Standardized drought indices in ecological research: Why one size does not fit all.
- Zang CS TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany.
- Buras A TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany.
- Esquivel-Muelbert A School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
- Jump AS Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
- Rigling A Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
- Rammig A TUM School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany.
- 2019-08-24
Published in:
- Global change biology. - 2020
English
While we generally agree with Slette et al. (Global Change Biol, 2019), that ecologists 'should do better' when defining drought in ecological studies, we argue against the uncritical use of a standardized drought index (such as the Standardized Precipitation and Evapotranspiration Index, SPEI; Vicente-Serrano et al. J Climate, 23: 1696-1718, 2010), as a stand-alone criterium for quantifying and reporting drought conditions. Specifically, we raise the following issues: (a) standardization can lead to a misrepresentation of actual water supply, especially for moist climates; (b) standardized values are not directly comparable between different reference periods; and finally, (c) spatially coarsely resolved data sources are unlikely to represent site-level water supply. This article is a commentary on Slette et al., 25, 3193-3200; See also the response to this Letter to the Editor by Slette et al., 26, e1-e3.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- bronze
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1111/gcb.14809
- PMID 31442346
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.rero.ch/global/documents/76412
Statistics
Document views: 46
File downloads:
- Full-text: 0