Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 195

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

How well do meteorological indicators represent agricultural and forest drought across Europe?

Open access
Bachmair, S, Tanguy, M, Hannaford, J, Stahl, K·2018·Environmental Research Letters

Abstract

Drought monitoring and early warning (M&EW) systems are an important component of agriculture/silviculture drought risk assessment. Many operational information systems rely mostly on meteorological indicators, and a few incorporate vegetation state information. However, the relationships between meteorological drought indicators and agricultural/silvicultural drought impacts vary across Europe. The details of this variability have not been elucidated sufficiently on a continental scale in Europe to inform drought risk management at administrative scales. The objective of this study is to fill this gap and evaluate how useful the variety of meteorological indicators are to assess agricultural/silvicultural drought across Europe. The first part of the analysis systematically linked meteorological drought indicators to remote sensing based vegetation indices (VIs) for Europe at NUTs3 administrative regions scale using correlation analysis for crops and forests. In a second step, a stepwise multiple linear regression model was deployed to identify variables explaining the spatial differences observed. Finally, corn crop yield in Germany was chosen as a case study to verify VIs' representativeness of agricultural drought impacts. Results show that short accumulation periods of SPI and SPEI are best linked to crop vegetation stress in most cases, which further validates the use of SPI3 in existing operational drought monitors. However, large regional differences in correlations are also revealed. Climate (temperature and precipitation) explained the largest proportion of variance, suggesting that meteorological indices are less informative of agricultural/silvicultural drought in colder/wetter parts of Europe. These findings provide important context for interpreting meteorological indices on widely used national to continental M&EW systems, leading to a better understanding of where/when such M&EW tools can be indicative of likely agricultural stress and impacts.

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 · 10.1088/1748-9326/aaafda

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 195

Metadata

Authors
Bachmair, S., Tanguy, M., Hannaford, J., & Stahl, K.
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2018-03-01
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
034042
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2793581487
Cited by
195
References
1
FWCI
10.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: How well do meteorological indicators represent agricultural and forest drought across Europe? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1748-9326/aaafda
The paper
Bachmair, S., Tanguy, M., Hannaford, J., & Stahl, K. (2018). How well do meteorological indicators represent agricultural and forest drought across Europe? Environmental Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaafda

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.