This dataset contains climate "indicators" (also referred to as climate indices or metrics) computed over one historical period (1980-2009) using the NCAR Daymet dataset, and two future periods (2040-2069, 2070-2099) using two statistically downscaled global climate model projections, each run under two plausible greenhouse gas futures (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). The indicators within this dataset include: hd: “Hot day” threshold -- the highest observed daily maximum 2 m air temperature such that there are 5 other observations equal to or greater than this value. cd: “Cold day” threshold -- the lowest observed daily minimum 2 m air temperature such that there are 5 other observations equal to or less than this value. rx1day: Maximum 1-day precipitation su: "Summer Days" –- Annual number of days with maximum 2 m air temperature above 25 C dw: "Deep Winter days" –- Annual number of days with minimum 2 m air temperature below -30 C wsdi: Warm Spell Duration Index -- Annual count of occurrences of at least 5 consecutive days with daily mean 2 m air temperature above 90th percentile of historical values for the date cdsi: Cold Spell Duration Index -- Same as WDSI, but for daily mean 2 m air temperature below 10th percentile rx5day: Maximum 5-day precipitation r10mm: Number of days with precipitation > 10 mm cwd: Consecutive wet days –- number of the most consecutive days with precipitation > 1 mm cdd: Consecutive dry days –- number of the most consecutive days with precipitation < 1 mm

These files include climatological summaries of downscaled historical and projected decadal average monthly derived snow variables and summaries at 771 meter spatial resolution across Alaska. There are three types of files: 1). The historical and future snowfall water equivalent (SWE) in millimeters, produced by multiplying snow-day fraction by decadal average monthly precipitation and summing over 6 months from October to March to estimate the total SWE on April 1. 2). The historical and future ratio of SWE to total precipitation (SFEtoP) in percent. SFEtoP is calculated as (SWE / total precipitation) and also represents the six month October to March period. 3). The future difference in SWE with respect to the historical baseline (dSWE) in percent. dSWE is calculated as ((future SWE – historical SWE) / historical SWE) * 100. These data are also summary for the six month October to March period. The historical baseline period is 1970-1999, (file naming convention “H70.99”) and data are calculated from downscaled CRU TS 3.1 data. Projected variables exist for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 emission scenarios and for 5 GCMs: NCAR-CCSM4, GFDL-CM3, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5, and MRI-CGCM3. The 5-model mean (file naming convention "5MM") was also computed. Projections exist for three thirty-year climatologies: the 2020s (2010-2039), the 2050s (2040-2069), and the 2080s (2070-2099). The snow-day fraction data used can be found here: http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/projected-decadal-averages-of-monthly-snow-day-fraction-771m-cmip5-ar5 http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/historical-decadal-averages-of-monthly-snow-day-fraction-771m-cru-ts3-0-3-1 The precipitation data used can be found here: http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/projected-monthly-and-derived-precipitation-products-771m-cmip5-ar5 http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/historical-monthly-and-derived-precipitation-products-771m-cru-ts Note: In Littell et al. 2018, "SWE" is referred to as "SFE", and "SFEtoP" as "SFE:P"

This dataset includes quantile-mapped historical and projected model runs of AR5 daily mean mean temperature (tas, degrees C) for each day of every year from 1958 - 2100 at 2.5 x 2.5 degree spatial resolution across 3 CMIP5 models. They are 365 multi-band geotiff files, one file per year, each band representing one day of the year, with no leap years.

This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of decadal means of annual day of freeze or thaw (ordinal day of the year), and length of growing season (numbers of days, 0-365) for each decade from 1910 - 2006 (CRU TS 3.0) or 2009 (CRU TS 3.1) at at 771 x 771 meter spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal mean of an annual mean calculated from mean monthly data.

This set of files includes downscaled future projections of vapor pressure (units=hPa) at a 1km spatial scale. This data has been prepared as model input for the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM). There can be errors or serious limitations to the application of this data to other analyses. The data constitute the result of a downscaling procedure using 2 General Circulation Models (GCM) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) for RCP 8.5 scenario (2006-2100) monthly time series and Climatic Research Unit (CRU) TS2.0 (1961-1990,10 min spatial resolution) global climatology data. Please note that this data is used to fill in a gap in available data for the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM) and does not constitute a complete or precise measurement of this variable in all locations. RCPs: 8.5 Centers, Model Names, Versions, and Acronyms: National Center for Atmospheric Research,Community Earth System Model 4,NCAR-CCSM4 Meteorological Research Institute,Coupled General Circulation Model v3.0,MRI-CGCM3 Methods of creating downscaled relative humidity data: 1. The GCM input data are distributed as relative humidity along with the CRU CL 2.0, therefore no conversion procedure was necessary before beginning the downscaling procedure. 2. Proportional Anomalies generated using the 20c3m Historical relative humidity data 1961-1990 climatology and the projected relative humidity data (2006-2100). 3. These proportional anomalies are interpolated using a spline interpolation to a 10min resolution grid for downscaling with the CRU CL 2.0 Relative Humidity Data. 4. The GCM proportional anomalies are multiplied by month to the baseline CRU CL 2.0 10min relative humidity climatology for the period 1961-1990. Creating a downscaled relative humidity projected time series 2006-2100. 5. Due to the conversion procedure and the low quality of the input data to begin with, there were values that fell well outside of the range of acceptable relative humidity (meaning that there were values >100 percent), these values were re-set to a relative humidity of 95 at the suggestion of the researchers involved in the project. It is well known that the CRU data is spotty for Alaska and the Circumpolar North, due to a lack of weather stations and poor temporal coverage for those stations that exist. 6. The desired output resolution for the AIEM modeling project is 1km, so the newly created downscaled time series is resampled to this resolution using a standard bilinear interpolation resampling procedure. 7. The final step was to convert the downscaled relative humidity data to vapor pressure using the calculation below, which uses a downscaled temperature data set created utilizing the same downscaling procedure. EQUATION: saturated vapor pressure = 6.112 x exp(17.62 x temperature/(243.12+temperature)) vapor pressure = (relative humidity x saturated vapor pressure)/100

This dataset is the product of a climate-driven model of beetle survival and reproduction in Alaska. We used that model to create this dataset of landscape-level “risk” of the climatic component of beetle infestation across the forested areas of Alaska. This risk component can best be applied as protection of the landscape offered by the climate and is categorized as high, medium, and low. It does not consider other major factors, such as existing beetle and predator populations or forest susceptibility. We computed these values over one historical period (1988-2017) using the NCAR Daymet model, and three future periods (2010-2039, 2040-2069, 2070-2099) using four statistically downscaled global climate model projections, each run under two plausible greenhouse gas futures (RCP 4.5 and 8.5).

This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of decadal means of annual day of freeze or thaw (ordinal day of the year), and length of growing season (numbers of days, 0-365) for each decade from 1910 - 2006 (CRU TS 3.0) or 2009 (CRU TS 3.1) at 2x2 kilometer spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal mean of an annual mean calculated from mean monthly data. **Day of freeze or thaw units are ordinal day 15-350 with the below special cases.** *Day of Freeze (DOF)* `0` = Primarily Frozen `365` = Rarely Freezes *Day of Thaw (DOT)* `0` = Rarely Freezes `365` = Primarily Frozen *Length of Growing Season (LOGS)* is simply the number of days between the DOT and DOF. ---- The spatial extent includes Alaska, the Yukon Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Each set of files originates from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU, http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/) TS 3.0 or 3.1 dataset. TS 3.0 extends through December 2006 while 3.1 extends to December 2009. **Day of Freeze, Day of Thaw, Length of Growing Season calculations:** Estimated ordinal days of freeze and thaw are calculated by assuming a linear change in temperature between consecutive months. Mean monthly temperatures are used to represent daily temperature on the 15th day of each month. When consecutive monthly midpoints have opposite sign temperatures, the day of transition (freeze or thaw) is the day between them on which temperature crosses zero degrees C. The length of growing season refers to the number of days between the days of thaw and freeze. This amounts to connecting temperature values (y-axis) for each month (x-axis) by line segments and solving for the x-intercepts. Calculating a day of freeze or thaw is simple. However, transitions may occur several times in a year, or not at all. The choice of transition points to use as the thaw and freeze dates which best represent realistic bounds on a growing season is more complex. Rather than iteratively looping over months one at a time, searching from January forward to determine thaw day and from December backward to determine freeze day, stopping as soon as a sign change between two months is identified, the algorithm looks at a snapshot of the signs of all twelve mean monthly temperatures at once, which enables identification of multiple discrete periods of positive and negative temperatures. As a result more realistic days of freeze and thaw and length of growing season can be calculated when there are idiosyncrasies in the data.

This set of files includes downscaled modeled historical estimates of monthly temperature (in degrees Celsius, no unit conversion necessary) from 1901 - 2005 at 15km x 15km spatial resolution. Each set of files originates from one of five top-ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RCPs or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. These outputs are from the Historical runs of the GCMs. The downscaling process utilizes CRU CL v. 2.1 climatological datasets from 1961-1990 as the baseline for the Delta Downscaling method.

These files include downscaled projections of decadal average monthly snow-day fraction ("fs", units = percent probability from 1 – 100) for each month of the decades from 2010-2019 to 2090-2099 at 771 x 771 m spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal average monthly mean. Output is available for the CCSM4, GFDL-CM3, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5A-LR, and MRI-CGCM3 models and three emissions scenarios (RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5). These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled decadal average monthly temperature. Separate equations were used to model the relationship between decadal monthly average temperature and the fraction of wet days with snow for seven geographic regions in the state: Arctic, Western Alaska, Interior, Cook Inlet, SW Islands, SW Interior, and the Gulf of Alaska coast, using regionally specific logistic models of the probability that precipitation falls as snow given temperature based on station data fits as in McAfee et al. 2014. These projections differ from McAfee et al. 2014 in that updated CMIP5 projected temperatures rather than CMIP3 temperatures were used for the future projections. Although the equations developed here provide a reasonable fit to the data, model evaluation demonstrated that some stations are consistently less well described by regional models than others. It is unclear why this occurs, but it is likely related to localized climate conditions. Very few weather stations with long records are located above 500m elevation in Alaska, so the equations used here were developed primarily from low-elevation weather stations. It is not clear whether the equations will be completely appropriate in the mountains. Finally, these equations summarize a long-term monthly relationship between temperature and precipitation type that is the result of short-term weather variability. In using these equations to make projections of future snow, as assume that these relationships remain stable over time, and we do not know how accurate that assumption is. These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled projected decadal average monthly temperature. The equations were developed from daily observed climate data in the Global Historical Climatology Network. These data were acquired from the National Climatic Data Center in early 2012. Equations were developed for the seven climate regions described in Perica et al. (2012). Geospatial data describing those regions was provided by Sveta Stuefer. Perica, S., D. Kane, S. Dietz, K. Maitaria, D. Martin, S. Pavlovic, I. Roy, S. Stuefer, A. Tidwell, C. Trypaluk, D. Unruh, M. Yekta, E. Betts, G. Bonnin, S. Heim, L. Hiner, E. Lilly, J. Narayanan, F.Yan, T. Zhao. 2012. NOAA Atlas 14. Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the United States.

This set of files includes downscaled projected estimates of monthly total precipitation (in mm, no unit conversion necessary) from 2006-2300 (or 2006-2100, as some datasets from the five models used in modeling work by SNAP only have data going out to 2100) at 15km x 15km spatial resolution. They include data for Alaska and Western Canada. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RPCs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. The downscaling process utilizes CRU CL v. 2.1 climatological datasets from 1961-1990 as the baseline for the Delta Downscaling method. Please note that these maps represent climatic estimates only. While we have based our work on scientifically accepted data and methods, uncertainty is always present. Uncertainty in model outputs tends to increase for more distant climatic estimates from present day for both historical summaries and future projections.