Revisiting assessments of ecosystem drought recovery

The time taken for ecosystems to recover from drought (drought recovery time) is critically important for the ecosystem state. However, recent literature presents contradictory conclusions on this feature: one study concludes that drought recovery time in the tropics and high northern latitudes is s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEnvironmental research letters Vol. 14; no. 11; pp. 114028 - 114037
Main Authors Liu, Laibao, Gudmundsson, Lukas, Hauser, Mathias, Qin, Dahe, Li, Shuangcheng, Seneviratne, Sonia I
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Bristol IOP Publishing 01.11.2019
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1748-9326
1748-9326
DOI10.1088/1748-9326/ab4c61

Cover

More Information
Summary:The time taken for ecosystems to recover from drought (drought recovery time) is critically important for the ecosystem state. However, recent literature presents contradictory conclusions on this feature: one study concludes that drought recovery time in the tropics and high northern latitudes is shortest (<4 months) but another concludes that it is longest (>12 months) in these regions. Here we explore the reasons for these contradictory results and revisit assessments of drought recovery time. We find that the study period, drought identification method and recovery level definition are main factors contributing to the contradictory conclusions. Further, we emphasize that including droughts that did not decrease ecosystem production or using a period of abnormal water availability to define ecosystem recovery level can strongly bias drought recovery time estimates. Based on our refined methods, we find the drought recovery time is also longest in some tropical regions but not in high northern latitudes during 1901-2010. Our study helps to resolve the recent controversy and provides insight for future drought recovery assessments.
Bibliography:ERL-107313.R2
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1748-9326
1748-9326
DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ab4c61