Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Rainfall Trends in Humid Temperate Climate in South America: Possible Effects in Ecosystems of Espinal Ecoregion

Written By

Julian Alberto Sabattini and Rafael Alberto Sabattini

Submitted: May 21st, 2021Reviewed: June 25th, 2021Published: July 28th, 2021

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.99080

Chapter metrics overview

90 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


In central Argentina, the annual rainfall regime shows increasing since the 2nd half of the 20th century. The aim of this work was to evaluate the long-term changes in the intensity of rainfall in the central-north region of Entre Ríos between 1945 and 2019, based only on daily precipitation records aggregated at yearly, monthly and seasonal levels. We used monthly rainfall data for the period 1945–2019 from 6 localities in Province of Entre Rios, Argentina. The change detection analysis has been conceded using Pettitt’s test, von Neumann ratio test, Buishand’s range test and standard normal homogeneity (SNH) test, while non-parametric tests including linear regression, Mann-Kendall and Spearman rho tests have been applied for trend analysis. Like the regional results, this study observed a sustained increase in monthly rainfall to the breaking point in the 1970s, but then the annual rate of increase was even higher. The average annual rainfall in the region prior to that date was 946 mm, while after the same 1150 mm, equivalent to 21.5% higher than the 1945–1977 average and 8.5% higher according to the historical average 1945–2019.


  • nonparametric trend tests
  • climate change
  • natural ecosystems
  • biodiversity

1. Introduction

There was a general increase in air temperature worldwide during the twentieth century, albeit with some differences between the hemispheres, corresponding to global warming. Global warming affects the hydrological cycle over land, resulting in observed changes to precipitation frequency, intensity, duration and amount [1, 2]. Although significant attention is paid to how changes in seasonal and annual precipitation sums affect ecosystems, relatively less is known about the ecological impacts of heavy rainfall events [3]. The evaluation of past trends of meteorological parameters at various spatial and temporal scales plays a crucial role in understanding climate change and its impact on food security, energy security, natural resource management, and sustainable development [4, 5]. Detailed analysis of rainfall trend is useful to rainfall forecasting, planning water resources development and management, designing water storage structures, irrigation practices and crop choices, drinking water supply, industrial development, and disaster management for current and future climatic conditions [6, 7].

The analysis of different global rainfall databases shows a change in an anomaly that was positive between 1950 and 1980 and became negative later [8]. While some studies show increasing rainfall, in other regions the evaluations show the opposite results. For instance, in Europe, the rain series show an increase in annual precipitation between 1940 and 1990 [9]. The climate of Italy, in turn, seems to be warmer and drier at the moment with a decrease in rainfall attributed to a reduction in the number of days of rain, as rainfall intensity shows a positive trend [10]. In different regions of South America somethings similar happens and has been studied by several authors. More recently [11] studied summer precipitation variability over Southeastern South America in a global warming scenario.

In central Argentina, the annual rainfall regime shows increasing rates from approximately the 1940s until the end of the century [12, 13, 14] with statistical and spectral analysis show that there is significant evidence that rainfall has increased in central Argentina since the 2nd half of the 20th century [15] analyzed breakpoints in annual rainfall trends in Córdoba, Argentina in the period 1930–2006, they observed from negative to positive in the 1950s in the north area of the region, while in the other areas the opposite change occurs in the 1970s. From the mid-1970s, a sharp increase in rainfall regime provided most of the area with a supply of moisture higher than previously reported [16, 17, 18, 19]. Recently results in changes annual rainfall in five sub-regions of the Argentine Pampa Region indicate that the Western Pampas are more vulnerable to abrupt changes than the Eastern Pampas [20]. While different indicators in central Argentina reflect a change for precipitation at some sites, the intensity and variability of rainfall show significant long-term trends [21]. The rainfall cycle hypothesis has been supported by recent studies showing an abrupt negative change in the water regime of Pampas Region in recent years [17, 18] as well as by studies linking changes in rainfall with regular or recurring oceanic indices [19, 20, 21].

A strong increase in agricultural activity in central of Argentina [22] is a possible cause that would explain the climate change. The central-north region of Entre Ríos (Argentina) had a strong fragmentation of the landscape due to deforestation [23]. These changes are environmentally and economically important, as they have a direct impact on hydrological and soil resources, as well as on the agricultural potential of the region. The central-north of Entre Ríos has a humid temperature climate, Cf in the Koppen-Geiger classification, as revised by [24]. In this way, the Pampa Region (where the province of Entre Rios is located) receives sea winds throughout the year, with a moisture gradient decreasing from east to west [20].

The statistical trend detection in climatic variables and precipitation time series is one of the interesting research areas in climatology and hydrology as it impacts spatial and temporal distribution of water availability across the globe [25]. The parametric or non-parametric method under statistical approach is used to detect if either a data of a given set follows a distribution or has a trend on a fixed level of significance. Various non-parametric tests, including Mann-Kendall test and Pettit’s test, are widely used to detect trend and change point in historical series of climatic and hydrological variables [26, 27, 28]. To understand the magnitude of trends many techniques have been proposed in the past, including t-tests [29, 30], Mann–Whitney and Pettitt’s tests [31] and standard normal homogeneity test [32, 33].

The aim of this work was to evaluate the long-term changes in the intensity of rainfall in the central-north region of Entre Ríos between 1945 and 2019, based only on daily precipitation records aggregated at yearly, monthly and seasonal levels. In more specific terms, the quality of the rainfall series is first analyzed in terms of its homogeneity to assess the reliability of the meteorological information used. Secondly, the existence of a trend in the indicators of the intensity and variability of rainfall is evaluated during a period showing a generalized increase in atmospheric temperature. Finally, the occurrence of a breakpoint that expresses a long-term trend change in the annual rainfall series in the region is assessed.


2. Material and methods

2.1 Region of study and rainfall data

We used monthly rainfall data for the period 1945–2019 from 6 localities (Figure 1 and Table 1) in the southern of department La Paz (Province of Entre Rios, Argentina): Hasenkamp (HAS), Las Garzas (LGA), Alcaraz Norte (ALN), Bovril (BOV), Hernandarias (HER), El Solar (ELS). This data were collected with conventional rain gauges, from the official records of Hydraulic Directorate (Direccion Hidraulica de Entre Rios, in spanish) and Cereal Bag (Bolsa de Cereales de Entre Rios, in spanish) of the Province of Entre Rios.

Figure 1.

Location map of southern of department La Paz (province of Entre Rios, Argentina) with localities analyzed.

Meteorological stationLatitudeLongitudeAltitude (m a.s.l)Period and Entirety (%)
HasenkampHAS31°30′32.94”S59°50′9.37”W881945–2019 (93.8%)
Las GarzasLGA31°25′43.54”S59°44′36.09”W821945–2019 (100%)
Alcaraz NorteALN31°19′37.49”S59°45′15.88”W681945–2019 (98.3%)
BovrilBOV31°20′26.89”S59°26′30.97”W791945–2019 (94.5%)
HernandariasHER31°13′51.34”S59°59′10.35”W521945–2019 (96.5%)
El SolarELS31°10′32.96”S59°43′56.73”W501945–2019 (99.2%)

Table 1.

Meteorological station used and the period analyzed.

The data from the 6 locations was subjected to a process of quality control for possible errors. All data above the third quartile plus three times the interquartile range and located more than five standard deviations from the mean was treated as outliers. These outliers were then contrasted climatographically with readings from nearby stations. If the same reading was labeled as out of range for more than two seasons, the value was correct. Months classed as outliers and those without data were treated as gaps. Both types of gaps were filled but no missing data was completed if there were more than three gaps in one year.

Stations with missing data techniques linear regression were used. The filling of missing data by the linear regression technique consisted in using data from neighboring stations that presented coefficients of significant linear correlations with the station to be used in the study [34, 35],


where aoand aiare the coeffcients of adjustment of the linear model, obtained in the processing of correlation. In this case, stations that presented an R2 greater than 0.90 were included. The two techniques are widely used to fill gaps in historical series and present low average deviations suitable for climatic studies on monthly and seasonal scales [36].

After the treatment of the time series, the monthly values of all rainfall stations were grouped into scales, according to the following definitions: a) autumn (March, April, and May), b) winter (June, July, and August), c) spring (September, October, and November), and d) summer (December, January, and February). For selecting the change point for a particular parameter, the method presented below has been used [37]: a) no change point or homogeneous (HG), series may be considered as homogeneous, if no or one test out of four tests rejects the null hypothesis at 5% significant level; b) doubtful series (DF), series may be considered as inhomogeneous and critically evaluated before further analysis if two out of four tests reject the null hypothesis at 5% significant level; and c) change point or inhomogeneous (CP) when series may has change point or be inhomogeneous in nature, if more than two tests reject the null hypothesis at 5% significant level.

2.2 Homogeneity tests for change point detection

Homogeneity testing is very crucial in climatological studies to represent the real variations in weather and climate. Inhomogeneity occurs in climate data due to several reasons including instrumentation error, changes in the adjacent areas of the instrument, and mishandling of the human. If the homogeneity is not tested prior to trend analysis, the results will indicate erroneous trends. In this study, the absolute homogeneity tests were performed on individual station records and calculating the ratio of observed series to the reference series. Four widely used statistical tests mentioned below were applied to the data to test for homogeneity. All the following four tests used in this study assume the null hypothesis of data being homogeneous. The change point detection is an important aspect to assess the period from where significant change has occurred in a time series. Pettitt’s test, von Neumann ratio test, Buishand range test and standard normal homogeneity tests have been applied for change point detection in climatic series. The details of various change point tests applied in the study are presented here.

2.2.1 Pettitt’s test

The Pettitt’s test for change detection, developed by [38], is a non-parametric test, which is useful for evaluating the occurrence of abrupt changes in climatic records [39, 40] because its sensitivity. According to Pettitt’s test, if x1, x2, x3, … xnis a series of observed data which has a change point at tin such a way that x1, x2 …, xthas a distribution function F1(x) which is different from the distribution function F2(x) of the second part of the series xt+1, xt+2, xt+3 …, xn. The non-parametric test statistics Utfor this test may be described as follows:


The test statistic Kand the associated confidence level (ρ) for the sample length (n) may be described as:


When ρis smaller than the specific confidence level, the null hypothesis is rejected. The approximate significance probability (p) for a change-point is defined as given below:


The test statistic Kcan also be compared with standard values at different confidence level for detection of change point in a series. The critical values of Kat 1 and 5% confidence levels for different tests used in the analysis has been presented in Table 2 [37].

Number of observationCritical values for test statistic at different significance level
Pettit TestSNHTBuishand Range testVon Neumann Ratio Test

Table 2.

Critical values of test statistics for different change point detections tests.

2.2.2 von Neumann ratio test

The von Neumann ratio test has been described by [41, 42] and others. The test statistics for change point detection in a series of observations x1, x2, x3xncan be described as:


According to this test, if the sample or series is homogeneous, then the expected value E(N) = 2 under the null hypothesis with constant mean. When the sample has a break, then the value of Nmust be lower than 2, otherwise we can imply that the sample has rapid variation in the mean. The critical values of Nat 1 and 5% confidence levels given in Table 2 can be used for identification of non-homogeneous series with change point.

2.2.3 Buishand’s range test

The adjusted partial sum (Sk), that is the cumulative deviation from mean for kth observation of a series x1, x2, x3.…xk.…xnwith mean (x¯) can be computed using following equation:


A series may be homogeneous without any change point if Sk∼0, because in random series, the deviation from mean will be distributed on both sides of the mean of the series. The significance of shift can be evaluated by computing rescales adjusted range (R) using the following equation:


The computed value of R/nis compared with critical values given by [37, 41] and has been used for detection of possible change (Table 2).

2.2.4 Standard normal homogeneity (SNH) test

The test statistic (Tk) is used to compare the mean of first nobservations with the mean of the remaining (n-k) observations with ndata points [32].


Z1and Z2can be computed as:


where, x¯and σxare the mean and standard deviation of the series. The year kcan be considered as change point and consist a break where the value of Tkattains the maximum value. To reject the null hypothesis, the test statistic should be greater than the critical value, which depends on the sample size (n) given in Table 2.

2.3 Test for trend analysis

All the trend tests in this section assume the null hypothesis of no trend and the alternative hypothesis of monotonic increasing or decreasing trend existence. When the time series are serially independent, the Mann–Kendall test [43, 44] and Spearman’s Rho test [45, 46] were applied to test for trends. The magnitude of the trend was estimated using Sen’s slope method [47]. Always suggested to apply various statistical tests to analyze the trends in serially correlated data.

2.3.1 Mann-Kendall test

The Mann–Kendall test is a nonparametric test for monotonic trend detection. It does not assume the data to be normally distributed and is flexible to outliers in the data. The test assumes a null hypothesis, H0, of no trend and alternate hypothesis, Ha, of increasing or decreasing monotonic trend. For a time series Xi=x1,x2,,xn, the Mann–Kendall test statistic Sis calculated as


where nis the number of data points, xiand xjare the data values in timeseries iand j(j> i), respectively, and signxjxiis the sign function as


Statistics Sis normally distributed with parameters E(S) and variance V(S) as given below:


where nis the number of data points, mis the number of tied groups, and tkdenotes the number of ties of extent k. Standardized test statistic Zis calculated using the formula below.


To test for a monotonic trend at an α significance level, the alternate hypothesis of trend is accepted if the absolute value of standardized test statistic Z is greater than the Z1α/2value obtained from the standard normal cumulative distribution Tables. A positive sign of the test statistic indicates an increasing trend and a negative sign indicates a decreasing trend.

2.3.2 Spearman’s rho test

The Spearman’s rho test is a non-parametric widely used for studying populations that take on a ranked order. If there is no trend and all observations are independent, then all rank orderings are equally likely. In this test, the difference between order and rank (di) for all observations x1,x2,x3,xncan be used to compute and Spearman’s ρ, variance Varρand test statistic Zusing following equations. The null hypothesis is tested in this test considering the statistic is normally distributed.


3. Results and discussion

Tables 38 show the results of the statistical analyzes carried out to know the point of change in monthly, seasonal and annual rainfall in each locality. A marked variability was observed in the months that changed significantly between the localities, fundamentally from January to May, even though the proximity between them does not exceed 40 km. This means, a priori and in subjective terms, that the climatic changes reported worldwide have a direct influence on a microspatial scale, as well as on the temporal window. However, in the region there was no heterogeneity in the breaking point between the localities evaluated for the months of November and December during the study period analyzed.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 3.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in Las Garzas location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 4.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in Alcaraz Norte location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 5.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in Bovril location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 6.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in Hasenkamp location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 7.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in El solar location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

PeriodStandard Normal Homogeneity TestPettitt’s testBuishand Range testvon Neumann’s test

Table 8.

Results of change point analysis with all test used in Hernandarias location.

References: k: year to shift, sig: * 0.05%, ** 0.01%, *** 0,1%, ns: no signification.

In relation to the statistical tests used, it is possible to conclude that the Von Neumman’s test is more robust when establishing the heterogeneity of the time series, while the Standard Normal Homogeneity test a priori would require less demand from the variability of the time series. to set a breaking point. Based on the results of the SNH Test, it is observed that the month of May presents marked heterogeneity in all localities, but the year that defines the point of change differs significantly. When comparing and analyzing all the tests for each period of time, only Las Garzas and Hernandarias present a significant, but doubtful point of change in the year that followed.

In seasonal analysis, summer is the season of the year that presented marked heterogeneity in the time series in all localities. The year of break point was different by location. However, El Solar and Hernandarias presented significant modifications in the heterogeneity of the time series with breaking points during the 1970s and 1980s, respectively. Both locations are adjacent to the Middle Paraná River, a situation that could be influenced by local atmospheric conditions [48]. There is even greater concern today about the future of rivers worldwide due to a multitude of stressors that impact running waters including climate change [49]. We draw on the growing literature related to climate change to illustrate potential impacts rivers may experience and management options for protecting riverine ecosystems and the goods and services they provide. Regional patterns in precipitation and temperature are predicted to change and these changes have the potential to alter natural flow regimes. One of the key ways in which climate change or other stressors affect river ecosystems is by causing changes in river flow. Rivers vary geographically with respect to their natural flow regime and this variation is critical to the ecological integrity and health of streams and rivers and thus a great deal has been written on the topic [50, 51]. The ecological consequences and the required management responses for any given river will depend not only on the direct impacts of increased temperature. Otherwise how extensively the magnitude, frequency, timing, and duration of runoff events change relative to the historical and recent flow regime for that river, and how adaptable the aquatic and riparian species are to different degrees of alteration.

The results resume depicting the homogeneity state of different series have been presented in Table 9 (See Supplementary Appendix with results of Test’s trend). The change point analysis on long-term series in all localities has indicated that a significant change point in the annual rainfall. The breaking point occurred in 1977 for the LGA, ALC and HER locations; year 1997 for BOV and HAS; and 1982 for the ELS locality. Figure 2 shows the average annual precipitation of all the localities evaluated in each year for the region, as well as the historical annual during the period. On the other hand, since the breaking point occurred in 1977 for most of the localities, it was established that the average annual rainfall in the region prior to that date was 946 mm, while after the same 1150 mm, equivalent to 21.5% higher than the 1945–1977 average and 8.5% higher according to the historical average 1945–2019. In addition, an important piece of information results from the linear model that made it possible to establish that the region’s average rainfall increased 4.9 mm per year from 1945 to 2019.

DECDF1986 1988HGDF1989HGCP1989CP1989 1996
SummerCP1976DF2004 1976DF1995 2008DF1995 2004CP1995 2004HG
CP1997CP1982CP1977 1989 1999

Table 9.

Results of change point detection analysis and trends of rainfall for all localities.

Reference: homogeneous series (HG), change point (CP), doubtful point (DF). Trends: ∼ none, ↑ increase, ↓ decrease, ¿? Doubtful.

Reference: a- Nature Serie, b- Year shift, c- Trend, LGA- Las Garzas, ALN- Alcaraz Norte, BOV- Bovril, HAS- Hasenkamp ELS- El Solar, HER- Hernandarias.

Figure 2.

Variation in the average annual rainfall of all the localities of the analyzed region.

These results are consistent with those obtained in the north of the country where the rainfall change was concentrated in a step change during the 1970s [52]. In this region, half or more of the annual rainfall trend occurred in the months of El Niño phase, with less contribution from La Niña and the neutral phases. However, in the rest of subtropical Argentina and especially south of 30°S, increased precipitation occurred mostly during months of the neutral phase of El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), with only small trends during months of El Niño and La Niña phases [53]. Accordingly, most of the annual precipitation trends since 1960 in subtropical Argentina can be accounted for by two modes. The first mode, which is positively correlated with precipitation in northern Argentina and with ENSO indices, had a steep increase in precipitation at the end of the 1970s. The second mode, which has a maximum positive correlation with annual precipitation between 30 and 40°S, had a regular positive trend starting in the early 1960s and it is correlated with the southward displacement of the South Atlantic high [53, 54]. In addition, several researchers analyzed the changes in the isohyets, showing that the rainfall regime in Argentina is subject to a positive fluctuation in the 1950s and that it reached maximum values in the 1970s [55], data that coincide with this manuscript.

Average rainfall increased, favoring the expansion of agriculture [16, 22]. This conclusion is obtained primarily because the studies of the time have been hampered by the low significance shown by statistical tests when applied to climatic data, especially precipitation. In the study region mention that one of the factors of change in precipitation is agrarian transformation and claim that the technological innovation of the sector was accompanied by a process of change in the water regime [16]. Furthermore, confirm that the expansion of agricultural structure of Entre Rios, is favored by increased precipitation, generating crops of the marginal territory.

The behavior of historical series of monthly rainfall confirm that November and December, as and summer season, have significant change point in all localities. The annual rainfall in all localities showed a significant increase such as summer season (Table 9). November and December showed and significant rise in contrast to the rest of months.

In the last decade, a substantial change in the average climate conditions was observed in many regions of Argentina, particularly in the southern region of Mesopotamian Pampa that showed two abrupt shifts [20]. The first of these was positive, with annual average rainfall increasing from 1062.9 mm during the 1941–1999 sub-period to 1568.9 mm during a short sub-period between 2000 and 2003. The second abrupt change, which began in 2004, was negative, with average annual rainfall dropping to 1108.0 mm, only slightly higher than what it had been in the initial 1941–1999 sub-period (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Variation in the average annual rainfall in each locality of the analyzed region. Reference: Black dash line (−−) show historical rainfall (1945–2019), black solid line (—) the average rainfall before and after the break point and gray dash line (−−) show a linear model annual rainfall.

Like the regional results, this study observed a sustained increase in monthly rainfall to the breaking point in the 1970s, but then the annual rate of increase was even higher. In South America [56], observed increasing trends in total annual precipitation values in Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, northern Peru, southern Brazil, and northern and central Argentina. Qualitatively there was a change that indicated a significant increase in summer precipitation, and a decrease in the number of annual frosts, concentrating the winter season (July and August), assuming a “tropicalization of the region”. Rainfall tropicalization can be understood as local and regional processes and impacts of climate change, which can be observed mainly by changes in the precipitation regime and the intensification of tropical climatic characteristics [57]. This process is not exclusive of Espinal Ecorregion. It has been observed in other contexts and scales in tropical and subtropical regions that show an important increase in precipitation during the rainy season in tropical regions [58, 59].

Climate change can also indirectly affect organisms by altering biotic interactions, which can have profound consequences for populations, community composition and ecosystem functions [60]. Other aspects of biodiversity management will be affected by global change and will need adapting, including wildlife exploitation, e.g. forestry [61], pest and invasive species control [62] or human and wildlife disease management [63]. Indirect effects may occur: (i) via generation of new biotic interactions, as range-shifted species appear for the first time in naive communities [64]; (ii) by removing existing interactions when species shift out of their existing range [65]; or (iii) by modulating key behavioral, physiological or other traits that mediate species interactions [66]. When climate-driven changes in biotic interactions involve keystone or foundation species, impacts can cascade through the associated community [61]. In this region, studies that have not yet been published for the province of Entre Ríos are showing indications of changes in the productivity of natural grasslands in native forests. Recently reports show that change the growth cycle has change in this ecosystem [67, 68], and mainly attributed to changes in precipitation regimes. These observations are like yields changes of the main crops, were the frequency of extreme weather events constitutes a growing risk.



This study was carried out in the framework of research and development projects UNER-PID No. 2196 “Ecological succession of a native forest intervened in the Spinal Ecorregion” and UNER-PID No. 2238 “Evaluation of the current and potential state of the native forests of Entre Rios in its productive and conservation aspect”.


Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 1A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at Las Garzas locality.

References: (*) test with significant differences of 0.05%.

PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 2A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at Alcaraz Norte locality.

PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 3A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at Bovril locality.

PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 4A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at Hasenkamp locality.

PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 5A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at El solar locality.

PeriodAverage rainfallSpearman’s Rank Rho TestMann-Kendall Test
Srhopz-valueSen’s slopeSptau

Table 6A.

Result of trend analysis rainfall at Hernandarias locality.


  1. 1.Sherwood S, Fu Q. A drier future? Science 2014; 343: 737–739. DOI: 10.1126/science.1247620
  2. 2.Stocker T. Climate change 2013: the physical science basis: Working Group I contribution to the Fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 2014.
  3. 3.Li L, Zheng Z, Biederman JA, Xu C, Xu Z, Che R, Wang Y, Cui X, Hao Y. Ecological responses to heavy rainfall depend on seasonal timing and multi-year recurrence. New Phytol, 2019; 223: 647-660. DOI: 10.1111/nph.15832
  4. 4.Sen Z, Zekâi S. Innovative Trend Analysis Methodology. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2011; 17:1042–1046. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000556
  5. 5.Milly PCD, Betancourt J, Falkenmark M, Hirsch RM, Kundzewicz ZW, Lettenmaier DP, Stouffer RJ. Stationarity Is Dead: Whither Water Management? Science. 2005; 319:573–574. DOI: 10.1126/science.1151915.
  6. 6.Hoekema DJ, Sridhar V. Relating climatic attributes and water resources allocation: A study using surface water supply and soil moisture indices in the Snake River basin, Idaho. Water Resour. Res. 2011; 47:1–17. DOI: 10.1029/2010WR009697.
  7. 7.Abbot J, Marohasy J. Skilful rainfall forecasts from artificial neural networks with long duration series and single-month optimization. Atmos. Res. 2017; 197:289–299. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2017.07.015.
  8. 8.Trenberth KE. Changes in Precipitation with Climate Change. Climate Research. 2011; 47(1-2):123–138. DOI: 10.3354/cr00953.
  9. 9.Kiely G, Albertson JD, Parlange MB. Recent trends in diurnal variation of precipitation at Valentia on the west coast of Ireland. Journal of Hydrology. 1998; 207(3–4): 270-279. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00143-7.
  10. 10.Cislaghi M, De Michele C, Ghezzi A, Rosso R. Statistical assessment of trends and oscillations in rainfall dynamics: Analysis of long daily Italian series. Atmospheric Research. 2005; 77:188–202. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2004.12.014.
  11. 11.Junquas C, Vera C, Li L, Le Treut H. Summer precipitation variability over Southeastern South America in a global warming scenario. 2012; 38(9-10):1867–1883. DOI: 10.1007/s00382-011-1141-y.
  12. 12.Lucero OA, Rozas D. Characteristics of aggregation of daily rainfall in a middle-latitudes region during a climate variability in annual rainfall amount. Atmospheric Research. 2002; 61:35–48. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-8095(01)00101-6.
  13. 13.Ravelo AC, Irastorza RO, Zanvettor RE. Zonificación de la región Pampeana Argentina según tendencias de series pluviométricas (1931–2000). Rev. Argent. Agrometeorol. 2003; 3–4: 85–90.
  14. 14.Pasquini AI, Lecomte KL, Piovano EL, Depetris PJ. Recent rainfall and runoff variability in central Argentina. Quat Int 2006; 158:127–139. DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2006.05.021.
  15. la Casa AC, Nasello OB. Breakpoints in annual rainfall trends over Córdoba, Argentina. Atmos. Res. 2010; 95:419–427. DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.11.005.
  16. 16.Sierra EM, Hurtado R, Spescha L. Corrimiento de las isoyetas anuales medias decenales en la Región Pampeana 1941–1990. Rev. Fac. Agron. 1994; 14:139–144.
  17. 17.Pérez S, Sierra EM, Casagrande G, Vergara G. Incremento de la precipitaciones (1921/1998) en el Centro-Este de la provincia de La Pampa (Argentina). Rev. Fac. Agron. 1999; 19(2):193-196.
  18. 18.Forte Lay JA, Scarpati OE, Capriolo AD. Precipitation variability and soil water content in pampean flatlands (Argentina). Geofísica Internacional. 2008; 47(4):341-354.
  19. 19.Pérez S, Sierra E, López E, Nizzero G, Momo F, Massobrio M. Abrupt changes in rainfall in the Eastern area of La Pampa Province, Argentina. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2011; 103:159–165. DOI: 10.1007/s00704-010-0290-y.
  20. 20.Pérez S, Sierra E, Momo F, Massobrio M. Changes in Average Annual Precipitation in Argentina’s Pampa Region and Their Possible Causes. Climate. 2015; 3:150–167. DOI: 10.3390/cli3010150.
  21. 21.De la Casa AC, Ovando GG, Nasello OB. Changes in the Intensity and Variability of Precipitation in the Central Region of Argentina between 1960 and 2012. Climate. 2018; 6:66. DOI: 10.3390/cli6030066.
  22. 22.Viglizzo EF, Roberto ZE, Filippin MC, Pordomingo AJ. Climate variability and agroecological change in the Central Pampas of Argentina. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1995; 55:7–16. DOI: 10.1016/0167-8809(95)00608-U.
  23. 23.Sabattini JA, Sabattini RA, Ledesma S. Caracterización del bosque nativo del centro norte de Entre Ríos (Argentina). Agrociencia. 2015; 19:8-16.
  24. 24.Kottek, M.; Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrift. 2006; 15(3):259-263.
  25. 25.Jaiswal RK, Lohani AK, Tiwari HL. Statistical Analysis for Change Detection and Trend Assessment in Climatological Parameters. Environ. Process. 2015;2:729–749. DOI: 10.1007/s40710-015-0105-3.
  26. 26.Jaiswal AK, Prakasa Rao GS, De US. Spatial and temporal characteristics of evaporation trends over India during 1971–2000. Mausam. 2008; 59(2):149–158.
  27. 27.Eslamian S, Hassanzadeh H, Khordadi MH. Detecting and evaluting climate change effect on frequency analysis of wind speed. Int J Global Energy. 2009; 32(3):295-304. DOI: 10.1504/IJGEI.2009.030657.
  28. 28.Salarijazi M, Ali Mohammad AA, Adib A, Daneshkhan A. Trend and change-point detection for the annual stream-flow series of the Karun River at the Ahvaz hydrometric station. Afr J Agric Reserv. 2012; 7(32): 4540–4552. DOI: 10.5897/AJAR12.650.
  29. 29.Staudt M, Esteban-Parra, Castro-Diez Y. Homogenization of long-term monthly Spanish temperature data. Int J Climatol 2007; 27:1809–1823. DOI: 10.1002/joc.1493.
  30. 30.Marengo JA, Camargo CC. Surface air temperature trends in southern Brazil for 1960–2002. Int J Climatol 2008, 28:893–904. DOI: 10.1002/joc.1584.
  31. 31.Yue S, Wang C. The Mann-Kendall Test Modified by Effective Sample Size to Detect Trend in Serially Correlated Hydrological Series. Water Resour Manag 2004; 18:201–218. DOI: 10.1023/B:WARM.0000043140.61082.60.
  32. 32.Stepanek P, Zahradnek P, Skalak P. Data quality control and homogenization of air temperature and precipitation series in the area of Czech Republic in the period of 1961-2007. Int J Global Energy. 2009; 3:23-26. DOI: 10.5194/asr-3-23-2009.
  33. 33.Bates BC, Chandler RE, Charles SP, Campbell EP. Assessment of apparent non-stationarity in time series of annual inflow, daily precipitation and atmospheric circulation indices: A case study from southwest Australia. Water Resour Res. 2010; 46: W00H02. DOI: 10.1029/2010WR009509.
  34. 34.Tabony RC. The estimation of missing climatological data. Journal of Climatology 1983; 3:297-314. DOI: 10.1002/joc.3370030308.
  35. 35.Xia Y, Fabian P, Stohl A, Winterhalter M. Forest climatology: Estimation of missing values for Bavaria, Germany. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. 1999; 96: 131-144. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00056-8.
  36. 36.Paulhus JL, Kohler MA. Interpolation of missing precipitation records. Monthly Weather Review. 1952; 80:129-133. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0493(1952)080<0129:IOMPR>2.0.CO;2.
  37. 37.Winingaard JB, Kleink Tank AMG, Konnen GP. Homogeneity of 20th Century European Daily Temperature and Precipitation Series. Int J Climatol 2003; 23:679–692. DOI: 10.1002/joc.906.
  38. 38.Pettitt AN. A non-parametric approach to the change point problem. J Appl Stat 1979; 28(2):126–135. DOI: 10.2307/2346729.
  39. 39.Zhang S, Lu XX. Hydrological responses to precipitation variation and diverse human activities in a mountainous tributary of the lower Xijiang, China. Catena. 2009; 77:130–142. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2008.09.001.
  40. 40.Gao P, Mu XM, Wang F, Li R. Changes in streamflow and sediment discharge and the response to human activities in the middle reaches of the Yellow River. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci. 2011; 15:1–10. DOI: 10.5194/hess-15-1-2011.
  41. 41.Buishand TA. Some methods for testing the homogeneity of rainfall records. J Hydrol. 1982; 58(1–2):11–27. DOI: 10.1016/0022-1694(82)90066-X.
  42. 42.Kang HF, Yusof F. Homogenity test on daily rainfall series in Peninsular Malasiya. Int J Contemp Math Sci. 2012; 7(1):9–22.
  43. 43.Mann, H.B. Nonparametric Tests Against Trend. Econometrica. 1945; 13:245–259.
  44. 44.Kendall, M.G. Rank Correlation Methods; Charles Griffin: London, UK. 1955
  45. 45.Spearman, C. The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am. J. Psychol. 1904; 15:72–101. DOI: 10.2307/1422689.
  46. 46.Lehman, E.L. Nonparametric Statistical Methods Based on Ranks; Holden-Day: San Francisco, CA, USA. 1975.
  47. 47.Sen, P.K. Estimates of the Regression Coefficient Based on Kendall’s Tau. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1968; 63:1379.
  48. 48.Iriondo MH, Paggi JC, Parma MJ. The Middle Paraná River. Limnology of a Subtropical Wetland. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 2007, 382 pp.
  49. 49.Palmer M, Lettenmaier DP, LeRoy Poff N, Postel SL, Richter B, Warner R. Climate Change and River Ecosystems: Protection and Adaptation Options. Environmental Management. 2009; 44:1053–1068. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-009-9329-1.
  50. 50.Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks R, Stromberg J. The natural flow regime: a new paradigm for riverine conservation and restoration. BioScience. 1997; 47:769–784. DOI: 10.2307/1313099.
  51. 51.Postel S, Richter B. Rivers for life: managing water for people and nature. Island Press, Washington, DC, 2003; p 240.
  52. 52.Barros VR, Boninsegna JA, Camilloni IA, Chidiak M, Magrín GO, Rusticucci M. Climate change in Argentina: trends, projections, impacts and adaptation. WIREs Climate Change. 2015; 6:151-169. DOI: 10.1002/wcc.316.
  53. 53.Dai A, Fung IY, del Genio AD. Surface observed global land precipitation variations during 1900–88. J. Clim. 1997; 10:2943–2962. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010<2943:SOGLPV>2.0.CO;2.
  54. la Casa AC, Nasello OB. Análisis periódico de las condiciones hidrológicas en la Provincia de Córdoba, Argentina. Anales AFA. 2015; 26:170–176. DOI: 10.31527/analesafa.2015.26.4.170.
  55. 55.Hoffmann JAJ, Nuñez S, Gomez A. Fluctuaciones de la precipitación en la Argentina, en lo que va del siglo. II Congreso Interamericano de Meteorología. V Congreso Argentino de Meteorología. Anales 1987; 12-1.5.
  56. 56.Haylock MR, Peterson TC, Alves LM, Ambirizzi T, Anunciação YMT, Báez J, Barros VR, Berlato MA, Bidegain M, Coronel G, Corradi V, Garcia VJ, Grimm AM, Karoly D, Marengo JA, Marino MB, Moncunill DF, Neche TD, Quintana J, Rebello E, Rusticucci M, Santos JL, Trebejo I, Vincent LA. Trends in total and extreme South American rainfall in 1960-2000 and links with sea surface temperature. Journal of climate. 2006; 19:1490-1512. DOI: 10.1175/JCLI3695.1
  57. 57.Nascimento Jr, Rodrigues Silvestre M, Santanna Neto JL. Trends and rainfall tropicalization in Paraná State, south of Brazil. Atmósfera. 2020; 33(1):1-18. DOI: 10.20937/ATM.52441.
  58. 58.Hasan Z, Akhter S, Kabir A. Analysis of rainfall trends in the South-east Bangladesh. Journal of Environment. 2014; 3:51-56.
  59. 59.Addsisu S, Selassie YG, Fissha G, Gedif B. Time series trend analysis of temperature and rainfall in lake Tana sub-basin. Ethiopia. Environmental Systems Research. 2015; 4:25. DOI: 10.1186/s40068-015-0051-0.
  60. 60.Zarnetske PL, Skelly DK, Urban MC. Biotic multipliers of climate change. Science 2021; 336:1516–1518. DOI: 10.1126/science.1222732.
  61. 61.Dale VH, Tharp ML, Lannom KO, Hoges DG. Modeling transient response of forests to climate change. Sci. Total Environ. 2010; 408:1888–1901. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.050.
  62. 62.Ziska LH, Blumenthal DM, Runion GB, Hunt ER, Diaz-Soltero H. Invasive species and climate change: an agronomic perspective. Clim. Change. 2011; 105:13–42. DOI: 10.1007/s10584-010-9879-5.
  63. 63.Harvell CD, Mitchell CE, Ward JR, Altizer S, Dobson AP, Ostfeld RS, et al. Ecology – Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota. Science. 2002; 296: 2158–2162. DOI: 10.1126/science.1063699.
  64. 64.Ling SD. Range expansion of a habitat-modifying species leads to loss of taxonomic diversity: a new and impoverished reef state. Oecologia. 2008; 156:883–894. DOI: 10.1007/s00442-008-1043-9.
  65. 65.Smale DA, Wernberg T. Extreme climatic event drives range contraction of a habitat-forming species. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2013; 280:20122829. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2829.
  66. 66.Bellard C, Bertelsmeier C, Leadley P, Thuiller W, Courchamp F. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 2012; 15:365–377. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x.
  67. 67.Sabattini JA, Sabattini RA, Urteaga Omar F, Bacigalupo M, Cian JC, Sabattini IA, Dopazzo VM. Recuperación del pastizal natural en un bosque nativo degradado del Espinal argentino: persistencia del control químico de arbustivas. Investigación Agraria. 2019; 21(2):93-107.
  68. 68.Sabattini RA, Sabattini JA, Cian JC, Lindt MA. Mechanical recovery of a native forest with shrubs of the Espinal Ecoregion (Argentina). Journal Forestist. Istanbul University. 2018; 68(2):78-86. DOI: 10.26650/forestist.2018.392323.

Written By

Julian Alberto Sabattini and Rafael Alberto Sabattini

Submitted: May 21st, 2021Reviewed: June 25th, 2021Published: July 28th, 2021