The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Evaporative Demand Drought Index. Part II: CONUS-Wide Assessment against Common Drought Indicators
Abstract
Precipitation, soil moisture, and air temperature are the most commonly used climate variables to monitor drought; however, other climatic factors such as solar radiation, wind speed, and humidity can be important drivers in the depletion of soil moisture and evolution and persistence of drought. This work assesses the Evaporative Demand Drought Index (EDDI) at multiple time scales for several hydroclimates as the second part of a two-part study. EDDI and individual evaporative demand components were examined as they relate to the dynamic evolution of flash drought over the central United States, characterization of hydrologic drought over the western United States, and comparison to commonly used drought metrics of the U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM), Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI), Standardized Soil Moisture Index (SSI), and the evaporative stress index (ESI). Two main advantages of EDDI over other drought indices are that it is independent of precipitation (similar to ESI) and it can be decomposed to identify the role individual evaporative drivers have on drought onset and persistence. At short time scales, spatial distributions and time series results illustrate that EDDI often indicates drought onset well in advance of the USDM, SPI, and SSI. Results illustrate the benefits of physically based evaporative demand estimates and demonstrate EDDI’s utility and effectiveness in an easy-to-implement agricultural early warning and long-term hydrologic drought–monitoring tool with potential applications in seasonal forecasting and fire-weather monitoring.
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
Cites
Little change in global drought over the past 60 years
Sheffield, J., Wood, E. F., & Roderick, M. L. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11575 · Cited by 1,978
Cited by
Otkin, J. A., Svoboda, M., Hunt, E. D., Ford, T. W., Anderson, M. C., Hain, C., & Basara, J. B. (2018) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/bams-d-17-0149.1 · Cited by 689
Self-citationHuntington, J. L., Hegewisch, K. C., Daudert, B., Morton, C. G., Abatzoglou, J. T., McEvoy, D. J., & Erickson, T. (2017) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/bams-d-15-00324.1 · Cited by 363
Self-citationDrought evolution, severity and trends in mainland China over 1961–2013
Yao, N., Li, Y., Lei, T., & Peng, L. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.327 · Cited by 341
Meteorological conditions associated with the onset of flash drought in the Eastern United States
Ford, T. W., & Labosier, C. F. (2017) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.08.031 · Cited by 322
Pan-European seasonal trends and recent changes of drought frequency and severity
Spinoni, J., Naumann, G., & Vogt, J. V. (2017) · Global and Planetary Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.11.013 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- McEvoy, D. J., Huntington, J. L., Hobbins, M. T., Wood, A., Morton, C., Anderson, M., & Hain, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Hydrometeorology
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2016-06-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1763-1779
- ISSN
- 1525-7541 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-755X
- OpenAlex
- W2343025137
- Cited by
- 177
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.45
- 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: The Evaporative Demand Drought Index. Part II: CONUS-Wide Assessment against Common Drought Indicators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jhm-d-15-0122.1
- The paper
- McEvoy, D. J., Huntington, J. L., Hobbins, M. T., Wood, A., Morton, C., Anderson, M., & Hain, C. (2016). The Evaporative Demand Drought Index. Part II: CONUS-Wide Assessment against Common Drought Indicators. Journal of Hydrometeorology. https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm-d-15-0122.1
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.