The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation
Open accessAbstract
The “Dust Bowl” drought of the 1930s was highly unusual for North America, deviating from the typical pattern forced by “La Nina” with the maximum drying in the central and northern Plains, warm temperature anomalies across almost the entire continent, and widespread dust storms. General circulation models (GCMs), forced by sea surface temperatures (SSTs) from the 1930s, produce a drought, but one that is centered in southwestern North America and without the warming centered in the middle of the continent. Here, we show that the inclusion of forcing from human land degradation during the period, in addition to the anomalous SSTs, is necessary to reproduce the anomalous features of the Dust Bowl drought. The degradation over the Great Plains is represented in the GCM as a reduction in vegetation cover and the addition of a soil dust aerosol source, both consequences of crop failure. As a result of land surface feedbacks, the simulation of the drought is much improved when the new dust aerosol and vegetation boundary conditions are included. Vegetation reductions explain the high temperature anomaly over the northern U.S., and the dust aerosols intensify the drought and move it northward of the purely ocean-forced drought pattern. When both factors are included in the model simulations, the precipitation and temperature anomalies are of similar magnitude and in a similar location compared with the observations. Human-induced land degradation is likely to have not only contributed to the dust storms of the 1930s but also amplified the drought, and these together turned a modest SST-forced drought into one of the worst environmental disasters the U.S. has experienced.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Drought under global warming: a review
Dai, A. (2011) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.81 · Cited by 3,523
Drylands extent and environmental issues. A global approach
Prăvălie, R. (2016) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.08.003 · Cited by 816
Seasonal Drought Prediction: Advances, Challenges, and Future Prospects
Hao, Z., Singh, V. P., & Xia, Y. (2018) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/2016rg000549 · Cited by 607
Desert dust hazards: A global review
Middleton, N. J. (2017) · Aeolian Research · doi:10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.12.001 · Cited by 594
Air Quality and Climate Connections
Fiore, A. M., Naik, V., & Leibensperger, E. M. (2015) · Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association · doi:10.1080/10962247.2015.1040526 · Cited by 537
Metadata
- Authors
- Cook, B. I., Miller, R. L., & Seager, R.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2009-03-31
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 4997-5001
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2148694603
- Cited by
- 378
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0810200106
- The paper
- Cook, B. I., Miller, R. L., & Seager, R. (2009). Amplification of the North American “Dust Bowl” drought through human-induced land degradation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0810200106
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.