International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 62, Issue 4, pp 609–620 | Cite as

A comparison of bioclimatic potential in two global regions during the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century

  • Maria G. Lebedeva
  • Anthony R. Lupo
  • Chasity B. Henson
  • Alexandr B. Solovyov
  • Yury G. Chendev
  • Patrick S. Market
Original Paper


Changes in the general circulation of the atmosphere have been taking place during the latter part of the twentieth century and the early part of the twenty-first century. In the Belgorod region of Southwest Russia, this has been manifested in the more frequent occurrence of stationary anticyclones, including those referred to as blocking anticyclones, especially during the summer season. Also, there has been a general increase in regional temperatures during the growing season over the period mentioned above, and combined with the more frequent occurrence of anticyclones has led to less humid conditions. In the Missouri region of the Central USA, variability in the circulation on differing time scales within the Eastern Pacific plays a strong role in the conditions that impact the growing season. As a result of changes in climate and climate variability, the benefit to agriculture during this period produces mixed results for both regions. This work will evaluate the growing season conditions using indexes that combine growing season temperature and precipitation such as the hydrothermal coefficient (HTC) and the bioclimatic potential (BCP). Also, the interannual variability of these indexes in both regions was examined. In the Belgorod region, the increase in temperature combined with little change in precipitation produced mixed results in interpreting these indexes. This was accompanied by more variable conditions as revealed by these indexes in the early twenty-first century. In the Missouri region, there was little trend in either index over the time period and the tendency was toward less climatic variability in the HTC and BCP.


Climate change Climate variability Agriculture Atmospheric blocking Bioclimatic potential Hydrothermal coefficient 



The authors acknowledge the support of the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant No 14-17-00171; “Regional responses of environmental components on climate change varying periodicity: South forest-steppe of the Central Russian Upland”, for analysis of the data pertaining to the Belgorod region. We also thank the anonymous reviewers and editors for their suggestions, which improved this manuscript.

Funding information

This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant No 14-17-00171 and was funded partially under the Missouri EPSCoR project supported by the National Science Foundation under Award Number IIA-1355406 for the central USA region.


  1. Agayan GM, Mokhov II (1989) Quasistationary autumn regimes of the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere in FGGE. Izv Atmos Oc Phys 25:1150–1156Google Scholar
  2. Agroclimatic Resources of the Belgorod region, Leningrad (1972) Hydrometeorological service of the Central Chernozem regions, p. 92Google Scholar
  3. Ahrens CD (2012) Meteorology today: an introduction to weather, climate, and the environment, Brooks-Cole, 10th editionGoogle Scholar
  4. Ashabokov BM, Calow HM, Fedchenko LM, Stasenko DV (2012) Some problems and methods of agriculture adaptation to climate change. In the book: Regional effects of global climate change (causes, effects, predictions): proceedings of Intern. Scientific. conf. (Voronezh, 26–27 June 2012). Voronezh, Publishing house “Scientific book.” pp. 360–365Google Scholar
  5. Birk K, Lupo AR, Guinan PE, Barbieri CE (2010) The interannual variability of Midwestern temperatures and precipitation as related to the ENSO and PDO. Atmósfera 23:95–128Google Scholar
  6. Changnon SA, Winstanley D (1999). Long-term variations in seasonal weather conditions and their impacts on crop production and water resources in Illinois. Research Report No. 127. Department of Natural Resources. Illinois Water Survey. pp. 37Google Scholar
  7. Chen D, Chen HW (2013) Using the Koeppen classification to quantify climate variation and change. An example for 1901–2010. Environmental Development 6:69–79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dawson NW, Guinan PE, Lupo AR (2010) A long-term study of tropical systems impacting Missouri. Transactions of the Missouri Academy of Science 44:29–41Google Scholar
  9. Edgerton MD (2009) Increasing crop productivity to meet global needs for feed, food, and fuel. Plant Physiol 149(1):7–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Enfield DB, Mestas-Nuñez AM (1999) Interannual-to-multidecadal climate variability and its relationship to global sea surface temperatures. In: Markgraf V (ed) Present and Past Inter-Hemispheric Climate Linkages in the Americas and their Societal Effects. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Gershunov A, Barnett TP (1998) Interdecadal modulation of ENSO teleconnections. Bull Amer Meteor Soc 79(12):2715–2725.<2715:IMOET>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gordeev AV, Kleschenko AD, Chernyakov BA, Sirotenko OD (2006) Bioclimatic potential of Russia: theory and practice. Moscow: Partnership of scientific editions KMK.- p. 512Google Scholar
  13. Gustokashina NN, Maksutova EV (2006) The tendencies of the climatic fridiy change in steppe and forest-steppe of the Baikal region. Geog Nat Res 4:76–81 [In Russian]Google Scholar
  14. Henson CB, Lupo AR, Market PS, Guinan PE (2017) The impact of ENSO and PDO-related climate variability on regional Missouri crop yields. Int J Biometeorol 61(5):857–867. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hu Q, Buyanovsky G (2003) Climate effects on corn yield in Missouri. J Appl Meteorol 42(11):1626–1635.<1626:CEOCYI>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hu Q, Woodruff CM, Mudrick SE (1998) Interdecadal variations of annual precipitation in the Central United States. Bull Amer Meteorol Soc 79(2):221–230.<0221:IVOAPI>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate change 2013: The Physical Scientific Basis, in Contributions of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Scholar
  18. Karl TR, Knight RW (1998) Secular trends of precipitation amount, frequency, and intensity in the United States. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 79(2):231–241.<0231:STOPAF>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Khromov SP, Petrosyants MA (2006) Meteorologia i Klimatologia. Publication of Moscow State University, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  20. Klyashtorin LB, Lyubushin AA (2007) Cyclic climate changes and fish productivity. Science Export, Moscow, Russia pp. 230Google Scholar
  21. Kolomeychenko BV (2007) Crop: A textbook for students. M: Agrobiznescentr.-552 pGoogle Scholar
  22. Kononova NK (2009) Classification of the Northern Hemisphere circulation mechanisms by B. L. Dzerdzeevsky. edited by A. B. Shmakin, Russian Acad. Sciences. Institute of Geography. M.: Voentechinizdat 372 pGoogle Scholar
  23. Lebedeva MG, Krymskaya OV, Lupo AR, Chendev YG, Petin AN, Solovyov AB (2016) Trends in summer season climate for Eastern Europe and southern Russia in the early 21st century. Adv Meteor, 2016, Article ID 5035086, pp. 10Google Scholar
  24. Lebedeva MG, Solovyov AB, Tolstopyatova OS (2015) Agroclimatic zoning of the Belgorod region in the context of climate change. Scientific sheets of BelSU. No. 9 (206), 31: 160–167Google Scholar
  25. Lebedeva MG, Krymskaya OV (2008) A manifestation of modern climate changes in the Belgorod region. Scientific sheets of BelSU. No. 3 (43):6: 188–196Google Scholar
  26. Lobell DB, Burke MB (2010) On the use of statistical models to predict crop yield responses to climate change. Agric For Meteorol 150(11):1443–1452. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Losev AP, Zhurina LL (2001) Agrometeorology. Kolos, Moscow 296 pGoogle Scholar
  28. Lupo AR, Kelsey EP, Weitlich DK, Davis NA, Market PS (2008) Using the monthly classification of global SSTs and 500 hPa height anomalies to predict temperature and precipitation regimes one to two seasons in advance for the mid-Mississippi region. Nat Wea Dig 32(1):11–33Google Scholar
  29. Lupo AR, Smith NB, Guinan PE, Chesser MD (2012a) The climatology of Missouri region dew points and the relationship to ENSO. Nat Wea Dig 36:81–91Google Scholar
  30. Lupo AR, Mokhov II, Akperov MG, Chernokulsky AV, Athar H (2012b) A dynamic analysis of the role of the planetary and synoptic scale in the summer of 2010 blocking episodes over the European part of Russia, Adv. Met, 2012: 11p, Article ID 584257Google Scholar
  31. Lupo AR, Mokhov II, Chendev YG, Lebedeva MG, Akperov MG, Hubbart JA (2014) Studying summer season drought in western Russia. Advances in Meteorology, Special Issue: Large Scale Atmospheric Science, 2014: 9 p, Article ID 942027Google Scholar
  32. Matveev SM, Chendev YG, Lupo AR, Hubbart JA, Timashuk DA (2016) Climatic changes in the East-European forest-steppe and their effects on scotch pine annual rings increment. Pure Appl Geophys 174(1):427–443. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mokhov II, Khon VC, Timazhev AV, Chernokulsky AV, Semenov VA (2014) Hydrological anomalies and trends in the Amur River basin due to climate changes. In: Extreme Floods in the Amur River Basin: Causes, Forecasts, and Recommendations, Roshydromet, Earth Climate Theory Studies, 81–121Google Scholar
  34. Mokhov II, Akperov AG, Prokofyeva MA, Timazhev AV, Lupo AR, Le Treut HR (2012) Blockings in the Northern Hemisphere and Euro-Atlantic region: estimates of changes from reanalyses data and model simulations. Doklady, 449, 430–433Google Scholar
  35. Mokhov II (2011). The anomalous summer of 2010 within the general context of climate change and the anomalies. Analysis of the anomalous weather over Russia during the Summer of 2010, 41–47Google Scholar
  36. Mokhov II, Chernokulsky AV, Shkolnik IM (2006) Regional model assessments of fire risks under global climate changes. Doklady Earth Sci 411(9):1485–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. National Climate Assessment (NCA) (2014). The National Climate Assessment Summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, Now and in the Future 2014. Available online:
  38. Neter J, Wasserman W, Whitmore GA (1988) Applied statistics, 3rd edn. MA. Allyn and Bacon, Boston 1006 ppGoogle Scholar
  39. Newberry RG, Lupo AR, Jensen AD, Rodriges-Zalipynis RA (2016) An analysis of the spring-to-summer transition in the West Central Plains for application to long range forecasting. Atms Cli Sci 6:375–393Google Scholar
  40. Nunes MJ, Lupo AR, Lebedeva MG, Chendev YG, Solovyov AB (2017) The occurrence of extreme monthly temperatures and precipitation in two global regions. Papers Appl Geog 3(2):143–156. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Petin AN, Lebedeva MG, Krymskaya OV, Chendev YG, Kornilov AG, Lupo AR (2014) Regional manifestations of changes in atmospheric circulation in the central black earth region (by the example of Belgorod region). Adv Environ Bio 8(10):544–547Google Scholar
  42. Reddy VR, Panchepsky YA (2000) Predicting crop yields under climate change conditions from monthly GCM weather projections. Environmental Modeling and Software 15:79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sapozhnikova SA (1970) To clarify of agricultural land capability climate assessment, agroclimatic resources of natural zones of the USSR and their use. L:Gidrometeoizdat, 80–92Google Scholar
  44. Selyaninov GT (1928) On agricultural climate valuation. Proc. Agric. Meteor. 20:165–177 [In Russian]Google Scholar
  45. Shashko DI (1985) Agroclimatic Resources of the USSR. Leningrad: Gidrometeoroizdat. 248. Stock materials of the Federal service for Hydrometeorology and environmental monitoring for 1899–2014Google Scholar
  46. Strashnaya AI, Maksimenkova TA, Chub OV (2011) Agrometeorological specifics of the 2010 drought in Russia in comparison with past droughts. Works of Russian Hydro-Meteorological Center 345:171–188 [In Russian]Google Scholar
  47. Tarankov VI (1991) Forest meteorology: textbook. Voronezh Pedagogical Institute Press, Voronezh (in Russian)Google Scholar
  48. Wiedenmann JM, Lupo AR, Mokhov II, Tikhonova EA (2002) The climatology of blocking anticyclones for the Northern and Southern Hemispheres: block intensity as a diagnostic. J Clim 15(23):3459–3473.<3459:TCOBAF>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wuebbles D, Meehl G, Hayhoe K, Karl T, Kunkel K, Santer B, Wehner M, Colle B, Fischer EM, Fu R, Goodman A, Janssen E, Kharin V, Lee H, Li W, Long LN, Olsen SC, Pan Z, Seth A, Sheffield J, Sun L (2014) CMIP5 climate model analysis: climate extremes in the United States. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 95:571–583. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zolotokrylin AN, Titkova TB (1998) The dependence of the climate anomalies in the growing season forest on the Russian plains on large-scale atmospheric circulation. Izv. Geog 5:121–128Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria G. Lebedeva
    • 1
  • Anthony R. Lupo
    • 2
  • Chasity B. Henson
    • 2
  • Alexandr B. Solovyov
    • 1
  • Yury G. Chendev
    • 3
  • Patrick S. Market
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Geography and GeoecologyBelgorod State UniversityBelgorodRussia
  2. 2.Department of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Natural Resources Management and Land CadastreBelgorod State UniversityBelgorodRussia

Personalised recommendations