Development of record-breaking statistics for climatological time-series analysis

The number of record-breaking events expected to occur in a strictly stationary time-series depends only on the number of values in the time-series, regardless of distribution. This holds whether the events are record-breaking highs or lows and whether we count from past to present or present to past. However, these symmetries are broken in distinct ways by trends in the mean and variance. We define indices that capture this information and use them to detect weak trends from multiple time-series. Here, we use these methods to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a variability trend among globally distributed surface temperature time-series? We find a significant decreasing variability over the past century for the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN). This corresponds to about a 10% change in the standard deviation of inter-annual monthly mean temperature distributions. (2) How are record-breaking high and low surface temperatures in the United States affected by time period? We investigate the United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) and find that the ratio of record-breaking highs to lows in 2006 increases as the time-series extend further into the past. When we consider the ratio as it evolves with respect to a fixed start year, we find it is strongly correlated with the ensemble mean. We also compare the ratios for USHCN and GHCN (minus USHCN stations). We find the ratios grow monotonically in the GHCN data set, but not in the USHCN data set. (3) Do we detect either mean or variance trends in annual precipitation within the United States? We find that the total annual and monthly precipitation in the United States (USHCN) has increased over the past century. Evidence for a trend in variance is inconclusive.

The growth response of planted red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) to alternative thinning regimes

Red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait.) plantations have been established in Michigan with expectations of mixed final product goals: pulpwood, boltwood and possibly sawlogs. The effects of alternative treatments on tree and stand attributes were examined in: the Atlantic Mine trial, thinned in spring 2006 with three alternatives: (1) every fifth row removal plus crown thinning, (2) every third row removal plus crown thinning and (3) every third row removal plus thinning from below; the Crane Lake trial, thinned in fall 2004 with two alternatives: (1) every third row removal and (2) every third row removal plus thinning from above; the Middle Branch East trial, thinned in fall 2004 with two alternatives: (1) every third row removal plus one in three remaining trees and (2) every third row removal plus one in five remaining trees. All trials included control plots where no thinning was applied. The trials were established in the field as a randomized complete block experiments, in which individual trees were measured in 3-4 fixed-area plots located within each treatment unit. Growth responses of diameter at breast height, height, live crown length, stand basal area and stand volume were examined along with their increments. The Tukey multiple comparison test was used to detect significant differences between treatments in their effect on tree growth response. The results showed that diameter increment increased with increasing thinning intensity and was significantly larger in thinned plots compared to unthinned. Treatments did not substantially affect average tree height increment. Stand basal area increment was significantly larger in the control plot only the year after the harvest. Volume increment was significantly larger in controls, but did not differ considerably among remaining treatments. However, the ratio of volume increment to standing volume was significantly smaller in unthinned plots compared to thinned. Since thinning treatments in all trials hardly ever differed significantly in their effect on stand growth response, mainly due to the relatively short time of the evaluation, heavier thinnings should be favored due to higher volume increment rates and shorter time needed to reach desirable diameters. Nevertheless, economic evaluation based on obtained results will be conducted in the future in order to make final decisions about the most profitable treatment.