Köppen-Geiger and Camargo climate classifications for the Midwest of Brasil

There is a wide variety of climates on the planet’s surface, and climate classifications are tools for delimiting and describing prevailing climate types. Köppen classification relates types of climate to types of vegetation, while Camargo classification seeks to map climatic types based on thermal and water factors. In Brazil, the Midwest region is a major agricultural producer but still lacks detailed climate information. In this sense, we aimed to compare Köppen and Geiger ( 1928 ) with Camargo ( 1991 ) methods for climate classification in the Midwest of Brazil. For this purpose, we used data on daily global solar radiation; mean, maximum, and minimum air temperature; relative humidity; wind speed; and precipitation from 2160 weather stations, which were obtained from the NASA/POWER platform. Components of normal climatological water balance were calculated using the Thornthwaite and Mather ( 1955 ) method, with an available water capacity of 100 mm. Köppen and Geiger ( 1928 ) system uses data on mean annual temperature, annual precipitation, coldest month mean temperature, warmest month mean temperature, and driest month precipitation. The method of Camargo ( 1991 ), modified by Maluf ( 2000 ), uses the following meteorological elements: mean annual temperature, coldest month mean temperature, annual water surplus and deficit, and water deficit months. The similarity between classification methods was verified by agglomerative hierarchical clustering and Tukey’s test at 95% reliability. The most predominant climate class according to Camargo ( 1991 ) was TR-UMi (humid tropical climate), representing 33.63% of the entire territory of the Midwest of Brazil. According to Köppen and Geiger ( 1928 ), six climate types were observed in the Midwest region, with a predominance of class Aw (tropical climate with dry winter), representing 58.50% of the entire region. While Köppen and Geiger ( 1928 ) showed a macroscale scope, Camargo ( 1991 ) classification had a mesoscale approach. The latter was more suitable for agricultural purposes, mainly because it provided information on prevailing water conditions in the region.