat}^{max}$ since Dv and Ds are correlated, and that observed relationship between Dv and $g_{anat}^{max}$ gives the highest correlation coefficient (Feild et al., 2011b). Vein densities from angiosperm fossils published in Feild et al. (2011b) record a 2- to 5-fold increase in angiosperm Dv during the Cretaceous (Fig. 2a), compared to early angiosperms and non-angiosperms (Table S2).

$Dv$ allows the reconstruction of the maximal water that can flow through the stomata $g_{anat}^{max}$ (mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) using the relationship developed by Brodribb et al. (2007) and Brodribb and Feild (2010):

$$g_{anat}^{max} = \frac{12760}{\text{VPD}} \Delta\Psi_{\text{leaf}} \left( \frac{\pi}{2} \sqrt{\frac{650^2}{D_v^2} + y^2} \right)^{-1.27}, \quad (8)$$

where VPD is the leaf-to-air vapor pressure deficit (MPa), $\Delta\Psi_{leaf}$ is the leaf water potential gradient (MPa), $Dv$ is the vein density (mm mm⁻² [leaf]) and y is the distance from vein terminals to epidermis (µm). The past VPD and $\Delta\Psi_{leaf}$ are set to 0.002 and 0.4 MPa, respectively, values that are typical for temperate-tropical environments (Brodribb and Feild, 2010). An estimation of y is 70–130 µm, producing a span of predicted values encompassing the likely morphological variability of leaves (Brodribb and Feild, 2010).

A lower value for y indicates a lower stomata-to-vein distance and a higher $g_{anat}^{max}$. The highest increase in $g_{anat}^{max}$ is obtained for the largest variation in Dv over time combined with the smallest y. Conversely, the lowest increase in $g_{anat}^{max}$ is obtained for the smallest variation in the highest Dv values over time, combined with the highest y (Table S2). From the early to the late Cretaceous, the 2- to 5-fold increase in angiosperm Dv corresponds to a 3- to 5-fold increase in $g_{anat}^{max}$ (Fig. 2b and Table S2). Thus, fossil Dv provides an estimation of the increase in $g_{anat}^{max}$ over time. Our land surface model does not explicitly represent vegetation traits or $g_{anat}^{max}$ but only gs, the operational stomatal conductance. However, based on the strong relationship between $g_{anat}^{max}$ and gs (Dow et al., 2014; Dow and Bergmann, 2014), one assumes that variations in gs due to the long-term evolution of leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities together with that of environmental factors such as pCO₂ would be reflected as proportional changes in $g_{anat}^{max}$.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Schematized coupling between stomatal conductance and photosynthesis from the leaf to the canopy scale in the ORCHIDEE model.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** (a) Time evolution of fossil vein densities (mm mm⁻² [leaf], y axis) adapted from Feild et al. (2011a) and the corresponding maximal stomatal conductance to H₂O (mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹, filled circles) calculated by the anatomic relationship (Eq. 8) developed by Brodribb et al. (2007) and Brodribb and Feild (2010). (b) Subdivision of maximal stomatal conductance to H₂O (mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) by time periods. The black solid lines are the angiosperm medians, the black dotted lines are the first and third quartiles, and the black points are the angiosperm mean values for each time period. Red lines and areas show the gymnosperm mean values and the gymnosperm mean ± 1 standard deviation area, respectively, over the Cretaceous.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Vegetation distribution prescribed in the Aptian simulation configuration: map showing the dominant ORCHIDEE PFT for each grid cell. For all experiments, this distribution is fixed through time. The prescribed fraction of bare soil is given Fig. S1 in the Supplement.</figcaption></figure>

## 2.3 Experimental setup

To assess the impact of angiosperm leaf evolution on transpiration and photosynthesis, we performed climate model simulations while varying leaf hydraulic or photosynthetic capacity, or both, for two contrasted pCO₂ levels (Table 2). This is not a direct functional trait-based modeling approach, but we mimic paleo-traits through constraints on the maximum operating stomatal conductance gs with different factors. The model continental boundary conditions include mid-Cretaceous (115 Ma) paleogeography reconstructions from Sewall et al. (2007). Global vegetation distribution is set by establishing a first-order estimate of correspondence between biomes, inferred from paleobotanical data (Sewall et al., 2007) and PFTs (Table S1 in the Supplement). Figure 3 shows only the dominant PFT, but several PFTs can be present in a pixel. For instance, regions indicated as C₃ grass are savannas with a fraction of trees (Table S1). We prescribe PFT distribution rather than activate the dynamical vegetation model to constrain our interpretations of the sensitivity experiments and avoid additional feedback linked to vegetation dynamics. This configuration allows the carbon cycle to be activated and the LAI to be prognostically calculated as a function of dynamic carbon allocation (Krinner et al., 2005).

Although scattered paleo soil texture data do exist for the Cretaceous, sensitivity studies carried out in the present day have shown a rather weak sensitivity of the terrestrial water budget to soil texture in the ORCHIDEE model (Tafasca et al., 2020). Thus, we set this parameter worldwide to an averaged value corresponding to loam in the Zobler classification (Zobler, 1986): 0.39 % silt, 0.43 % sand and 0.18 % clay. Soil color determines the bare soil albedo and is set globally

at 0.16 (Wilson and Henderson-Sellers, 1985). We set the solar radiation at 99 % of the current value (Gough, 1981) and the orbital parameters as today (Laskar et al., 2004). The ocean is prescribed through sea-surface temperatures obtained from an unpublished fully coupled Aptian simulation with the ESM IPSL-CM5A2 (Sepulchre et al., 2020). To assess the impact of angiosperm trait evolution on transpiration and photosynthesis, we consider (i) two different factors applied to angiosperm PFTs only and (ii) one external forcing (pCO₂) that alter the stomatal conductance in our land-surface model (Table 2).

Change in leaf hydraulic capacity is considered via a change in the coupling factor (fcpl) that describes the slope of the relationship between gs and the dynamical driving parameters (namely A, pCO₂ and vapor pressure deficit). Because fcpl is related to the structural conductance, the change in $g_{anat}^{max}$ can then be empirically represented by a factor $\alpha$, modulating fcpl in the gs formulation (Eq. 1). Changes in leaf photosynthetic capacity are taken into account via changes in Vcmax (Eq. 4). To this end, we use a factor $\beta$ that is applied to both Vcmax and Vjmax (i.e. Vcmax/Vjmax ratio kept constant, Eqs. 3 to 5). We carry out three different factorial experiments using the upper value of changes in $g_{anat}^{max}$ induced from the Dv proxy as depicted earlier. (i) $\alpha$ is set to 1/5 while $\beta$ is 1, accounting for a direct decrease in angiosperm leaf hydraulic capacity by a factor of 5 (NOANGIOh, Table 2). (ii) $\beta$ is set to 1/5 while $\alpha$ is 1, corresponding to a direct decrease in angiosperm leaf photosynthetic capacity by a factor of 5 (NOANGIOp, Table 2). This sensitivity experiment is supported by the coupling between stomatal conductance and assimilation in the model and by several studies suggesting mimicking proto-angiosperm capacities by decreasing mod-
<table><caption>**Table 2.** Definition of the experiments.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Name</th><th colspan="2">Factors representing the fraction of current leaf capacities for angiosperm PFTs</th><th rowspan="2">pCO₂ (ppm)</th><th rowspan="2">Description</th></tr><tr><th>Hydraulic capacity (α)</th><th>Photosynthetic capacity (β)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ANGIO(1120)</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1120</td><td>Cretaceous world with the high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of modern angiosperms</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOh(1120)</td><td>1/5</td><td>1</td><td>1120</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf hydraulic capacity of modern angiosperms</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOp(1120)</td><td>1</td><td>1/5</td><td>1120</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf photosynthetic capacity of modern angiosperms</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOhp(1120)</td><td>√1/5</td><td>√1/5</td><td>1120</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of modern angiosperms</td></tr><tr><td>ANGIO(280)</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>280</td><td>Cretaceous world with the high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of modern angiosperms, under preindustrial pCO₂</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOh(280)</td><td>1/5</td><td>1</td><td>280</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf hydraulic capacity of modern angiosperms, under preindustrial pCO₂</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOp(280)</td><td>1</td><td>1/5</td><td>280</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf photosynthetic capacity of modern angiosperms, under preindustrial pCO₂</td></tr><tr><td>NOANGIOhp(280)</td><td>√1/5</td><td>√1/5</td><td>280</td><td>Cretaceous world without the high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of modern angiosperms, under preindustrial pCO₂</td></tr></tbody></table>

ern $V_{cmax}$ by a factor of 5 (Boyce and Lee, 2010; Lee and Boyce, 2010). Since leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities are likely to have co-evolved over the Cretaceous (Franks and Beerling, 2009a; De Boer et al., 2012), (iii) we set $α$ and $β$ to $\sqrt{1/5}$, i.e., with half the forcing simultaneously applied to the leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities (NOANGIOhp, Table 2). These three sensitivity tests represent three likely Cretaceous worlds with proto-angiosperm types. We perform the reference control experiment where the factors $α$ and $β$ are set to 1 in order to keep the modern leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacity of extant angiosperms as the reference ones (ANGIO, Table 2). Since pCO₂ simultaneously impacts leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic trait evolution in the long term (Franks and Beerling, 2009a), we repeat this set of experiments for two different extreme pCO₂ forcings. At 1120 ppm, we refer to the mid-Cretaceous (115 Ma) estimates, contemporary with the beginning of the angiosperm radiation. At 280 ppm, we perform a sensitivity test to assess the response of proto-angiosperm vegetation to a preindustrial-like pCO₂. Regarding the average $g_s$ value over a long time period, we assume that the $g_s/g_{anat}^{max}$ ratio is a constant at long timescales because of

plants' structural adaptation to their environment (Dow et al., 2014; Dow and Bergmann, 2014). We consider that all the changes in the model operational $g_s$, arising from the above-mentioned proto-angiosperm parameterizations, reflect that of the maximal anatomic stomatal conductance. The experiments were run for 60 years, a sufficient time to balance gross primary productivity and evapotranspiration. We analyze and show the averaged last 10 years of simulations.

# 3 Results

## 3.1 Leaf operating stomatal conductance

The leaf stomatal conductance to H₂O ($g_s$, mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹) is the global mean of annual daylight leaf stomatal conductance of the top of canopy leaves (where exposure to sunlight is maximal). Figure 4 shows that leaf stomatal conductance decreases as we sequentially reduce leaf hydraulic (NOANGIOh) or photosynthetic (NOANGIOp) capacities, or both (NOANGIOhp), to mimic the proto-angiosperm world. Reducing the high leaf hydraulic and/or photosynthetic capacities from modern
angiosperm leads to a 3-fold drop of leaf stomatal conductance on average, a factor in the lowest bracket of the range expected from $g_{anat}^{max}$ inferred from the fossil record (Fig. 2b). Within every PFT group, $g_s$ decrease is similar amongst sensitivity experiments and validates our chosen combinations of values for $\alpha$ and $\beta$. The maximal decrease in $g_s$ is simulated for the tropical broadleaved evergreen and the C₃ grass PFTs, which also depict the largest stomatal conductance in the reference ANGIO simulations. Leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities have not been altered for the temperate needleleaf evergreen PFT, as they correspond to gymnosperms. Thus, gymnosperm $g_s$ was expected to be constant for each of the pCO₂ groups of experiments. However, $g_s$ slightly decreases in the sensitivity experiments for this PFT, suggesting a feedback from the atmosphere-vegetation coupling that ultimately altered soil moisture stress and stomatal conductance. Indeed, soil moisture stress for gymnosperm transpiration increases for all the simulations with the proto-angiosperm vegetation prescribed (Fig. S2) because of less precipitation (Fig. S3).

Simulations forced with “Cretaceous-like” pCO₂ (1120 ppm) show systematically lower $g_s$ values than simulations with pCO₂ set at preindustrial levels (280 ppm). This illustrates that the model reproduces the expected closure of stomata as a response to high pCO₂ well, in a direct link with Eqs. (4) and (5). This decrease in $g_s$ with increasing pCO₂ is the highest (52% on average) for experiments with the modern-like leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities (ANGIO(1120) versus ANGIO(280)). For these experiments, tropical broadleaved evergreen PFT reacts to the high pCO₂ with $g_s$ values dropping from 0.14 mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹ at 280 ppm to 0.06 mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹ at 1120 ppm, while that of C₃ grasses drops from 0.09 to 0.04 mol m⁻² [leaf] s⁻¹. At 1120 ppm, as the leaf stomatal conductance of ANGIO runs is already strongly reduced compared to that at 280 ppm, the relative decrease in $g_s$ when modern leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities are reduced is also less important: -66% for tropical broadleaved evergreen at 1120 ppm to be compared to -73% for the same PFT at 280 ppm (Fig. 4).

## 3.2 Leaf area index and vegetation cover

Annual mean leaf area index (LAI) provides an indication of the vegetation ability to grow given the prescribed boundary conditions, i.e., Cretaceous paleogeography, varying pCO₂ and interactions with the atmosphere. It is the weighted average of leaf area index of each PFT per surface of ground of a grid cell (i.e., surface averaged across all PFTs including bare soil, written groundCELL). For the modern-like vegetation (ANGIO), Fig. 5a and b show that the highest LAI values are simulated for regions dominated by tropical broadleaved evergreen, which are set in midlatitudes to high latitudes in the specific Cretaceous configuration (Fig. 3). LAI is also slightly higher at 1120 ppm than at 280 ppm, as a response to

the CO₂ fertilization effect on photosynthesis that increases biomass production (Fig. 1). The vegetation response to the prescribed perturbations of fcpl and $V_{cmax}$ strongly differs depending on the pCO₂. At high pCO₂, LAI is unchanged with the sole perturbation of the leaf hydraulic capacity (fcpl·$\frac{1}{5}$, NOANGIOh, Fig. 5c) meaning that even with a reduced $g_s$ at the leaf level, the high pCO₂ allows for the fertilization effect to drive biomass growth ($C_i$ in Eq. 1). Conversely, $V_{cmax}$ perturbation (NOANGIOp, Fig. 5e) induces a strong decrease in the vegetation cover of all angiosperm PFTs, which is replaced by bare soil (Fig. S4), with LAI dropping to values ranging from 1 to 4 m² [leaf] m⁻² [groundCELL] compared to LAI ranging from 1 to 8 m² [leaf] m⁻² [groundCELL] for ANGIO(1120). Lastly, when both fcpl and $V_{cmax}$ perturbations are combined (fcpl·$\sqrt{\frac{1}{5}}$ and $V_{cmax}·\sqrt{\frac{1}{5}}$, NOANGIOhp, Fig. 5g), LAI is mostly unchanged, suggesting that in a high-pCO₂ context, slightly reduced leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacity does not affect actual assimilation. At high pCO₂, the impact of reducing $V_{cmax}$ on photosynthesis is limited because the limiting factor is likely $V_j$ (and then light) rather than $V_c$ (and $C_i$) (Eq. 3). At low pCO₂, LAI depicts a much stronger response to perturbations. Reducing the leaf hydraulic capacity leads to a global drop of the vegetation cover, with grass-dominated regions averaging 1 m² [leaf] m⁻² [ground] and tree-dominated regions barely reaching 5 m² [leaf] m⁻² [ground] except in the very southern latitudes, where no significant change is simulated (Fig. 5d). The strongest signal occurs with the reduction of leaf photosynthetic capacity through $V_{cmax}$ (NOANGIOp, Fig. 5f). Apart from the unchanged needleleaf PFT, the modified vegetation cannot grow in the NOANGIOp experiment at 280 ppm, as shown by LAI values close to zero for every angiosperm PFT. Simulated LAI in NOANGIOhp shows that at a lower $V_{cmax}$ associated with a lower fcpl, tropical PFTs also collapse globally, although vegetation is maintained at high latitude (Figs. 5h and S4h). At 280 ppm, intercellular CO₂ partial pressure (Eqs. 1 to 5) becomes more limiting than the solar energy whatever the vegetation prescribed. The latitudinal gradient of LAI reduction testifies to another limiting factor to be integrated, which plays a role at low latitudes but not at high latitudes. Figure S5 shows that the soil moisture stress for transpiration (Fig. 1, Eqs. 4 and 5) is larger in the tropics to midlatitudes and near zero at high latitudes. As expected, water in the soil available for transpiration is thus a limiting factor of plant growth in the tropics and midlatitudes at low pCO₂.

## 3.3 Canopy operating stomatal conductance

Although the fossil record and empirical models can help to infer the foliar maximal stomatal conductance to H₂O, the land surface model is required to explore the stomatal conductance to H₂O at the canopy level that is given by Eq. (7): $g_c$ is the integral of $g_s$ over the entire canopy and is inversely proportional to the canopy resistance $r_c$. The canopy
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** Global-scale leaf operating stomatal conductance to H₂O *g*<sub>s</sub> (mol m<sup>-2</sup>[leaf] s<sup>-1</sup>) per PFT: (a) ANGIO(1120) (gray bar), NOANGIOh(1120) (diagonal hatched bar), NOANGIOp(1120) (dotted bar) and NOANGIOhp(1120) (diagonal hatched and dotted bar); (b) ANGIO(280) (gray bar), NOANGIOh(280) (diagonal hatched bar), NOANGIOp(280) (dotted bar) and NOANGIOhp(280) (diagonal hatched and dotted bar). The leaf stomatal conductance to H₂O is the global mean of annual daylight leaf stomatal conductance of the top of canopy leaves.</figcaption></figure>

stomatal conductance is the global mean of annual daylight canopy stomatal conductance and is weighted by surface unit of ground of a grid cell where each PFT is found (i.e., written groundPFT). *g*<sub>c</sub> is the combined result of changes in *g*<sub>s</sub> arising from the forcing factors α and β and changes in vegetation leaf area; i.e., both have an influence that can be either reinforcing or counterbalancing. As expected, Figs. 4 and 6 show significant differences between *g*<sub>s</sub> and *g*<sub>c</sub> with respect to the pCO<sub>2</sub> prescribed: while *g*<sub>s</sub> decreases by about a factor of 3 for each proto-angiosperm sensitivity experiment compared to the reference (Fig. 4), the decrease in *g*<sub>c</sub> is not equal through experiments (Fig. 6). The dramatic drop in *g*<sub>c</sub> when reducing the high leaf photosynthetic capacity (NOANGIOp) is well explained by the significant LAI decrease (Fig. 5e and f). In addition, the effect of pCO<sub>2</sub> is more complex at the canopy scale. Indeed, *g*<sub>c</sub> is still reduced in the perturbed experiments but is not systematically lower at 1120 ppm than at 280 ppm (Fig. 6) as opposed to *g*<sub>s</sub> (Fig. 4).

NOANGIOh simulations do not show a change in g_c between 280 and 1120 ppm. A decrease in fcpl by a factor of 5 implies a reduction of the LAI at 280 ppm (Fig. 5d) because plants cannot assimilate enough carbon to sustain their biomass (C_i in Eqs. 1 to 5), whereas this is not the case at 1120 ppm (Fig. 5c). Indeed, at the canopy scale, at low pCO₂, higher g_s just makes up the LAI loss. Conversely, at high pCO₂, lower g_s is compensated for by the higher LAI, ultimately making angiosperm g_c almost identical for the two pCO₂ scenarios. In the NOANGIOp and NOANGIOhp experiments, g_c is higher at 1120 ppm than at 280 ppm. By in-

creasing the carbon assimilation during photosynthesis, high pCO₂ allows for higher vegetation cover (Fig. 5e and g) and higher canopy stomatal conductance, whereas low pCO₂ together with low leaf photosynthetic capacity imply a collapse of the vegetation (Fig. 5f and h).

LAI changes described earlier modulate the relationship between *g*<sub>s</sub> and *g*<sub>c* (Fig. 1). At low pCO₂, the LAI decrease between the ANGIO and any of the three perturbed experiments (Fig. 5d, f and h) strengthens the initial decrease in *g*<sub>s</sub> (positive feedback, Figs. 4b and 6b). Mean *g*<sub>s</sub> decreases by 69%, 73% and 69% while mean *g*<sub>c</sub> decreases by 72%, 97% and 91%, respectively, for NOANGIOh, NOANGIOp and NOANGIOhp compared to ANGIO (Figs. 4b and 6b). Indeed, decreasing *V*<sub>cmax</sub> under low pCO₂ implies a reduction of the plant capacity to assimilate carbon (Eq. 4) and directly impacts the GPP (Fig. S6f and h) and then the LAI at the canopy scale (Fig. 5f and h). However, decreasing fcpl and thus *g*<sub>s</sub> reduce the CO₂ concentration at the chloroplast level (*C*<sub>i</sub> in Eq. 1) and have only an indirect effect on GPP (Fig. S6d) and thus on LAI (Fig. 5d). At high pCO₂, the LAI is almost sustained for NOANGIOh and NOANGIOhp compared to ANGIO (Fig. 5a, c and g) because the assimilation remains high when *C*<sub>i</sub> is not the limiting factor (Fig. S6a, c and g). The latter lessens the initial decrease in *g*<sub>s</sub> (Fig. 6a) on *g*<sub>c* (Fig. 4a). Nevertheless, the NOANGIOp(1120) experiment shows a much lower *g*<sub>c</sub> than the two previous experiments because of the direct impact of decreasing *V*<sub>cmax</sub> on the LAI (Fig. 5e). Therefore, comparing *g*<sub>c</sub> of perturbed simulations to that of the reference allows us to account for the
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5.** Annual mean LAI (m² [leaf] m⁻² [groundCELL]) for (a) ANGIO(1120), (b) ANGIO(280), (c) NOANGIOh(1120), (d) NOANGIOh(280), (e) NOANGIOp(1120), (f) NOANGIOp(280), (g) NOANGIOhp(1120) and (h) NOANGIOhp(280). The annual mean LAI is the weighted average of leaf area index of each PFT per surface of ground of a grid cell (i.e., surface averaged across all PFTs including bare soil, written groundCELL in the text).</figcaption></figure>

structural conductance linked to plant trait evolution at the canopy level.

## 3.4 Transpiration rate

As shown in Eq. (6), transpiration rate is controlled by (i) the atmospheric evaporative demand (Fig. S7), which depends on air vapor pressure deficit, surface temperature (Fig. S8) and aerodynamic resistance, and (ii) the capacity of plants to

transpire, driven by the canopy conductance (Fig. S9). For both pCO₂ cases, experiments with modern-like vegetation depict the highest transpiration rates in the tropics and the midlatitudes, where they reach up to 2.5 and 3 mm d⁻¹ at 1120 and 280 ppm, respectively (Fig. 7a and b). These regions have optimal conditions in water availability in the soil (Fig. S5) and light, resulting in higher canopy stomatal conductance (Fig. S9a and b) together with a high atmospheric evaporative demand (Fig. S7a and b) as a response to high
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** Global-scale canopy operating stomatal conductance to H₂O, g_c (mol m⁻² [groundpFT] s⁻¹), per PFT: (a) ANGIO(1120) (gray bar), NOANGIOh(1120) (diagonal hatched bar), NOANGIOp(1120) (dotted bar) and NOANGIOhp(1120) (diagonal hatched and dotted bar); (b) ANGIO(280) (gray bar), NOANGIOh(280) (diagonal hatched bar), NOANGIOp(280) (dotted bar) and NOANGIOhp(280) (diagonal hatched and dotted bar). The canopy stomatal conductance to H₂O is the daylight average over the year and is weighted by the surface of ground of a grid cell where each PFT is found (written groundpFT in the text).</figcaption></figure>

temperatures (Fig. S8a and b). Transpiration is also slightly strengthened (+0.2 mm d⁻¹) at low pCO₂ compared to high pCO₂ (Fig. 7a and b) as a consequence of higher g_c (Figs. 4 and 6). Parameterizing the vegetation without the modern angiosperm leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities systematically leads to lower transpiration rates (Fig. 7).

Overall, in line with changes depicted for LAI and g_c, transpiration rates react more strongly to decreasing leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities in a 280 ppm world than in a 1120 ppm world. At 280 ppm, NOANGIOh shows a decrease of 0.6 mm d⁻¹ (−44%) in transpiration compared to ANGIO, especially over equatorial Gondwana and paleo Southeast Asia, whereas the decrease is limited to 0.3 mm d⁻¹ (−24%) at 1120 ppm (Fig. 7c and d) as a response to g_c changes described earlier (Fig. 6). Transpiration also significantly drops when leaf photosynthetic capacity alone is reduced (NOANGIOp, Fig. 7e and f). At 1120 ppm, transpiration drops by 0.5 mm d⁻¹ (−53%) (Fig. 7e). The signal is stronger at 280 ppm, where a complete collapse of transpiration is simulated (Fig. 7f). This latter result is a direct consequence of the LAI collapse described earlier (Fig. 5e and f). Combining reduction in leaf photosynthetic and hydraulic capacities (NOANGIOhp) leads to little decreases in transpiration rate at 1120 ppm (Fig. 7g), comparable to NOANGIOh (Fig. 7c), because the high pCO₂ prevents the decrease in carbon assimilation (Fig. 5g) and canopy stomatal conductance (Fig. 6). Conversely, at low pCO₂, the limitation of C_i (Eqs. 1, 4 and 5) implies a collapse of LAI (Fig. 5h) and g_c (Fig. 6) over the tropics and

midlatitudes, and transpiration is near zero for NOANGIOhp, with a decrease of 1 mm d⁻¹ (−81%) compared to ANGIO (Fig. 7h).

Transpiration anomalies result from variations in the atmospheric evaporative demand (Fig. S7) combined with that of the canopy stomatal conductance (Fig. S9), arising from g_s and LAI changes which are modulated by the soil moisture stress for transpiration and light. Transpiration anomalies are located over the paleo-tropics (Fig. 7c and d) for NOANGIOh compared to ANGIO experiments because decreasing leaf hydraulic capacity by a factor of 5 acts mainly on wet regions where plants efficiently transpire in the ANGIO world (Fig. 1 and Eqs. 1 to 5), while arid belt regions are less sensitive to any change in g_c. In these regions, transpiration is already constrained by water shortage, so the upper stomatal conductance limit is not the limiting factor. However, midlatitudes do not show transpiration anomalies because the decrease in g_c (Figs. 6, S9c and d) is compensated for by the increase in atmospheric evaporative demand (Fig. S7c and d) that strengthens transpiration rate. In contrast, decreasing leaf photosynthetic capacity (NOANGIOp) acts more globally on terrestrial plants and explains the widespread transpiration anomalies (Fig. 7e and f), always modulated by the atmospheric evaporative demand (Fig. S7e and f). At 1120 ppm, NOANGIOhp shows the same pattern as NOANGIOh (Fig. 7c and g) because plants are more sensitive to reduction in fcpl than to reduction in V_cmax (C_i is not limiting) while the decrease in transpiration is more extended at 280 ppm (Fig. 7h) because it arises mainly from the decrease
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7.** Annual mean transpiration rate (mm d⁻¹) for (a) ANGIO(1120) and (b) ANGIO(280), anomalies of annual mean transpiration rate (mm d⁻¹) for (c) NOANGIOh(1120) vs. ANGIO(1120), (d) NOANGIOh(280) vs. ANGIO(280), (e) NOANGIOp(1120) vs. ANGIO(1120), (f) NOANGIOp(280) vs ANGIO(280), (g) NOANGIOhp(1120) vs. ANGIO(1120) and (h) NOANGIOhp(280) vs. ANGIO(280). The *t*-test 95 % confidence level anomalies are given by dots.</figcaption></figure>

in $V_{cmax}$ at low pCO₂ that drives carbon assimilation to decline (Eqs. 3 and 4).

## 3.5 Water use efficiency

The annual mean water use efficiency (WUE) is the ratio of annual mean GPP to annual mean transpiration over each grid point (gC kg H₂O⁻¹). It pictures the capacity of vegetation to maximize carbon uptake while minimizing water loss

and thus is a good indicator of plant adaptation to their environment. For the modern-like vegetation (ANGIO), maximal values of WUE are found in the midlatitude to high-latitudes where optimal conditions of water and light (Figs. 8a and b, S5) are available for the vegetation. WUE increases with pCO₂: while it barely exceeds 10 gC kg H₂O⁻¹ at 280 ppm, it reaches more than 15 gC kg H₂O⁻¹ at 1120 ppm. This is explained by the CO₂ fertilization effect generated by the high pCO₂ on $C_i$ (Eqs. 3 to 5) that strengthens plant produc-
tivity. At 1120 ppm, the highest value of WUE is found for NOANGIOh, with a 1.7 gC kg H₂O⁻¹ (+30%, Fig. S10c) increase compared to ANGIO (Fig. 8a and c). Indeed, reducing the leaf hydraulic capacity does not imply a change in GPP, which remains similar to that of ANGIO(1120) (Fig. S6a and c) but rather generates a slight decrease in transpiration rate (Fig. 7c), explaining the increase in WUE. Therefore, plants with lower leaf hydraulic capacity than today are better adapted to the high-*pCO*₂ environment. For NOANGIOhp(1120), the WUE is partly reduced compared to ANGIO(1120) but stays at a high level (Fig. 8a and g). It results from the larger decrease in GPP than in transpiration rate (Figs. S6g and 7g), as GPP is more sensitive to the *V*<sub>cmax</sub> reduction (Eq. 4) than transpiration is to the fcpl reduction (Eqs. 1 and 6). In contrast, WUE is largely degraded in NOANGIOp(1120) compared to ANGIO(1120) (Fig. 8a and e). Both GPP (Fig. S6a and e) and transpiration rate (Fig. 7a and e) significantly drop when reducing the leaf photosynthetic capacity (NOANGIOp) at high *pCO*₂. However, *V*<sub>cmax</sub> acts directly on the carbon assimilation (Eqs. 3 and 4) while it is more indirect for the stomatal conductance, thus implying that the reduction of *V*<sub>cmax</sub> has a larger effect on GPP than on transpiration rate. In contrast to experiments at high *pCO*₂, ANGIO(280) gives the highest WUE at low *pCO*₂. NOANGIOh(280) depicts a lower WUE than ANGIO(280) (Fig. 8b and d), which demonstrates that plants with lower leaf hydraulic capacity than today are less adapted to the low-*pCO*₂ environment. At low *pCO*₂, the low *C*<sub>i</sub> decreases GPP (Eq. 4, Fig. S6b and d) while it increases *g*<sub>s</sub> (Eq. 1, Fig. 4), modulating the transpiration decrease (Fig. 7d). However, at low *pCO*₂, WUE collapses to very low values for NOANGIOp and NOANGIOhp (Fig. 8f and h), which is driven by the large decrease in GPP when combining the low *C*<sub>i</sub> with the reduction of *V*<sub>cmax</sub> (Fig. S6f and h). Once the leaf photosynthetic capacity is decreased, changes in GPP are the main contributor to the changes in WUE whatever the *pCO*₂ level prescribed.

# 4 Discussion

## 4.1 How to better account for the proto-angiosperm conductance traits in land surface models?

Fossil maximal anatomic stomatal conductance has been widely used to estimate the maximum of water flow through the stomata before and after the angiosperm radiation. Still, determining how an increase of a factor of 5 in maximal anatomic stomatal conductance translates into actual flux at the top of the canopy is challenging. We show that the complete response of the vegetation to evolving physiological and morphological traits is modulated by environmental factors such as *pCO*₂, light, vapor pressure deficit and water availability in the soil (Fig. 1).

The simplest representation of proto-angiosperm vegetation is to account for the lower maximal anatomic stomatal conductance by a factor of 5, consistent with the fossil records, directly by applying this factor to fcpl in the calculation of the leaf stomatal conductance (Eq. 1). Our results show that a lower fcpl of angiosperms at high *pCO*₂ does not change plant photosynthesis (Fig. 5c and S6c) but slightly decreases transpiration (Fig. 7c), driving WUE to increase (Fig. 8c) compared to the modern angiosperm prescription. Hence, a lower maximal stomatal conductance at high *pCO*₂ appears as an advantage compared to modern angiosperms because of a better optimization of carbon uptake over water loss. At low *pCO*₂, both transpiration (Fig. 7d) and photosynthesis are decreased because a reduced LAI entails a reduction of canopy stomatal conductance, which strengthens the initial reduction of leaf stomatal conductance compared to the modern vegetation. Despite the absence of a direct proxy for fossil plant maximum *V*<sub>cmax</sub>, several studies have suggested mimicking the proto-angiosperm capacities by decreasing modern *V*<sub>cmax</sub> (Boyce and Lee, 2010; Lee and Boyce, 2010), rather than fcpl, by a factor of 5. This approach is supported by our knowledge of modern plant processes that stomatal conductance interacts with assimilation in order to optimize carbon gain against water loss (Bonan, 2015) and is made possible by the coupling between leaf stomatal conductance and leaf photosynthetic capacity in our land surface model (Farquhar et al., 1980; Ball et al., 1987; Krinner et al., 2005; Yin and Struik, 2009). However, applying this method leads vegetation cover to decrease at high *pCO*₂ (Figs. 5e and S6e) or even collapse at low *pCO*₂ (Figs. 5f and S6f), which is not recorded in the fossil record. As a consequence, transpiration rates (Fig. 7e and f) and WUE (Fig. 8e and f) significantly decrease at high *pCO*₂ and are zero at low *pCO*₂ compared to the modern vegetation. Hence, taking into account stomatal conductance reduction only through *V*<sub>cmax</sub> reduction does not appear to be adequate. However, several studies suggested a decrease in *V*<sub>cmax</sub> with increasing *pCO*₂ (Ainsworth and Rogers, 2007) driven by (i) a coevolution between stomatal conductance and *V*<sub>cmax</sub> through time (Franks and Beerling, 2009a; De Boer et al., 2012) and (ii) the photosynthesis coordination theory that states that plants optimize *V*<sub>cmax</sub> to be near the co-limitation between carboxylation rate and RuBP regeneration (Maire et al., 2012; Stocker et al., 2020). This theory has recently been improved also considering the cost related to stomatal conductance (Stocker et al., 2020). This *V*<sub>cmax</sub> limitation is related to the high energetic (and then respiration) cost needed to maintain a high level of Rubisco (acquisition of nitrogen). Rather than the two extreme cases that decrease leaf hydraulic or photosynthetic capacity of angiosperms by a factor of 5, we consider a covariation in fcpl and *V*<sub>cmax</sub>, by applying half the forcing given by the fossil records (i.e., √(1/5)) to fcpl directly and the other half to *V*<sub>cmax</sub>. Experimental studies on extant plant types (Lin et al., 2015) have shown differences in water-use
<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 8.** Annual mean WUE (gC kgH₂O⁻¹) for (a) ANGIO(1120), (b) ANGIO(280), (c) NOANGIOh(1120), (d) NOANGIOh(280), (e) NOANGIOp(1120), (f) NOANGIOp(280), (g) NOANGIOhp(1120) and (h) NOANGIOhp(280).</figcaption></figure>

strategy between modern angiosperm trees and gymnosperm trees. They argue that modern angiosperm trees have 2 times higher stomatal conductance sensitivity response to driving factors than gymnosperm trees, showing that our choice for $fc_{pl} \cdot \sqrt{1/5}$ together with $V_{cmax} \cdot \sqrt{1/5}$ seems the most realistic. When applying this factor jointly to $fc_{pl}$ and $V_{cmax}$ at a high $pCO_2$, our results suggest that vegetation is barely impacted, with a slight reduction of GPP (Fig. S6g) that remains sufficient to sustain LAI values close to those of the control scenario (Fig. 5g) and a relatively high WUE (Fig. 8g) com-

pared to the modern vegetation (Figs. 5a and 8a). Conversely at low $pCO_2$, LAI collapses (Fig. 5h) and GPP, transpiration and WUE reach zero (Figs. S6h, 7h and 8h) as a response to carbon assimilation drop.

At 280 ppm, sensitivity tests with a low leaf photosynthetic capacity or together with a low leaf hydraulic capacity can be considered extrema where plants cannot grow (Figs. 5f and h, S6f and h), whereas the experiment with modern-trait vegetation corresponds to a maximum in plant productivity and transpiration (Figs. 5b, 7b and 8b). At 1120 ppm, two
sets of forcing factors simulate a sustainable paleovegetation productivity: lowered leaf hydraulic capacity only or lowered leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities together (Fig. 5c and g, S6c and g). However, lowering only the leaf hydraulic capacity while keeping the high V<sub>cmax</sub> as in the modern vegetation is probably not realistic. Indeed, under high pCO₂, because of increasing limitation of Rubisco regeneration, the actual photosynthesis can be maintained with a smaller V<sub>cmax</sub>. Sustaining a given level of V<sub>cmax</sub> is associated with a respiration cost, for nitrogen acquisition and protein maintenance. So, to optimize its carbon gain, we expect the plant to also have a lower V<sub>cmax</sub>. Although our model does not represent the nitrogen cycle, we infer that this supplementary cost would lead to a decrease in productivity when simulating the proto-angiosperm vegetation with a modern leaf photosynthetic capacity together with a low leaf hydraulic capacity. Taking into account the differentiated response of vegetation to a declining pCO₂, we suggest that simultaneously decreasing fcpl and V<sub>cmax</sub> by a factor of √(1/5) is the most realistic representation of proto-angiosperm vegetation. The latter is consistent with a previous study of Franks and Beerling (2009a) suggesting that past fluctuations in pCO₂ acted as a forcing on both V<sub>cmax</sub> and stomatal conductance.

Finally, our study confirms the hypothesis that paleovegetation has evolved from a likely state with a relatively low stomatal conductance (Fig. 4a) and V<sub>cmax</sub> under high pCO<sub>2</sub> that allowed nonetheless sustainability of a high productivity (Figs. 5g, 7g and 8g) to a state of high stomatal conductance (Fig. 4b) and V<sub>cmax</sub> as found in the modern vegetation, in order to maintain high productivity under low pCO<sub>2</sub> (Figs. 5b, 7b and 8b). The study also shows that paleovegetation characteristics can be better represented by parameterizing models fully describing the coupling between stomatal conductance and plant productivity from leaf to the canopy scale. Furthermore, we show that decreasing leaf hydraulic and/or photosynthetic capacities does not coincide with a decrease in the leaf operational stomatal conductance to the same extent. Indeed, accounting for a decrease by a factor of 5, given by the maximal bound of the range expected from the maximal anatomic stomatal conductance, leaf stomatal conductance is only 3-fold lower than the reference. This difference is due to the fact that plants never operate at the level of the maximal anatomic stomatal conductance because of light and water limitation effects on photosynthesis. While some previous studies directly decrease the transpiration rate by the factor of vein density changes from the fossil record (Boyce et al., 2009; Boyce and Lee, 2017; Boyce et al., 2010), we suggest explicitly representing changes in leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities. Nevertheless, when embedding parallel changes on pCO<sub>2</sub>, leaf stomatal conductance of plants with reduced leaf hydraulic and photosynthesis capacities at high pCO<sub>2</sub> is nearly 6 times lower than the reference one at low pCO<sub>2</sub>. It confirms that accounting for pCO<sub>2</sub> changes is mandatory to model the evolution of angiosperm leaf traits.

## 4.2 Do the high leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of angiosperms provide a selective advantage compared to the other plants under decreasing pCO₂?

Our work relies upon the assumption that stomata aperture maximizes carbon gain while minimizing water loss (Bonnan, 2015). Both photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to H₂O are sensitive to environmental variables such as light, pCO₂ and water availability in the soil (Fig. 1). As pCO₂ has varied a lot through the Cretaceous (Fletcher et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2014), plants had to adjust their stomatal conductance. Our study suggests that having a high stomatal conductance, which means a large vein density and a high V<sub>cmax</sub>, provides little advantage compared to a low stomatal conductance under high pCO₂. In contrast, having a high stomatal conductance under low pCO₂ may confer a competitive advantage over plants with limited stomatal conductance to assimilate carbon. But this higher stomatal conductance should be linked to an increase in V<sub>cmax</sub> to sustain growth. In that sense, fossil records provide evidence of plant trait evolution during the angiosperm radiation. Fossils of early angiosperms show that vein density was as low as that of other plant types (Feild et al., 2011b) because having a high vein density under high pCO₂ was not necessary for the plants to grow. Then, the pCO₂ likely declined (Fletcher et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2014). For this time, our results support the hypothesis that angiosperms evolved towards leaves with increasing vein density combined with a more efficient biochemistry that allowed them to have an increasing stomatal conductance and photosynthetic capacity to counteract the effect of pCO₂ decrease on carbon assimilation. Among other factors, this evolution of physiological leaf traits has given a competitive advantage to angiosperms compared to gymnosperms dominating the vegetation of the period that enabled them to colonize almost all the terrestrial ecosystems. Our results are consistent with those of Franks and Beerling (2009a), which have shown that WUE co-evolves positively with variations in pCO₂ over the Phanerozoic: periods with high pCO₂ enhanced GPP while simultaneously allowing a reduction of transpirational water losses due to reduced stomatal conductance. They also show that even after the evolution of angiosperm leaf morphology and biochemistry, WUE is estimated to have been at its lowest level since the Carboniferous. Our model consistently represents the range of WUE deducted by Franks and Beerling (2009a) under different pCO₂: between 5 and 9 gC kg H₂O⁻¹ (Fig. 8a and b). Moreover, there is a likely co-adaptation of stomatal traits and leaf venation which implies a better optimization of carbon gain against water loss (De Boer et al., 2012). Progressively, under decreasing pCO₂, angiosperms with high stomatal density and low stomatal size (Franks and Beerling,
2009a, b) likely invested increasingly more energy in building more and more veins to sustain the higher stomatal conductance and then carbon assimilation, while other plants did not. The innovation of angiosperms in dense water transport networks could have become a necessity to support higher stomatal conductance and prevent plant desiccation (De Boer et al., 2012).

## 4.3 What are the limitations of our modeling choices?

As a first step toward understanding the impact of trait evolution on the leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities of angiosperms, we have chosen to simulate the Aptian (115 Ma) because this time period corresponds to the first step of increasing vein density found in the fossil record (Feild et al., 2011a). To get an exhaustive view of the angiosperm evolution, future studies will benefit from considering similar experiments with boundary conditions set several million years before and after the Aptian. Specifically, exploring cold and warm extremes of the Cretaceous, such as the Cenomanian–Turonian (95 Ma) and the Maastrichtian (70 Ma), would be valuable, as climate and pCO₂ have been shown to vary a lot during these periods (Ladant and Donnadieu, 2016).

The vegetation map we used (Fig. 3) results from two efforts of (i) compilation and spatialization of the Aptian paleobotanical records (Sewall et al., 2007) and (ii) conversion of the fossil data into plant functional type combinations (Table S1). Each of these two steps includes uncertainties that can propagate into our results but can hardly be quantified. We acknowledge that the prescribed vegetation cover, especially in the tropics, can potentially alter the radiative balance and the hydrological cycle (e.g., Port et al., 2016). It is however unlikely that the Aptian vegetation cover would be very different from the one provided by Sewall et al. (2007), given the compilation effort made for this reconstruction. Further studies could still circumvent this potential issue by running a full dynamical vegetation model, i.e., by allowing PFTs to spatially settle in regions where the simulated climate is the most appropriate.

Recent studies on past vegetation transitions indicate that differences in transpiration rates also arise from the ratio of carbon over nitrogen (White et al., 2020; Richey et al., 2021). As mentioned earlier, the ORCHIDEE version we used does not explicitly represent the nitrogen cycle, preventing us from considering the additional cost to maintain high leaf photosynthetic capacity with lower leaf hydraulic capacity. The recent developments of a new version of ORCHIDEE that does include the nitrogen cycle (Vuichard et al., 2019), based on previous developments (Zaehle and Friend, 2010; Zaehle et al., 2010), will help to account for this process, provided that good constraints can be obtained regarding the C:N ratio of Cretaceous vegetation and soils.

Through the use of the coupled LMDZ and ORCHIDEE models, our approach includes the pivotal coupling between atmosphere and vegetation. However by using fixed sea-

surface temperatures, we neglect the feedbacks from the ocean-atmosphere coupling that could occur as a response to simulated changes in vegetation cover. Although sensitivity experiments with strong changes in vegetation suggested ocean feedbacks could play a significant role on the continental hydrological cycle (Davin and de Noblet-Ducoudré, 2010), our choice was motivated by (i) the will to focus on first-order continental processes, (ii) the computing cost required to equilibrate fully coupled simulations that typically require more than 3000 simulated years (Sepulchre et al., 2020) and the fact that comparable studies used either fixed SSTs (Boyce and Lee, 2010; Lee and Boyce, 2010) or slab oceans (White et al., 2020).

Our parameterization of stomatal conductance in ORCHIDEE from Yin and Struik (2009) (Eq. 1) is semi-empirical. A refinement of our modeling approach would be to use a stomatal conductance model based on optimization theory that explicitly describes the stomata functioning so as to optimize carbon gain against water loss (Medlyn et al., 2011; Buckley and Mott, 2013; Buckley, 2017). In particular, the model we use here simply links external forcing to leaf stomatal conductance by an empirical term of coupling fcpl that describes all the processes related to stomatal conductance. The $\alpha$ factor applied in Eq. (1) to the coupling factor (fcpl) does not fully represent the change in the maximal anatomic stomatal conductance as it should be considering changes inferred from vein density. We have seen that reducing the leaf hydraulic or photosynthetic capacity (or a combination of both) by a factor of 5 leads to a 3-fold decrease in leaf stomatal conductance. It emphasizes the need, in the future, to improve the parameterization of the stomatal conductance in global models by explicitly modeling both structural and dynamical conductance. Such a parameterization already exists for individuals plants (Dow et al., 2014), growing under controlled conditions, but not for land surface models. Moreover, moving beyond PFT-based approaches towards truly trait-based ones would allow a more direct account of changes in functional traits.

Finally, we only consider the Cretaceous evolution of leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacity in this paper, as leaves are the end limit of plant water transport (Brodribb et al., 2007; Brodribb and Feild, 2010; Feild et al., 2011a, b). However, root thickness and wood structure for instance have evolved towards greater hydraulic efficiency (Brundrett, 2002; Wheeler and Baas, 2019). A comprehensive approach of the evolution of the plant hydraulic system would require consideration of the entire soil–plant–atmosphere continuum, based on coupled resistances. Future studies would benefit from implementing a full hydraulic architecture of plants in the land surface model.
## 5 Conclusions

In line with recent studies focusing on Paleozoic vegetation transitions (White et al., 2020; Richey et al., 2021), the purpose of our study is to better represent past vegetation in Earth system models by emulating “paleo-traits” in the vegetation parameterizations. Our approach involves an atmosphere-vegetation model, which couples stomatal conductance and carbon assimilation, motivated by an ecophysiological model based on angiosperm fossil records. Here, it allows us to evaluate three different paleovegetation prescriptions under two end-member scenarios of *pCO*₂ for the Cretaceous. We show that the simulated vegetation cover, transpiration rate and water use efficiency are sensitive to the paleovegetation trait prescribed. Only accounting for leaf hydraulic capacity reduction provides no significant change in LAI, GPP and transpiration, while slightly increasing WUE at high *pCO*₂. In contrast, global transpiration decreases at low *pCO*₂ because of the positive feedback between LAI and stomatal conductance. On the other hand, only accounting for leaf photosynthetic capacity reduction gives a substantial decrease in or even a collapse of vegetation at high or low *pCO*₂, respectively, which is in contradiction of the fossil record. Combining a reduction of leaf hydraulic capacity with that of photosynthetic capacity does not affect the plant productivity and LAI at high *pCO*₂ while vegetation collapses at low *pCO*₂. All the results in combination demonstrate that under high *pCO*₂ the reduced stomatal conductance of the proto-angiosperm vegetation is not a limiting factor on productivity. It also shows that high values of *V*<sub>cmax</sub> as observed in modern angiosperms do not enhance plant productivity, whereas maintaining the high *V*<sub>cmax</sub> likely requires higher leaf nitrogen concentration and higher energy demand. Therefore, a combination of lower-than-modern leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities seems the most realistic physiological parameterization for proto-angiosperms in the specific high-*pCO*₂ context of the Cretaceous. This is supported by evidence of coevolution inferred from previous studies (Franks and Beerling, 2009a, b) and the ratio of stomatal conductance between modern angiosperms and gymnosperms from in situ experiments (Lin et al., 2015). Our results are also consistent with recent studies on coordination theory (Maire et al., 2012; Stocker et al., 2020).

Our study also suggests that proto-angiosperm vegetation with low leaf hydraulic and photosynthetic capacities was adapted to high *pCO*₂, where the combination of both physiological constraints nonetheless allowed high productivity and WUE. Conversely, it would not have been able to exist under low *pCO*₂, where we simulated a collapse of GPP under such physiological parameter configuration. Modeling the full coupling between GPP and stomatal conductance allows us to understand why increasing both structural conductance and maximum photosynthetic capacity, even at an expense of a possible increasing water loss, was a selec-

tive advantage with decreasing *pCO*₂ and is the likely explanation for observed increasing structural conductance of angiosperms since the Cretaceous, consistent with previous studies (Franks and Beerling, 2009a, b; Boyce and Zwieniecki, 2012; Brodribb and Feild, 2010). From a low stomatal conductance (low vein density and *V*<sub>cmax</sub>) similar to that of gymnosperms under high *pCO*₂, angiosperms evolve towards a high stomatal conductance (high vein density and *V*<sub>cmax</sub>) to counteract the effect of the *pCO*₂ decrease on carbon assimilation.

While this study provides clues on how to account for angiosperm evolutionary traits in paleoclimate simulations, further work is needed to assess the potential climate effects of the Cretaceous angiosperm leaf evolution, especially on the hydrological cycle and the energy balance at the land surface. Furthermore, allowing dynamic vegetation would be an important future refinement of this research to model feedbacks between vegetation and climate. Also, replacing PFT morphophysiological traits by species-specific traits (Kattge et al., 2020) as has already been done for the aDGVM2 model (Scheiter et al., 2013), the LPJmL-FIT model (Sakschewski et al., 2015) or the JEDI model (Pavlick et al., 2013) allows plant communities to be assembled based on how plants with different trait combinations perform under a given set of environmental conditions. This way, changes in functional traits would be more directly taken into account. With such a dynamical vegetation model, we may question the veracity of the reciprocity with the human-induced increase in *pCO*₂. Building leaves with high vein density and *V*<sub>cmax</sub> induces an investment in nutrients and energy (Chapin et al., 2011; Fiorin et al., 2016; Beerling and Franks, 2010) that could be an extra cost for plants without benefit under a higher *pCO*₂. That would suggest that plants should evolve back to a reduced stomatal conductance and *V*<sub>cmax</sub>. However, the pace of the current increase in *pCO*₂ is dramatically higher than the million-year timescale of Cretaceous changes and likely incompatible with a genetic plant adaptation. Whether extant plants will be able to adjust their physiological and morphological traits or not to the human perturbation is a challenging question for future studies.

*Code availability.* The code is available as part of the IPSL-CM5A2 Earth system model, which has been made available by Sepulchre et al. (2020). The code can be retrieved through svn, with the following command lines: `svn co (http://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/icmg/svn/modipsl/branches/publications/IPSLCM5A2.1_11192019/`, Ghattas, 2020). See also https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/3011/2020/#section11 (last access: 25 June 2020; Sepulchre et al., 2020). The ORCHIDEE code, which has been modified for this study, is available as well through svn: `svn co (https://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/orchidee/browser/branches/publications/ORCHIDEE_IPSLCM5A2.1.r5307`, Ghattas, 2018). The login-password combination requested at first use to download the ORCHIDEE component is “anonymous” and “anonymous”.
*Data availability.* We provide the simulation outputs in the online repository: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5517167 (Bres et al., 2021).

*Supplement.* The supplement related to this article is available online at: https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-5729-2021-supplement.

*Author contributions.* JB, PS, NVio and NVui designed the work. Under supervision of PS, NVio and NVui, JB performed the simulations, processed the data, wrote the manuscript and drew the figures, except Fig. 1, which was drawn by PS. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

*Competing interests.* The contact author has declared that neither they nor their co-authors have any competing interests.

*Disclaimer.* Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

*Acknowledgements.* We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their meticulous work that helped to improve this paper a lot. This work was granted access to the HPC resources of TGCC under allocation 2019-A0090102212 made by GENCI.

*Financial support.* Julia Bres, Nicolas Viovy and Nicolas Vuichard are supported by the Commisariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA). Pierre Sepulchre is supported by Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS).

*Review statement.* This paper was edited by Akihiko Ito and reviewed by two anonymous referees.

## References

Ainsworth, E. A. and Rogers, A.: The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO₂]: mechanisms and environmental interactions, Plant Cell Environ., 30, 258–270, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01641.x, 2007.

Ball, J. T., Woodrow, I. E., and Berry, J. A.: A model predicting stomatal conductance and its contribution to the control of photosynthesis under different environmental conditions, in: Progress in photosynthesis research, 221–224, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0519-6_48, 1987.

Bathiany, S., Claussen, M., Brovkin, V., Raddatz, T., and Gayler, V.: Combined biogeophysical and biogeochemical effects of large-scale forest cover changes in the MPI earth system model, Biogeosciences, 7, 1383–1399, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1383-2010, 2010.

Beerling, D. J. and Franks, P. J.: The hidden cost of transpiration, Nature, 464, 495–496, https://doi.org/10.1038/464495a, 2010.

Betts, R. A., Cox, P. M., Lee, S. E., and Woodward, F. I.: Contrasting physiological and structural vegetation feedbacks in climate change simulations, Nature, 387, 796–799, https://doi.org/10.1038/42924, 1997.

Bonan, G.: Ecological climatology: concepts and applications, Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Boyce, C. K. and Lee, J.-E.: An exceptional role for flowering plant physiology in the expansion of tropical rainforests and biodiversity, P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci., 277, 3437–3443, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0485, 2010.

Boyce, C. K. and Lee, J.-E.: Plant evolution and climate over geological timescales, Annu. Rev. Earth Pl. Sc., 45, 61–87, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-063016-015629, 2017.

Boyce, C. K. and Zwieniecki, M. A.: Leaf fossil record suggests limited influence of atmospheric CO₂ on terrestrial productivity prior to angiosperm evolution, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 109, 10403–10408, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1203769109, 2012.

Boyce, C. K., Brodribb, T. J., Feild, T. S., and Zwieniecki, M. A.: Angiosperm leaf vein evolution was physiologically and environmentally transformative, P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci., 276, 1771–1776, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.1919, 2009.

Boyce, C. K., Lee, J.-E., Feild, T. S., Brodribb, T. J., and Zwieniecki, M. A.: Angiosperms Helped Put the Rain in the Rainforests: The Impact of Plant Physiological Evolution on Tropical Biodiversity, Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard., 97, 527–540, https://doi.org/10.3417/2009143, 2010.

Braconnot, P., Joussaume, S., Marti, O., and De Noblet, N.: Synergistic feedbacks from ocean and vegetation on the African monsoon response to mid-Holocene insolation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 2481–2484, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL006047, 1999.

Bres, J., Sepulchre, P., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: The Cretaceous physiological adaptation of angiosperms to a declining pCO₂: a trait-oriented modelling approach, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5517167, 2021.

Brodribb, T. J. and Feild, T. S.: Leaf hydraulic evolution led a surge in leaf photosynthetic capacity during early angiosperm diversification, Ecol. Lett., 13, 175–183, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01410.x, 2010.

Brodribb, T. J., Feild, T. S., and Jordan, G. J.: Leaf maximum photosynthetic rate and venation are linked by hydraulics, Plant Physiol., 144, 1890–1898, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.107.101352, 2007.

Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Driesschaert, E., Fichefet, T., Kicklighter, D., Loutre, M.-F., Matthews, H. D., Ramankutty, N., Schaeffer, M., and Sokolov, A.: Biogeophysical effects of historical land cover changes simulated by six Earth system models of intermediate complexity, Clim. Dynam., 26, 587–600, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-005-0092-6, 2006.

Brovkin, V., Raddatz, T., Reick, C. H., Claussen, M., and Gayler, V.: Global biogeophysical interactions between forest and climate, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L07405, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037543, 2009.

Brundrett, M. C.: Coevolution of roots and mycorrhizas of land plants, New Phytol., 154, 275–304, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00397.x, 2002.

Buckley, T. N.: Modeling stomatal conductance, Plant Physiol., 174, 572–582, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.01772, 2017.
Buckley, T. N. and Mott, K. A.: Modelling stomatal conductance in response to environmental factors, Plant Cell Environ., 36, 1691–1699, https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12140, 2013.

Chapin, F. S., Matson, P. A., and Vitousek, P.: Principles of terrestrial ecosystem ecology, Springer Science & Business Media, 2011.

Charney, J., Stone, P. H., and Quirk, W. J.: Drought in the Sahara: a biogeophysical feedback mechanism, Science, 187, 434–435, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.187.4175.434, 1975.

Christenhusz, M. J. and Byng, J. W.: The number of known plants species in the world and its annual increase, Phytotaxa, 261, 201–217, https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.261.3.1, 2016.

Condamine, F. L., Silvestro, D., Koppelhus, E. B., and Antonelli, A.: The rise of angiosperms pushed conifers to decline during global cooling, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 117, 28867–28875, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2005571117, 2020.

Davin, E. L. and de Noblet-Ducoudré, N.: Climatic impact of global-scale deforestation: Radiative versus nonradiative processes, J. Climate, 23, 97–112, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI3102.1, 2010.

De Boer, H. J., Eppinga, M. B., Wassen, M. J., and Dekker, S. C.: A critical transition in leaf evolution facilitated the Cretaceous angiosperm revolution, Nat. Commun., 3, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2217, 2012.

Dow, G. J. and Bergmann, D. C.: Patterning and processes: how stomatal development defines physiological potential, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 21, 67–74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2014.06.007, 2014.

Dow, G. J., Bergmann, D. C., and Berry, J. A.: An integrated model of stomatal development and leaf physiology, New Phytol., 201, 1218–1226, https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12608, 2014.

Ducoudré, N. I., Laval, K., and Perrier, A.: SECHIBA, a new set of parameterizations of the hydrologic exchanges at the land-atmosphere interface within the LMD atmospheric general circulation model, J. Climate, 6, 248–273, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1993)006<0248:SANSOP>2.0.CO;2, 1993.

Dury, M., Mertens, L., Fayolle, A., Verbeeck, H., Hambuckers, A., and François, L.: Refining species traits in a dynamic vegetation model to project the impacts of climate change on tropical trees in Central Africa, Forests, 9, 722, https://doi.org/10.3390/f9110722, 2018.

Egea, G., Verhoef, A., and Vidale, P. L.: Towards an improved and more flexible representation of water stress in coupled photosynthesis–stomatal conductance models, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151, 1370–1384, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.05.019, 2011.

Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S. V., and Berry, J. A.: A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO$_2$ assimilation in leaves of C$_3$ species, Planta, 149, 78–90, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00386231, 1980.

Feild, T. S., Brodribb, T. J., Iglesias, A., Chatelet, D. S., Baresch, A., Upchurch, G. R., Gomez, B., Mohr, B. A., Coiffard, C., Kvacek, J., and Jaramillo, C.: Fossil evidence for Cretaceous escalation in angiosperm leaf vein evolution, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 8363–8366, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014456108, 2011a.

Feild, T. S., Upchurch, G. R., Chatelet, D. S., Brodribb, T. J., Grubbs, K. C., Samain, M.-S., and Wanke, S.: Fossil evidence for low gas exchange capacities for Early Cretaceous angiosperm

leavesEarly Angiosperm Leaf Gas Exchange, Paleobiology, 37, 195–213, https://doi.org/10.1666/10015.1, 2011b.

Fiorin, L., Brodribb, T. J., and Anfodillo, T.: Transport efficiency through uniformity: organization of veins and stomata in angiosperm leaves, New Phytol., 209, 216–227, https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13577, 2016.

Fisher, R. A. and Koven, C. D.: Perspectives on the future of land surface models and the challenges of representing complex terrestrial systems, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2018MS001453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001453, 2020.

Fletcher, B. J., Brentnall, S. J., Anderson, C. W., Berner, R. A., and Beerling, D. J.: Atmospheric carbon dioxide linked with Cenozoic and early Cenozoic climate change, Nat. Geosci., 1, 43, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo.2007.29, 2008.

Fraedrich, K., Kleidon, A., and Lunkeit, F.: A green planet versus a desert world: Estimating the effect of vegetation extremes on the atmosphere, J. Climate, 12, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<3156:AGPVAD>2.0.CO;2, 1999.

Franks, P. and Beerling, D.: CO$_2$-forced evolution of plant gas exchange capacity and water-use efficiency over the Phanerozoic, Geobiology, 7, 227–236, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4669.2009.00193.x, 2009a.

Franks, P. J. and Beerling, D. J.: Maximum leaf conductance driven by CO$_2$ effects on stomatal size and density over genetic time, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 10343–10347, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0904209106, 2009b.

Franks, P. J. and Farquhar, G. D.: The effect of exogenous abscisic acid on stomatal development, stomatal mechanics, and leaf gas exchange in Tradescantia virginiana, Plant Physiol., 125, 935–942, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.125.2.935, 2001.

Ghattas, J.: source: ORCHIDEE_IPSLCM5A2.1.r5307 [code], available at: https://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/orchidee/browse/branches/publications/ORCHIDEE_IPSLCM5A2.1.r5307, last access: 6 June 2018.

Ghattas, J.: IPSLCM5A2.1_11192019 – Revision 5957 [code], available at: http://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/igcmg/svn/modipsl/branches/publications/IPSLCM5A2.1_11192019/, last access: 25 June 2020.

Gibbard, S., Caldeira, K., Bala, G., Phillips, T. J., and Wickett, M.: Climate effects of global land cover change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L23705, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024550, 2005.

Gough, D.: Solar interior structure and luminosity variations, in: Physics of solar variations, 21–34, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9633-1_4, 1981.

Guimberteau, M., Ducharne, A., Ciais, P., Boisier, J. P., Peng, S., De Weirdt, M., and Verbeeck, H.: Testing conceptual and physically based soil hydrology schemes against observations for the Amazon Basin, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 1115–1136, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1115-2014, 2014.

Hourdin, F., Foujols, M.-A., Codron, F., Guemas, V., Dufresne, J.-L., Bony, S., Denvil, S., Guez, L., Lott, F., Ghattas, J., Braconnot, P., Marti, O., Meurdesoif, Y., and Bopp, L.: Impact of the LMDZ atmospheric grid configuration on the climate and sensitivity of the IPSL-CM5A coupled model, Clim. Dynam., 40, 2167–2192, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1411-3, 2013.

Jarvis, A., Mansfield, T., and Davies, W. J.: Stomatal behaviour, photosynthesis and transpiration under rising CO$_2$, Plant Cell Environ., 22, 639–648, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.1999.00407.x, 1999.
Kattge, J. and Knorr, W.: Temperature acclimation in a bio-
chemical model of photosynthesis: a reanalysis of data
from 36 species, Plant Cell Environ., 30, 1176–1190,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01690.x, 2007.

Kattge, J., Bönisch, G., Díaz, S., et al.: TRY plant trait database–enhanced coverage and open access, Glob. Change Biol., 26, 119–188, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14904, 2020.

Keenan, T., García, R., Friend, A. D., Zaehle, S., Gracia, C., and Sabate, S.: Improved understanding of drought controls on seasonal variation in Mediterranean forest canopy CO₂ and water fluxes through combined in situ measurements and ecosystem modelling, Biogeosciences, 6, 1423–1444, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-6-1423-2009, 2009.

Keenan, T., Sabate, S., and Gracia, C.: Soil water stress and coupled photosynthesis–conductance models: Bridging the gap between conflicting reports on the relative roles of stomatal, mesophyll conductance and biochemical limitations to photosynthesis, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 150, 443–453, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.01.008, 2010.

Kleidon, A., Fraedrich, K., and Heimann, M.: A green planet ver-
sus a desert world: Estimating the maximum effect of vegeta-
tion on the land surface climate, Climatic Change, 44, 471–493,
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005559518889, 2000.

Krinner, G., Viovy, N., de Noblet-Ducoudré, N., Ogée, J., Polcher, J., Friedlingstein, P., Ciais, P., Sitch, S., and Prentice, I. C.: A dynamic global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere-biosphere system, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 19, GB1015, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002199, 2005.

Ladant, J.-B. and Donnadieu, Y.: Palaeogeographic regulation of
glacial events during the Cretaceous supergreenhouse, Nat. Com-
mun., 7, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12771, 2016.

Laskar, J., Robutel, P., Joutel, F., Gastineau, M., Correia, A., and
Levrard, B.: A long-term numerical solution for the insola-
tion quantities of the Earth, Astron. Astrophys., 428, 261–285,
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20041335, 2004.

Lee, J.-E. and Boyce, K.: Impact of the hydraulic capacity of plants on water and carbon fluxes in tropical South America, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D23123, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014568, 2010.

Leuning, R., Kelliher, F. M., De Pury, D., and Schulze, E.-D.: Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, conductance and transpiration: scaling from leaves to canopies, Plant Cell Environ., 18, 1183–1200, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1995.tb00628.x, 1995.

Lin, Y.-S., Medlyn, B. E., Duursma, R. A., Prentice, I. C., Wang, H., Baig, S., Eamus, D., de Dios, V. R., Mitchell, P., Ellsworth, D. S., de Beeck, M. O., Wallin, G., Uddling, J., Tarvainen, L., Linderson, M.-L., Cernusak, L. A., Nippert, J. B., Ochel-tree, T. W., Tissue, D. T., Martin-StPaul, N. K., Rogers, A., Warren, J. M., De Angelis, P., Hikosaka, K., Han, Q., Onoda, Y., Gimeno, T. E., Barton, C. V. M., Bennie, J., Bonal, D., Bosc, A., Löw, M., Machinins-Ng, C., Rey, A., Rowland, L., Setterfield, S. A., Tausz-Posch, S., Zaragoza-Castells, J., Broadmeadow, M. S. J., Drake, J. E., Freeman, M., Ghannoum, O., Hutley, L. B., Kelly, J. W., Kikuzawa, K., Kolari, P., Koyama, K., Limousin, J.-M., Meir, P., Lola da Costa, A. C., Mikkelsen, T. N., Salinas, N., Sun, W., and Wingate, L.: Optimal stomatal behaviour around the world, Nat. Clim. Change, 5, 459–464, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2550, 2015.

Maire, V., Martre, P., Kattge, J., Gastal, F., Esser, G., Fontaine, S., and Soussana, J.-F.: The coordination of leaf photosynthesis links C and N fluxes in C₃ plant species, PloS one, 7, e38345, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038345, 2012.

McElwain, J. C., Yiotis, C., and Lawson, T.: Using modern plant trait relationships between observed and theoretical maximum stomatal conductance and vein density to examine patterns of plant macroevolution, New Phytol., 209, 94–103, https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13579, 2016.

Medlyn, B. E., Duursma, R. A., Eamus, D., Ellsworth, D. S., Prentice, I. C., Barton, C. V., Crous, K. Y., De Angelis, P., Freeman, M., and Wingate, L.: Reconciling the optimal and empirical approaches to modelling stomatal conductance, Glob. Change Biol., 17, 2134–2144, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02375.x, 2011.

Pavlick, R., Drewry, D. T., Bohn, K., Reu, B., and Kleidon, A.: The Jena Diversity-Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (JeDi-DGVM): a diverse approach to representing terrestrial biogeography and biogeochemistry based on plant functional trade-offs, Biogeosciences, 10, 4137–4177, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-4137-2013, 2013.

Peng, S.-S., Yue, C., and Chang, J.-F.: Developments and applications of terrestrial biosphere model, Chinese J. Plant Ecol., 44, 436, https://doi.org/10.17521/cjpe.2019.0315, 2020.

Port, U., Claussen, M., and Brovkin, V.: Radiative forcing and feedback by forests in warm climates – a sensitivity study, Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 535–547, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-535-2016, 2016.

Richey, J. D., Montañez, I. P., White, J. D., DiMichele, W. A., Matthaeus, W. J., Poulsen, C. J., Macarewich, S. I., and Looy, C. V.: Modeled physiological mechanisms for observed changes in the late Paleozoic plant fossil record, Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl., 562, 110056, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.110056, 2021.

de Rosnay, P. and Polcher, J.: Modelling root water uptake in a com-
plex land surface scheme coupled to a GCM, Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci., 2, 239–255, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2-239-1998, 1998.

Sakschewski, B., von Bloh, W., Boit, A., Rammig, A., Kattge, J., Poorter, L., Peñuelas, J., and Thonicke, K.: Leaf and stem economics spectra drive diversity of functional plant traits in a dynamic global vegetation model, Glob. Change Biol., 21, 2711–2725, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12870, 2015.

Scheiter, S., Langan, L., and Higgins, S. I.: Next-
generation dynamic global vegetation models: learning
from community ecology, New Phytol., 198, 957–969,
https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12210, 2013.

Sepulchre, P., Caubel, A., Ladant, J.-B., Bopp, L., Boucher, O., Bracconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cozic, A., Donnadieu, Y., Dufresne, J.-L., Estella-Perez, V., Ethé, C., Fluteau, F., Foujols, M.-A., Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Marti, O., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Sarr, A.-C., Servonnat, J., Swingedouw, D., Szopa, S., and Tardif, D.: IPSL-CM5A2 – an Earth system model designed for multi-millennial climate simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3011–3053, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3011-2020, 2020.

Sewall, J. O., van de Wal, R. S. W., van der Zwan, K., van Oost-
erhout, C., Dijkstra, H. A., and Scotese, C. R.: Climate model
boundary conditions for four Cretaceous time slices, Clim. Past,
3, 647–657, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-647-2007, 2007.
Sitch, S., Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Cramer, W., Kaplan, J. O., Levis, S., Lucht, W., Sykes, M. T., Thonicke, K., and Venevsky, S.: Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model, Glob. Change Biol., 9, 161–185, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00569.x, 2003.

Stocker, B. D., Wang, H., Smith, N. G., Harrison, S. P., Keenan, T. F., Sandoval, D., Davis, T., and Prentice, I. C.: P-model v1.0: an optimality-based light use efficiency model for simulating ecosystem gross primary production, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1545–1581, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1545-2020, 2020.

Sun, X. and Barros, A. P.: Impact of Amazonian evapotranspiration on moisture transport and convection along the eastern flanks of the tropical Andes, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 141, 3325–3343, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2615, 2015.

Tafasca, S., Ducharne, A., and Valentin, C.: Weak sensitivity of the terrestrial water budget to global soil texture maps in the ORCHIDEE land surface model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3753–3774, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-3753-2020, 2020.

Vuichard, N., Messina, P., Luyssaert, S., Guenet, B., Zaehle, S., Ghattas, J., Bastrikov, V., and Peylin, P.: Accounting for carbon and nitrogen interactions in the global terrestrial ecosystem model ORCHIDEE (trunk version, rev 4999): multi-scale evaluation of gross primary production, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4751–4779, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4751-2019, 2019.

Wang, Y., Huang, C., Sun, B., Quan, C., Wu, J., and Lin, Z.: Paleo-CO₂ variation trends and the Cretaceous greenhouse climate, Earth-Sci. Rev., 129, 136–147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2013.11.001, 2014.

Wheeler, E. A. and Baas, P.: Wood evolution: Baileyan trends and functional traits in the fossil record, IAWA J., 40, 488–529, https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-40190230, 2019.

White, J. D., Montañez, I. P., Wilson, J. P., Poulsen, C. J., McElwain, J. C., DiMichele, W. A., Hren, M. T., Macarewich, S., Richey, J. D., and Matthaeus, W. J.: A process-based ecosystem model (Paleo-BGC) to simulate the dynamic response of Late Carboniferous plants to elevated O₂ and aridification, Am. J. Sci., 320, 547–598, https://doi.org/10.2475/09.2020.01, 2020.

Wilson, M. and Henderson-Sellers, A.: A global archive of land cover and soils data for use in general circulation climate models, J. Climatol., 5, 119–143, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370050202, 1985.

Yin, X. and Struik, P.: C₃ and C₄ photosynthesis models: An overview from the perspective of crop modelling, NJAS-Wagen. J. Life Sc., 57, 27–38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2009.07.001, 2009.

Zaehle, S. and Friend, A.: Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model: 1. Model description, site-scale evaluation, and sensitivity to parameter estimates, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24, GB1005, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003521, 2010.

Zaehle, S., Friend, A., Friedlingstein, P., Dentener, F., Peylin, P., and Schulz, M.: Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model: 2. Role of the nitrogen cycle in the historical terrestrial carbon balance, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24, GB1006, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003522, 2010.

Zobler, L.: A world soil file for global climate modeling. NASA TM-87802, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, 1986.