- Email: [email protected]
‘Erratum to “Review of probabilistic pollen-climate transfer methods” [Quat. Sci. Rev. 31 (2012) 17–29]’
Quaternary Science Reviews 52 (2012) 75e76
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Quaternary Science Reviews journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quascirev
‘Erratum to “Review of probabilistic pollen-climate transfer methods” [Quat. Sci. Rev. 31 (2012) 17e29]’ Christian Ohlwein a, *, Eugene R. Wahl b a
Meteorological Institute, University of Bonn, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center (NOAA-NCDC), Paleoclimatology Branch/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology, Boulder, CO, USA b
a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 14 July 2012 Accepted 25 July 2012 Available online 20 August 2012
The authors apologise that improperly-scaled versions of Figs. 3 and 5 were inadvertently published in the above paper. The corrected versions are provided below, along with correspondingly adjusted captions. This error affects only the figures themselves, the results and conclusions described in the original text are unaffected.
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.11.002. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Ohlwein). 0277-3791/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.07.022
76
C. Ohlwein, E.R. Wahl / Quaternary Science Reviews 52 (2012) 75e76
Fig. 3. Reconstruction of July surface temperature over the Holocene (based on pollen preserved in wet meadow sediments) in southern California, USA. ROC-optimized MAT reconstruction from Wahl (2002) is shown at left; GLM-inversion reconstruction reported in this article [based on pollen ratios of (all conifers)/(all conifers þ oak þ important shrubs)] is shown at right (cf. Fig. 2). The reconstructions are from the two sedimentary fossil sites noted in left panel of Fig. 2 (solid-line/blue, dashed-line/brown), with temporal data coverages as shown. Vertical line indicates modern climatology (0 anomaly) at the two sites. Estimated 67% (“one sigma”) probability ranges of reconstruction are indicated. Reconstructions for modern data sites in very near proximity to the fossil data sites are shown by open diamonds. Timing of fossil pollen samples is based on calibrated 14C dating reported in Wahl (2002); “BP” indicates years before CE 1950.
Fig. 5. Reconstruction of annual precipitation over the Holocene (based on pollen preserved in wet meadow sediments) in southern California, USA. ROC-optimized MAT reconstruction from Wahl (2002) is shown at left; GLM-inversion reconstruction reported in this article [based on pollen ratios of (all conifers)/(all conifers þ oak þ important shrubs)] is shown at right (cf. Fig. 4). The reconstructions are from the two sedimentary fossil sites noted in left panel of Fig. 4 (solid-line/blue, dashed-line/brown), with temporal data coverages as shown. Vertical line indicates modern climatology (0 cm anomaly) at the two sites. Estimated 67% (“one sigma”) probability ranges of reconstruction are indicated. Reconstructions for modern data sites in very near proximity to the fossil data sites are shown by open diamonds. Timing of fossil pollen samples is based on calibrated 14C dating reported in Wahl (2002); “BP” indicates years before CE 1950.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Quaternary Science Reviews journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quascirev
‘Erratum to “Review of probabilistic pollen-climate transfer methods” [Quat. Sci. Rev. 31 (2012) 17e29]’ Christian Ohlwein a, *, Eugene R. Wahl b a
Meteorological Institute, University of Bonn, Auf dem Hügel 20, 53121 Bonn, Germany National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center (NOAA-NCDC), Paleoclimatology Branch/World Data Center for Paleoclimatology, Boulder, CO, USA b
a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 14 July 2012 Accepted 25 July 2012 Available online 20 August 2012
The authors apologise that improperly-scaled versions of Figs. 3 and 5 were inadvertently published in the above paper. The corrected versions are provided below, along with correspondingly adjusted captions. This error affects only the figures themselves, the results and conclusions described in the original text are unaffected.
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.11.002. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Ohlwein). 0277-3791/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.07.022
76
C. Ohlwein, E.R. Wahl / Quaternary Science Reviews 52 (2012) 75e76
Fig. 3. Reconstruction of July surface temperature over the Holocene (based on pollen preserved in wet meadow sediments) in southern California, USA. ROC-optimized MAT reconstruction from Wahl (2002) is shown at left; GLM-inversion reconstruction reported in this article [based on pollen ratios of (all conifers)/(all conifers þ oak þ important shrubs)] is shown at right (cf. Fig. 2). The reconstructions are from the two sedimentary fossil sites noted in left panel of Fig. 2 (solid-line/blue, dashed-line/brown), with temporal data coverages as shown. Vertical line indicates modern climatology (0 anomaly) at the two sites. Estimated 67% (“one sigma”) probability ranges of reconstruction are indicated. Reconstructions for modern data sites in very near proximity to the fossil data sites are shown by open diamonds. Timing of fossil pollen samples is based on calibrated 14C dating reported in Wahl (2002); “BP” indicates years before CE 1950.
Fig. 5. Reconstruction of annual precipitation over the Holocene (based on pollen preserved in wet meadow sediments) in southern California, USA. ROC-optimized MAT reconstruction from Wahl (2002) is shown at left; GLM-inversion reconstruction reported in this article [based on pollen ratios of (all conifers)/(all conifers þ oak þ important shrubs)] is shown at right (cf. Fig. 4). The reconstructions are from the two sedimentary fossil sites noted in left panel of Fig. 4 (solid-line/blue, dashed-line/brown), with temporal data coverages as shown. Vertical line indicates modern climatology (0 cm anomaly) at the two sites. Estimated 67% (“one sigma”) probability ranges of reconstruction are indicated. Reconstructions for modern data sites in very near proximity to the fossil data sites are shown by open diamonds. Timing of fossil pollen samples is based on calibrated 14C dating reported in Wahl (2002); “BP” indicates years before CE 1950.