Abstract
Global interpolated climate products are widely used in ecological research to investigate biosphere-climate interactions and to track ecological response to climate variability and climate change. In turn, biological data could also be used for an independent validation of one aspect of climate data quality. All else being equal, more variance explained in biological data identifies the better climate data product. Here, we compare seven global precipitation time series products, including gauge-based datasets (CRU-TS, UDEL-TS, GPCC), re-analysis products (ERA5, CHELSA), a satellite-based dataset (PERSIANN) and a multi-source product that draws on gauge, re-analysis, and satellite data (MSWEP). We focus on precipitation variables, because they are more difficult to interpolate than temperature, and show larger divergence among gridded data products. Our validation is based on 20 years of remotely sensed vegetation greenness (MODIS-EVI) and 120 years of tree ring records from the International Tree Ring Data Bank (ITRDB). The results for the 20-year EVI based validation shows that all gauge and re-analysis data products performed similarly, but were outperformed by the multi-source MSWEP product, especially in regions with low weather station coverage, such as Africa. For analyzing long 120-year time-series, UDEL-TS showed superior performance prior to the 1940s, with especially large margins for northern Asia and the Himalayas region. For other regions, CRU-TS and GPCC could be recommended. We provide maps that can guide the best regional choice of climate product for research involving time series of biological response to historic climate variability and climate change.