3 ms·
You don't need a single tree across the entire timespan you want to look at. You can assemble a series of overlapping samples from a number of trees that lived
by curtis 8y ago
You don't need a single tree across the entire timespan you want to look at. You can assemble a series of overlapping samples from a number of trees that lived at different times during the timespan of interest.
From Wikipedia [1]:
> A fully anchored and cross-matched chronology for oak and pine in central Europe extends back 12,460 years, and an oak chronology goes back 7,429 years in Ireland and 6,939 years in England. Comparison of radiocarbon and dendrochronological ages supports the consistency of these two independent dendrochronological sequences. Another fully anchored chronology that extends back 8500 years exists for the bristlecone pine in the Southwest US (White Mountains of California).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology#Growth_rings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology#Growth_rings (the final paragraph of this section)
- rl3 8y ago>You don't need a single tree across the entire timespan you want to look at. Yeah, I was thinking more in terms of scarcity being an issue for samples that existed during particularly ancient periods in question. However, it seems the samples need not be living nor complete, and we've quite the extensive archive of dead wood dating further back than I could have imagined.
- lawlessone 8y agodoes this mean they have samples of tree for every year between now and those nearly 12,460 years into the past?