Reexamination of instrument change effects in the U.S. Historical Climatology Network

Geophysical Research Letters

Volumn 33, Issue 15, 2006, Pages

  Hubbard, K G ^a   Lin, X ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; INSTRUMENTS;

DATA SET; INSTRUMENT CHANGE;

CLIMATOLOGY;

CLIMATOLOGY; STATISTICAL DATA; TEMPERATURE PROFILE;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33845656354     PISSN: 00948276     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2006GL027069     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Alexandersson, H., and A. Moberg (1997), Homogenization of Swedish temperature data. Part I: Homogeneity test for linear trends, Int. J. Climatol., 17, 25-34.
2. Balling, R. C., Jr., and S. S. Roy (2004), A spatial entropy analysis of temperature trends in the United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L09201, doi:10.1029/2004GL019630.
3. Davey, C. A., and R. A. Pielke Sr. (2005), Microclimate exposures of surface-based weather stations: Implications for the assessment of long-term temperature trends, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 86, 497-504.
4. DeGaetano, A. T. (2006), Attributes of several methods for detecting discontinuities in mean temperature series, J. Clim., 19, 838-853.
5. Easterling, D. R., T. R. Karl, E. H. Mason, P. Y. Hughes, and D. P. Bowman (1996), United States Historical Climatology Network (U.S. HCN) monthly temperature and precipitation data, Publ. 3404, 262 pp., Environ. Sci. Div., Carbon Dioxide Inf. and Anal. Cent., Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., Oak Ridge, Tenn.
6. Mahmood, R., S. A. Foster, and D. Logan (2006), The geoprofile metadata, exposure of instruments, and measurement bias in climatic record revisited, Int. J. Climatol, 26, 1091-1124.
7. Menne, M. J., and C. N. Williams Jr. (2005), Detection of undocumented change points using multiple test statistics and composite reference series, J. Clim., 18, 4271-4286.
8. Peterson, T. C. (2003), Assessment of urban versus rural in situ surface temperatures in the contiguous United States: No difference found, J. Clim., 16, 2941-2959.
9. Peterson, T. C., et al. (1998), Homogeneity adjustments of in situ atmospheric climate data: A review, Int. J. Climatol., 18, 1493-1517.
10. Pielke, R. A., Sr, T. Stohlgren, L. Schell, W. Parton, N. Doesken, K. Redmond, J. Moeny, T. Mckee, and T. G. F. Kittel (2002), Problems in evaluating regional and local trends in temperature: An example from eastern Colorado, USA, Int. J. Climatol., 22, 421-434.
11. Quayle, R. G., D. R. Easterling, T. R. Karl, and P. Y. Hughes (1991), Effects of recent thermometer changes in the cooperative station network, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 72, 1718-1723.
12. Robeson, S. M., and J. A. Doty (2005), Identifying rogue air-temperature stations using cluster analysis of percentile trends, J. Clim., 18, 1275-1287.
13. Vincent, L. A. (1998), A techniques for the identification of inhomogeneities in Canadian temperature series, J. Clim., 11, 1094-1104.