## 5 Conclusions  
In conclusion, the PPA-SiBGC and LANDIS-II NECN models represent vegetation dynamics previously absent in modeling studies at these sites. These include, \"...long-term\" increases in tree biomass, successional change in forest composition, and disturbance events, processes not well represented in current models,\" which drive interannual variation in NEE [88]. While the timescale of our simulations were decidedly short-term due to data limitations, both models showed good performance. While PPA-SiBGC showed stronger performance across the range of metrics tested, including the logistics of model deployment, LANDIS-II NECN also performed well across the metrics tested. Further studies are needed to compare more aspects of these and other models based on an array of performance criteria. Ultimately, we hope that this study serves as the foundation for future forest ecosystem model intercomparisons for the North American continent, similar in spirit to the former TDE Ecosystem Model Intercomparison project [54]. This may help create the impetus for a Global Forest Model Intercomparison Project (ForestMIP) together with modeling groups on other continents. The aims of this research were not to determine which model is 'best' for prognosis at two locations, but to improve the capabilities of existing models across a range of locations in order to advance earth system models. In this regard, there are beneficial aspects to both modeling approaches and the trade-offs presented largely depend on the desired application. Counter to the classical modeling trade-off of [PERSON] [38], improvements in precision and generality resulted from realism. The following are available online at [[http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/10/2/180/s1](http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/10/2/180/s1)]([http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/10/2/180/s1](http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/10/2/180/s1)). Parameter tables for both models and sites are provided in Appendix B (Tables 1-30). All model, parameter, script files used in this model intercomparison exercise are available for download at the following public GitHub repository: [[https://github.com/adam-erickson/ecosystem-model-comparison](https://github.com/adam-erickson/ecosystem-model-comparison)]([https://github.com/adam-erickson/ecosystem-model-comparison](https://github.com/adam-erickson/ecosystem-model-comparison)). The repository provides tables containing parameter values and climate drivers used in the PPA-SiBGC and LANDIS-II NECN model simulations for the two model intercomparison sites. Tree species codes are adopted from the USDA PLANTS database, accessible at the following URL: [[https://plants.usda.gov](https://plants.usda.gov)]([https://plants.usda.gov](https://plants.usda.gov)). Scripts provided include a simple object-oriented forest biogeochemistry model wrapper library implemented in the R language [83]. The model wrapper library includes a number of features for simplifying the operation of this class of models, including functions for cleaning up and parsing model outputs into memory in a common format for comparison. Importantly, the wrapper library enables full reproducibility of results through the _lift_ems.r_ and _jerc_rd.r_ scripts. Using these scripts with the object-oriented _classes.r_ model wrapper, it is possible to load pre-computed model results and calculate all intercomparison metrics for verification. The directory structure of the repository is shown in Figure S1. Individual contributions provided to complete this work include the following: conceptualization, N.S. ; methodology, A.E. and N.S. ; software, A.E. ; validation, A.E. ; formal analysis, A.E. ; investigation, A.E. ; resources, N.S. ; data curation, A.E. ; writing--original draft preparation, A.E. ; writing--review and editing, A.E. and N.S. ; visualization, A.E. ; supervision, N.S. ; project administration, N.S. ; funding acquisition, N.S. This research was funded by United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) contract number W912 HQ-18-C-0007.