<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> The hydrogen isotopic composition of leaf wax-derived biomarkers, e.g. long chain <i>n</i>-alkanes (&#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub>), is widely applied in paleoclimatology research. However, a direct reconstruction of the isotopic composition of paleoprecipitation based on &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> alone can be challenging due to the overprint of the source water isotopic signal by leaf-water enrichment. The coupling of &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> with &#948;<sup>18</sup>O of hemicellulose-derived sugars (&#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub>) has the potential to disentangle this effect and additionally allow relative humidity reconstructions. Here, we present &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> as well as &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> results obtained from leaves of the plant species <i>Eucalyptus globulus</i>, <i>Vicia faba</i> var. <i>minor</i> and <i>Brassica oleracea</i> var. <i>medullosa</i>, which were grown under controlled conditions. We addressed the questions (i) do &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> values allow precise reconstructions of leaf water isotope composition, (ii) how accurately does the reconstructed leaf-water-isotope composition enables relative humidity (RH) reconstruction in which the plants grew, and (iii) does the coupling of &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> enable a robust source water calculation?</p> <p> For all investigated species, the alkane <i>n</i>-C<sub>29</sub> was most abundant and therefore used for compound-specific &#948;<sup>2</sup>H measurements. For <i>Vicia faba</i>, additionally the &#948;<sup>2</sup>H values of <i>n</i>-C<sub>31</sub> could be evaluated robustly. With regard to hemicellulose-derived monosaccharides, arabinose and xylose were most abundant and their &#948;<sup>18</sup>O values were therefore used to calculate weighted mean leaf &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> values. Both &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> yielded significant correlations with &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>leaf-water</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>leaf-water</sub>, respectively (r<sup>2</sup>&#8201;=&#8201;0.45 and 0.85, respectively; p&#8201;<&#8201;0.001, n&#8201;=&#8201;24). Mean fractionation factors between biomarkers and leaf water were found to be &#8722;156&#8201;&#8240; (ranging from &#8722;133 to &#8722;192&#8201;&#8240;) for &#949;<sub><i>n</i>-alkane/leaf-water</sub> and +27.3&#8201;&#8240; (ranging from +23.0 to 32.3&#8201;&#8240;) for &#949;<sub>sugar/leaf-water</sub>, respectively. Using rearranged Craig-Gordon equations with either T<sub>air</sub> or T<sub>leaf</sub> and measured &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>leaf-water</sub> or &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>leaf-water</sub> as input variables, we furthermore modeled climate chamber RH<sub>air</sub> and RH<sub>leaf</sub> values. Modelled RH<sub>air</sub> values, from the more simplified Craig-Gordon model, turned out to be most accurate and correlate highly significantly with measured RH<sub>air</sub> values (R<sup>2</sup>&#8201;=&#8201;0.84, p&#8201;<&#8201;0.001; RMSE&#8201;=&#8201;6&#8201;%). When combining &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>leaf-water</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>leaf-water</sub> values that are calculated from the alkane and sugar biomarkers instead of actually measured &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>leaf-water</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>leaf-water</sub> as input variables, the correlation of modelled RH<sub>air</sub> values with measured RH<sub>air</sub> values is getting worse, but is still highly significant with R<sup>2</sup>&#8201;=&#8201;0.54, p&#8201;<&#8201;0.001; RMSE&#8201;=&#8201;10&#8201;%. This highlights the potential of the coupled &#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub><i>n</i>-alkane</sub>-&#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>sugar</sub> paleohygrometer approach for suitable relative humidity reconstructions. Finally, the reconstructed source water isotope composition (&#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>s</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>s</sub>) as calculated from the coupled approach matches the source water in the climate chamber experiment (&#948;<sup>2</sup>H<sub>tank-water</sub> and &#948;<sup>18</sup>O<sub>tank-water</sub>).</p>