Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and droughts often result from a combination of interacting physical processes across multiple spatial and temporal scales. The combination of processes (climate drivers and hazards) leading to a significant impact is referred to as a 'compound event'. Traditional risk assessment methods typically only consider one driver and/or hazard at a time, potentially leading to underestimation of risk, as the processes that cause extreme events often interact and are spatially and/or temporally dependent. Here we show how a better understanding of compound events may improve projections of potential high-impact events, and can provide a bridge between climate scientists, engineers, social scientists, impact modellers and decision-makers, who need to work closely together to understand these complex events.

Summary1. Plant height is a central part of plant ecological strategy. It is strongly correlated with life span, seed mass and time to maturity, and is a major determinant of a species' ability to compete for light. Plant height is also related to critical ecosystem variables such as animal diversity and carbon storage capacity. However, remarkably little is known about global patterns in plant height. Here, we use maximum height data for 7084 plant Species · Site combinations to provide the first global, cross-species quantification of the latitudinal gradient in plant height. 2. The mean maximum height of species growing within 15°of the equator (7.8 m) was 29 times greater than the height of species between 60°and 75°N (27 cm), and 31 times greater than the height of species between 45°and 60°S (25 cm). There was no evidence that the latitudinal gradient in plant height was different in the northern hemisphere than in the southern hemisphere (P = 0.29). A 2.4-fold drop in plant height at the edge of the tropics (P = 0.006) supports the idea that there might be a switch in plant strategy between temperate and tropical zones. 3. We investigated 22 environmental variables to determine which factors underlie the latitudinal gradient in plant height. We found that species with a wide range of height strategies were present in cold, dry, low productivity systems, but there was a noticeable lack of very short species in wetter, warmer, more productive sites. Variables that capture information about growing conditions during the harsh times of the year were relatively poor predictors of height. The best model for global patterns in plant height included only one term: precipitation in the wettest month (R 2 = 0.256).4. Synthesis. We found a remarkably steep relationship between latitude and height, indicating a major difference in plant strategy between high and low latitude systems. We also provide new, surprising information about the correlations between plant height and environmental variables.

The coupled climate models used in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are evaluated. The evaluation is focused on 12 regions of Australia for the daily simulation of precipitation, minimum temperature, and maximum temperature. The evaluation is based on probability density functions and a simple quantitative measure of how well each climate model can capture the observed probability density functions for each variable and each region is introduced. Across all three variables, the coupled climate models perform better than expected. Precipitation is simulated reasonably by most and very well by a small number of models, although the problem with excessive drizzle is apparent in most models. Averaged over Australia, 3 of the 14 climate models capture more than 80% of the observed probability density functions for precipitation. Minimum temperature is simulated well, with 10 of the 13 climate models capturing more than 80% of the observed probability density functions. Maximum temperature is also reasonably simulated with 6 of 10 climate models capturing more than 80% of the observed probability density functions. An overall ranking of the climate models, for each of precipitation, maximum, and minimum temperatures, and averaged over these three variables, is presented. Those climate models that are skillful over Australia are identified, providing guidance on those climate models that should be used in impacts assessments where those impacts are based on precipitation or temperature. These results have no bearing on how well these models work elsewhere, but the methodology is potentially useful in assessing which of the many climate models should be used by impacts groups.

[1] Seven climate models were used to explore the biogeophysical impacts of human-induced land cover change (LCC) at regional and global scales. The imposed LCC led to statistically significant decreases in the northern hemisphere summer latent heat flux in three models, and increases in three models. Five models simulated statistically significant cooling in summer in near-surface temperature over regions of LCC and one simulated warming. There were few significant changes in precipitation. Our results show no common remote impacts of LCC. The lack of consistency among the seven models was due to: 1) the implementation of LCC despite agreed maps of agricultural land, 2) the representation of crop phenology, 3) the parameterisation of albedo, and 4) the representation of evapotranspiration for different land cover types. This study highlights a dilemma: LCC is regionally significant, but it is not feasible to impose a common LCC across multiple models for the next IPCC assessment.