/ F. C. Ljungqvist, A. Piermattei, A. Seim [et al.] // Quat. Sci. Rev. - 2020. -
Vol. 230. - Ст. 106074,
DOI 10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.106074
. - ISSN 0277-3791
Аннотация: To place recent hydroclimate changes, including drought occurrences, in a long-term historical context, tree-ring records serve as an important natural archive. Here, we evaluate 46 millennium-long tree-ring based hydroclimate reconstructions for their Data Homogeneity, Sample Replication, Growth Coherence, Chronology Development, and Climate Signal based on criteria published by Esper et al. (2016) to assess tree-ring based temperature reconstructions. The compilation of 46 individually calibrated site reconstructions includes 37 different tree species and stem from North America (n = 29), Asia (n = 10); Europe (n = 5), northern Africa (n = 1) and southern South America (n = 1). For each criterion, the individual reconstructions were ranked in four groups, and results showed that no reconstruction scores highest or lowest for all analyzed parameters. We find no geographical differences in the overall ranking, but reconstructions from arid and semi-arid environments tend to score highest. A strong and stable hydroclimate signal is found to be of greater importance than a long calibration period. The most challenging trade-off identified is between high continuous sample replications, as well as a well-mixed age class distribution over time, and a good internal growth coherence. Unlike temperature reconstructions, a high proportion of the hydroclimate reconstructions are produced using individual series detrending methods removing centennial-scale variability. By providing a quantitative and objective evaluation of all available tree-ring based hydroclimate reconstructions we hope to boost future improvements in the development of such records and provide practical guidance to secondary users of these reconstructions. © 2019 The Authors
Scopus Держатели документа: Department of History, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Swedish Collegium for Advanced Study, Uppsala, Sweden
Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Chair of Forest Growth, Institute of Forest Sciences, Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Department of Physical Geography, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Dendro Sciences Group, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland
CzechGlobe Global Change Research Institute CAS, Brno, Czech Republic
Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
Center for Ecological Forecasting and Global Change, College of Forestry, Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, Yangling, China
Sukachev Institute of Forest SB RAS, Krasnoyarsk, Akademgorodok, Russian Federation
Institute of Ecology and Geography, Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation
Department of Geography, Climatology, Climate Dynamics and Climate Change, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
Centre for International Development and Environmental Research, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
Regional Climate Group, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Georges Lemaitre Centre for Earth and Climate Research, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Department of Geosciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, United States
Instituto Argentino de Nivologia, Glaciologia y Ciencias Ambientales IANIGLA, CCT-CONICET-Mendoza, Mendoza, Argentina
Key Laboratory of Desert and Desertification, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, China
Department of Geography, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany
Доп.точки доступа: Ljungqvist, F. C.; Piermattei, A.; Seim, A.; Krusic, P. J.; Buntgen, U.; He, M.; Kirdyanov, A. V.; Luterbacher, J.; Schneider, L.; Seftigen, K.; Stahle, D. W.; Villalba, R.; Yang, B.; Esper, J.
