“…The training set has a MJT gradient of 16.6 • C and the RMSEP represents 13.8 % of the scalar length of the MJT gradient. This is comparable with most chironomid-based transfer function models including those developed from northern Sweden with 100 lakes (r 2 = 0.65, Larocque et al, 2001), western Ireland with 50 lakes (r 2 = 0.60, Potito et al, 2014) and Finland with 77 lakes (r 2 = 0.78, Luoto, 2009) representing 14.7, 15 and 12.5 % of the scalar length of the temperature gradient, respectively, but less robust than the combined 274-lake transfer function developed from Europe (r 2 = 0.84, RMSEP representing 10.4 % of the scalar length of the MJT gradient) (Heiri et al, 2011). Despite of the relatively lower model coefficient (r boot = 0.63), we observe that by having a large number of lakes in the calibration set, the distribution of the sites along the MJT gradient is relatively even (Fig.…”