**5. Conclusions**

In this study, the consistency between in-situ observations collected at 17 field observation stations in the alpine region of the QTP and the three reanalysis datasets (CLDAS, GLDAS, and ERA5L) and their deviations from observations from 2017–2018 are evaluated. Major conclusions are as follows:


In summary, CLDAS is more consistent with observations than GLDAS and ERA5L are and demonstrates better capability for the description of temperature in the alpine region of the QTP. Despite certain defects and limitations, ERA5L and GLDAS are still reliable and applicable in the alpine area of the QTP where observations are sparse and unevenly distributed. Results of the present paper have grea<sup>t</sup> implications for ecosystems and sustainable development studies in the QTP.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, X.H., S.H. and C.S.; methodology, X.H., S.H. and C.S.; validation, S.H.; data curation, S.H. and C.S.; writing—original draft preparation, X.H.; writing— review and editing, X.H., S.H. and C.S.; visualization, X.H.; supervision, S.H.; funding acquisition, S.H. and C.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research was funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2018YFC1506601), the Key Research and Development Program of Sichuan (No. 2022YFS0541), the Key Techniques and Data Sets of Land Surface Reanalysis in Qinghai Xizang Plateau (No. NMICJY202106), Study on the Fusion of Precipitation and Soil Moisture with Multi-Source Data (No. 2011DFG23150), and the Innovative Development Project of the China Meteorological Administration (No. CXFZ2021Z007).

**Acknowledgments:** The authors appreciate the National Tibetan Plateau Data Center for providing the meteorological observation data set of HORN in 2017–2018, and thank all the participants in the field observations. We are very grateful for the helpful input and suggestions from the anonymous reviewers and editors.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
