Ecological Archives C006-055-A3

Marcos Texeira, Mariano Yarzabal, Gervasio Pineiro, Santiago Baeza, and Jose Maria Paruelo . 2015. Land cover and precipitation controls over long-term trends in carbon gains in the grassland biome of South America. Ecosphere 6:196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/es15-00085.1

Appendix C. Trends in integrated precipitation use efficiency and precipitation marginal response.

In this appendix we show the results of the trend analyses for 3 and 5 year integrated precipitation use efficiency. We also show the patterns of precipitation marginal response for the subset of 12 ground meteorological stations with precipitation records from 1948 to 2011 and fPAR estimates from 1981 to 2011.

Table C1. Results of the regressions of 3 year integrated precipitation use efficiency against time for twelve sites with precipitation and fPAR records for the period 1981 to 2011. For each site the most parsimonious models according to Akaike information criterion is shown. “b1” represents the slope of the simple linear model and “p-val” the p value associated. Latitude (Lat) and longitude (Long) of sites are shown.

Site

b1

p

AIC

Lat

Long

S1) Baltasar Brum

-0.0028

0.868

15.998

30º43’30’’S

57º19’30’’W

S2) Queguay chico

-0.0060

0.596

7.985

32º4’30’’S

56º52’30’’W

S3) Paysandú

0.0159

0.500

12.993

32º22’30’’S

58º4’30’’W

S4) Treinta y Tres

0.0016

0.901

10.647

33º10’30’’S

54º22’30’’W

S5) Mercedes

-0.0016

0.907

11.798

33º16’30’’S

58º4’30’’W

S6) Trinidad

-0.0012

0.882

0.821

33º34’30’’S

56º52’30’’W

S7) Nueva Palmira

-0.0237

0.112

11.698

33º52’30’’S

58º22’30’’W

S8) Cerro Colorado

0.0079

0.636

15.693

33º52’30’’S

55º34’30’’W

S9) Estanzuela

0.0386

0.060

17.455

34º13’30’’S

57º25’30’’W

S10) Florida

0.0260

0.104

13.113

34º19’30’’S

56º16’30’’W

S11) Rocha

0.0342

0.072

16.150

34º31’30’’S

54º19’30’’W

S12) Libertad

0.0006

0.972

16.431

34º40’30’’S

56º34’30’’W

 

Table C2. Results of the regressions of 5 year integrated precipitation use efficiency against time for twelve sites with precipitation and fPAR records for the period 1981 to 2011. For each site the most parsimonious models according to Akaike information criterion is shown. “b1” represents the slope of the simple linear model and “p-val” the p value associated. Latitude (Lat) and longitude (Long) of sites are shown.

Site

b1

p

AIC

Lat

Long

S1) Baltasar Brum

-0.0099

0.519

5.808

30º43’30’’S

57º19’30’’W

S2) Queguay chico

-0.0120

0.479

7.020

32º4’30’’S

56º52’30’’W

S3) Paysandú

0.0156

0.424

4.430

32º22’30’’S

58º4’30’’W

S4) Treinta y Tres

-0.0064

0.657

5.388

33º10’30’’S

54º22’30’’W

S5) Mercedes

-0.0035

0.831

7.096

33º16’30’’S

58º4’30’’W

S6) Trinidad

-0.0080

0.250

-4.266

33º34’30’’S

56º52’30’’W

S7) Nueva Palmira

-0.0267

0.066

2.564

33º52’30’’S

58º22’30’’W

S8) Cerro Colorado

-0.0031

0.891

11.948

33º52’30’’S

55º34’30’’W

S9) Estanzuela

0.0319

0.238

11.846

34º13’30’’S

57º25’30’’W

S10) Florida

0.0175

0.434

10.190

34º19’30’’S

56º16’30’’W

S11) Rocha

0.0312

0.130

7.791

34º31’30’’S

54º19’30’’W

S12) Libertad

-0.0039

0.809

6.800

34º40’30’’S

56º34’30’’W

 

FigC1

Fig. C1. Trends in 3 year integrated precipitation use efficency ((I-fPAR/accumulated precipitation) × 1000) for the period 1980–2011. Red broken lines represent best fit models (selected by means of AIC). Vertical broken lines represent the period mean whereas horizontal broken lines represent the mean PUE. All models were non significant at α=0.05.


 

FigC2

Fig. C2. Trends in 5 year integrated precipitation use efficency ((I-fPAR/accumulated precipitation) × 1000) for the period 1980-2011. Red broken lines represent best fit models (selected by means of AIC). Vertical broken lines represent the period mean whereas horizontal broken lines represent the mean PUE. All models were nonsignificant at α=0.05.


 

FigC3

Fig. C3. Annually integrated fPAR × 1000 vs. annual precipitation for the period 1980–2011. The slopes associated to the red lines represent the precipitation marginal response (PMR). Slopes significant at an α = 0.01 are marked with (**), whereas those significant at an α = 0.05 are marked with (*).


[Back to C006-055]