From	Edward R. Cook	Date	Fri, 10 Oct 2003 07:28:43 -0400
To	Jan Esper
CC	Keith Briffa
Subject	Re: data again
Jan, Did you finally get the raw ring-width data from Malcolm? Does Keith know about this? He asked Malcolm for the data as well, but did not receive a reply as far as I know. Ed >Dear Malcom > >thank you for the series of mails and attachements! I just came back >into office (and I am already close to leave for another fieldtrip >next week), and had no time yet to look in all the files you sent >me. As soon as I get an overview of what you sent, I will keep you >informed. > >About the Central Asian data, I am just putting another draft >together also describing some of the new data Kerstin Treydte (who >is now in our team) sampled. Kerstin herself started working on a >bigger analysis including her new ring width and stable isotope data >(she processed 1000-yr. records of carbon and oxygen stable >isotopes). This will be the major paper of her PhD, and once this >paper is accepted, we are intending to release data to the ITRDB. >Will keep you posted. > >Thank you again and take care >Jan > > > > > >>Dear Jan - did you get the e-mail I sent on September 22? It may have caused >>problems, because there were 10 attachemnts. In fact, I include >>some that were >>missed with this message. In addition, you should be able to get >>the *.rwl files >>for the 27 western chronologies usedin Mann, Bradley, Hughes 1998 at the >>following web location: >>http://www.ltrr.arizona.edu/~fenbiao/For_Jan_27rwl/ >>Please let me know if you experience any problems with this. >>I also omitted some of the attachments from the earlier message. THey should >>be attached to this one. Good luck! Malcolm >> >>------- Forwarded message follows ------- >>From: Malcolm Hughes >>To: esper@wsl.ch >>Subject: data >>Copies to: fenbiao@ltrr.arizona.edu >>Date sent: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:30:24 -0700 >> >>Dear Jan - I have recently started to clear up all outstanding >>business related to the next analysis by Mike Mann, Ray Bradley, et >>al., and found, to my horror, that I had not replied to your e-mail of >>last April 8 (copy at end of this message). In response to our >>request for access to the data on which your 2000 and 2002 papers were >>based, you indicated that you would need to check with a colleague at >>WSL. Have you been able to do this, and if so, what is the result? >>Obviously we are keen to include all important data already in the >>peer reviewed literature, such as yours, in our analyses. You also >>requested "the raw measurements of (y)our sequoia data and the western >>conifer data used in the Mann et al 1998, 1999 papers". 1) data used >>in Mann et al 1998 - these are all listed in the Nature on-line >>supplementary materials (attached), and were all from the ITRDB, so >>they may be downloaded from there. The same list is also attached. We >>think we can find theraw data (the *.rwl files) and send them to you >>if you would like - please let me know. 2) The western conifer data >>used in MBH 99 are a subset of these, as indicated in another set of >>attached MS-Excel files. These are a little bit repetitive, but >>contain the following particularly useful information for these 27 >>longer chronologies: vchron11000 contains, inter alia, the ITRDB ID, >>species code, first year, last year, collector's name >> >>vchron41000 contains the ITRDB ID, then the first and last >>years with 5, 10, etc samples >> >>vchron81000 contains the ID, etc and then in the following >>cols: V mn sensitivity W chronology autocorrelation, AE >>number of series, AG mean correlation of series with >>chronology AH mean series autocorrelation, AI series mean >>length, series median segment length. >>Please remember that this set ranges from lower forest >>border to upper forest border, so that various mixtures from >>all precip to precip plus temp locally apply. >> >>As I recently told Keith Briffa, you should be aware that it >>would be completely unjustified to assume that the first >>measured ring was anywhere near the pith in many of these >>sites, especially as you go back in time, where the >>chronologies are based on remnants that have weathered on >>the inside and the outside. For this, and related, reasons, it >>would also be completely unjustified to assume any >>constant, or small, distance in years of the first measured >>rings from pith. That is, I can see no way of making a >>remotely reliable estimate of cambial age in the vast >>majority of these samples. I am sitting on the >>bones of a manuscript in which I had someone spend >>several months checking many hundreds of bristlecone and >>similar cross-sections and cores in our store. They found >>only a few dozen - less than 10%, where either pith was >>present, or the innermost ring could reasonably be described >>as 'near pith'. If you have seen these stripbark montane 5- >>needle pines, and ever tried to core them, you will >>understand why. A further problem arises from the >>observation that radial increment may increase rather >>dramatically in the period after most of the bark dies back, >>but of course we don't know when that was. Andy Bunn at >>Montana State University has, I think, a manuscript in >>preparation of review on this. I have a manuscript in >>preparation where we restandardized many of these series >>in the following way - >>identify the long, flat part of the sample ringwidth curve >>(i.e. remove the 'grand period of growth', if present) and >>then fit a straight line of no or negative slope. >>3) I attach *rwl and chronology files from three sequoia sites (those >>referred to by Hughes and Brown, 1992 Drought frequency in central >>California since 101 B.C. recorded in giant sequoia tree rings. >>Climate Dynamics, 6, 161-167 ) Please note the reasons given for the >>rather strong standardization used (explained in text) and for the >>splitting of the Mountain Home samples at AD 1297 (this explains my >>sending you 4 of each kind of file, even though there were only three >>sites in this case). We do not have pith dates for these samples, but >>it is important to note the following caution - most of the radials >>and cross- sections were from stumps, where we found that very slow >>growth near the pith was often an indicator of great age. This of >>course tells us that trees destined to be very old were often >>suppressed for many years in their early life (but not all of them). >>The tricky part comes from the observation that, although we could see >>slow growth on the top of the stump near the pith, the wood was often >>in too poor a state of presevation there to date and measure. >>Therefore, do not assume that the first ring measured was anywhere >>near pith - it could easily be off by centuries. There is a *.crn and >>*.rwl for each of the four chronologies. Gfo is Giant Forest, CSX is >>Camp Six, and MH is Mountain Home, split into MH1 and MH 2 as >>indicated above. I'd be interested to know how you get on with this. >>Cheers, Malcolm . . >> ----- Forwarded message from Jan Esper ----- >>> Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:15:35 +0200 >>> From: Jan Esper >>> Reply-To: Jan Esper >>> Subject: Re: from Malcolm Hughes >>> To: fenbiao@ltrr.arizona.edu >>> >>> Dear Fenbiao and Malcom >>> >>> Since I got funding from the Swiss Science Foundation to do some >>> similar research, I really like the idea to share our tree ring >>> data. However, I have to discuss this again with Kerstin Treydte who >>> now started to work at the WSL and is running a re-analysis >>> (including new samplings) for western central Asia. >>> >>> In principle, would it be possible to receive the raw measurements >>> of your Sequoia data and the western conifer data used in the Mann >>> et al. 1998, 1999 papers? >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Take care >>> Jan >>> >>> CC >>> K Treydte >>> D Frank >>> >>> >Dear Jan, >>> >You may be familiar with our earlier attempts at very large scale >>> multi-proxy >>> >reconstruction of certain aspects of climate, (for example, Mann, >>> >Bradley >>> and >>> >Hughes, 1998, Nature, 392, 779-787). This work was possible because >>> >many colleagues made their data available. We are now assembling an >>> >updated and extended dataset for new work along similar lines. We >>> >hope to take advantage of data that were not available five years >>> >ago, and to use improved methods in our analyses. >>> > >>> >Would you be willing to permit us to use the >>> >(chronologies/reconstruction?) reported in your paper (s) listed >> > >below? >>> > >>> >Esper J. (2000). Long-term tree-ring variations in Juniperus at the >>> >upper timber-line in karakorum (Pakistan). Holocene 10 (2), >>> >253-260. >>> > >>> >Esper J., Schweingruber F.H., Winiger M. (2002). 1300 years of >>> >climatic history for western central Asia inferred from tree-rings. >>> >Holocene 12 (3), >>> 267-277. >>> > >>> >We are particularly interested in (1) the ring-width series of >>> >Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb and Juniperus turkestanica Kom. From 6 >>> >different sites in >>> the >>> >Hunza-karakorrum; >>> >(2) 20 individual sites ranging from the lower to upper local >>> >timber-lines >>> in >>> >the Northwest karakorum of Pakistan and the Southern Tien Shan of >>> Kirghizia. >>> > >>> >If at all possible, we would prefer to receive tree-ring data as >>> >both raw >>> data >>> >(individual unmodified measurement series for all samples used) and >>> >your >>> final >>> >chronologies used in the publication. >>> > >>> >If you are willing to share your data for the purposes of our >>> >analyses, but >>> do >>> >not >>> >wish them to be passed on to anyone else by us, please tell us, and >>> >we will mark the data accordingly in our database. If data have >>> >been marked as not being publicly available, we will pass on any >>> >requests for them to you. >>> > >>> >Please reply to Dr. Fenbiao Ni’s email address (this one). Many >>> >thanks. >>> > >>> >Sincerely, >>> >Malcolm K. Hughes >>> >(team: Michael E. Mann, Ray Bradley, Malcolm Hughes, Scott >>> >Rutherford, >>> Fenbiao >>> >Ni) >>> > >>> >Malcolm Hughes >>> >Professor of Dendrochronology >>> >Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research >>> >University of Arizona >>> >Tucson, AZ 85721 >>> >520-621-6470 >>> >fax 520-621-8229 >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dr. Jan Esper >>> Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL >>> Zuercherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf >>> Switzerland >>> Phone: +41-1-739 2510 >>> Fax: +41-1-739 2215 >>> Email: esper@wsl.ch >>> >>> ----- End forwarded message ----- >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >>----- End forwarded message ----- >> >> >> >> >> >>Attachments: >> D:\Projects\Bradley and Mann\Newest June 9 1997\westernforjan.xls >> D:\Projects\Bradley and Mann\Nature figures\naturesupmat.doc >> D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for esper\csx.rwl D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for >> esper\csxars.crn D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for esper\gfo.rwl >> D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for esper\gfoars.crn D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for >> esper\mhf1.rwl D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for esper\mhf2.rwl >> D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for esper\MHF2ARS.CRN D:\Projects\SEQUOIA\for >> esper\MHF1ARS.CRN >>------- End of forwarded message -------Malcolm >>Hughes >>Professor of Dendrochronology >>Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research >>University of Arizona >>Tucson, AZ 85721 >>520-621-6470 >>fax 520-621-8229 > > >-- >Dr. Jan Esper >Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL >Zuercherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf >Switzerland >Phone: +41-1-739 2510 >Fax: +41-1-739 2215 >Email: esper@wsl.ch -- ================================== Dr. Edward R. Cook Doherty Senior Scholar and Director, Tree-Ring Laboratory Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Palisades, New York 10964 USA Email: drdendro@ldeo.columbia.edu Phone: 845-365-8618 Fax: 845-365-8152 ==================================