Palaeoclimate and fossil woods—is the use of mean sensitivity sensible?
The growth rings of fossil wood provide valuable data on tree ecology. As many of the parameters controlling width are climatic, it is tempting to use these rings as an indicator of climate. This is what has been done, with great success, by dendrochronological studies of archaeological wood. For...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institute of Paleobiology PAS
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Acta Palaeontologica Polonica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app68/app011082023.pdf |
| Summary: | The growth rings of fossil wood provide valuable data on tree ecology. As many of the parameters controlling width are
climatic, it is tempting to use these rings as an indicator of climate. This is what has been done, with great success, by
dendrochronological studies of archaeological wood. For wood dating from before the Pleistocene, however, the task
is more uncertain. Since around 1980, researchers have relied mainly on a statistical parameter, the mean sensitivity, an
average of the difference in width between two consecutive rings. However, there has never been a critical examination
of utility and significance of this parameter for fossil wood. I compiled 63 studies that used mean sensitivity for
palaeoclimatological inferences. An analysis of this compilation is presented here. Despite its ups and downs since the
1980’s, mean sensitivity is increasingly used by palaeobotanists. However, it has been used in very different ways. The
values obtained for the same fossil can vary greatly from one researcher to another, but also according to the radii of
the woody axis considered. Within fossil wood assemblages, average sensitivity varies widely, but rarely consistently.
Overall, mean sensitivity values are continuously, normally and unimodally distributed, and therefore are unsuitable for
characterising discrete climate classes. Finally, it seems that the most recent studies are also the least cautious when it
comes to interpreting the values obtained. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0567-7920 1732-2421 |