Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 201

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Less bluster ahead? Ecohydrological implications of global trends of terrestrial near‐surface wind speeds

McVicar, Tim R., Roderick, Michael L., Donohue, Randall J., Van Niel, Thomas G.·2012·Ecohydrology

Abstract

Why, in a globally warming climate, have observed rates of atmospheric evaporative demand (AED) declined at many sites over recent decades? The answer is that the evaporative process is primarily driven by radiative and aerodynamic components (the latter mainly influenced by wind speed and atmospheric humidity). So, although increases in air temperatures in isolation would result in increases of both pan evaporation (Epan) observations, and fully physically based model estimates of potential evapotranspiration (ETp), results show that changes in the other meteorological variables governing AED are currently exerting a greater opposing influence. Widespread declines in wind speed (denoted ‘stilling’) of ~−0.014 m s−1 a−1 have recently been reported. In studies assessing the relative contribution of the four primary meteorological variables on AED dynamics, wind speed trends are often indentified as being important. Stilling reduces AED, but its impact on actual evapotranspiration and streamflow is situation dependant. For wet catchments under steady state conditions, stilling‐induced declines in actual evapotranspiration will result in an approximate complementary increase in streamflow. In contrast, for dry catchments, actual evapotranspiration dynamics more closely follow precipitation dynamics so stilling has negligible impact on streamflow. In ‘equitant’ catchments (i.e. those that straddle the energy–water limitation divide), the likely impact of stilling on the catchment water balance depends on sub‐annual processes and requires that new approaches (either top–down or bottom–up) be developed to allow better predictions to be made. Copyright © 2012 Commonwealth of Australia

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/eco.1298

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 201

Metadata

Authors
McVicar, T. R., Roderick, M. L., Donohue, R. J., & Van Niel, T. G.
Venue
Ecohydrology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
381-388
ISSN
  • 1936-0584 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-0592
OpenAlex
W2157078686
Cited by
201
References
1
FWCI
7.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Less bluster ahead? Ecohydrological implications of global trends of terrestrial near‐surface wind speeds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/eco.1298
The paper
McVicar, T. R., Roderick, M. L., Donohue, R. J., & Van Niel, T. G. (2012). Less bluster ahead? Ecohydrological implications of global trends of terrestrial near‐surface wind speeds. Ecohydrology. https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.1298

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.