Comparison of simulated and proxy-based climate reconstructions for mid-Holocene Europe reveals high uncertainty

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0
Full text 2,361 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Gridded and time-continuous paleoclimate model outputs are increasingly used to inform high-resolution models in biogeography and other disciplines. However, few studies quantitatively evaluate such outputs for bias, uncertainty, and consistency with other climate reconstructions of similar scale and scope of interest. Here we evaluate downscaled and bias-corrected output from two paleoclimate models against proxy-based reconstructions from European sites in the mid-Holocene (9000–5000 years before present) by comparing absolute values of annual precipitation sum, and mean January and July air temperature. We paired proxy-based climate values with simulated ones from the same time and place. For pairs within each site we checked for correlation. Then we pooled pair-wise differences of all sites together to check for systematic over- or underestimation. Correlation analysis revealed that climate models reproduce a winter warming trend in the northern half of Europe. Pair-wise differences indicate that all gridded datasets show both over- and underestimation bias compared to proxies in different climate variables, but without one dataset performing consistently better. Distinguishing performance between these datasets is complicated by high uncertainties in proxy-based reconstructions. Our results indicate that, at least on the whole-European scale, time-continuous model outputs resolve relevant mid-Holocene climatic changes only to a very limited degree. In order to account for current uncertainties in reconstructing paleoclimate we advise users not to rely on only one gridded dataset and to evaluate reconstructions from models against proxy data from the area of interest. Author accepted manuscript, unformatted proof. DOI https://doi.org/10.32942/X2TH20 Subjects Climate, Paleobiology

Keywords

chironomid, general circulation model, model evaluation, Model validation, palaeoclimate, paleoclimate model, pollen Dates Published: 2025-10-27 13:32 Last Updated: 2025-10-27 13:32 License CC-By Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Additional Metadata Data and Code Availability Statement: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10608482 Language: English

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-24T02:00:01.246996+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0