Za standardizacijo zaporedij širin branik je v uporabi več programov, mi smo primerjali dva - najbolj razširjeni in znani program ARSTAN in pred kratkim predstavljeno knjižnico za standardizacijo dendrokronoloških podatkov dplR, narejeno za statistični program R. Oba programa sta brezplačna, ARSTAN je namenski program za standardizacijo zaporedij širin branik, medtem ko je program R, v okviru katerega deluje knjižnica dplR, namenjen tudi drugim analizam in prikazom podatkov. Uporabili smo različne teste in preverili, ali so med kronologijami širin branik, kakor jih izračunata ARSTAN in dplR, statistično značilne razlike in ali so standardizirane kronologije, narejene s knjižnico dplR, enako uporabne za preučevanje ekoloških in klimatoloških vprašanj, kot so kronologije, narejene s programom ARSTAN. ARSTAN za izračun kronologije ponudi uporabniku listo ukazov, medtem ko dplR zahteva pisne ukaze in ne ponuja izbire. Pri primerjavi rezultatov smo ugotovili, da razlike med izračuni primerjanih programov niso statistično značilne - programa pri osnovnih statističnih parametrih ponudita enake rezultate za povprečne širine branik in standardne odklone ter z razliko na drugem decimalnem mestu za rezultate občutljivosti in avtokorelacijskega koeficienta. Korelacija med standardiziranima kronologijama znaša 0,9773, med kronologijama ostankov pa 0,9776, grafično so razlike prav tako maloštevilne in majhne. Ker se programa razlikujeta le po delovnem okolju, je odločitev o izbiri programa prepuščena uporabniku.Several freeware programs are available for calculation of chronologies. In this paper, we compared two of these programsthe well known ARSTAN and the newly introduced library for standardization dendrochronological data dplR, made for statistical program R. Both are free. ARSTAN is specific and produces chronologies from tree-ring width by standardization, while dplR is a package within the statistical programming environment R, which is able to analyze and present results of other analysis. For comparison of chronologies,made in these two programs, we used different tests. ARSTAN provides many options for calculating chronologies, whereas dplR demands written orders and offers no choices. Differences between built chronologies from these two programs are not statistically significant - programs produce same results comparing basic statistical analysis for average tree-ring width sand standard deviations, but for results of sensitivity and autocorrelation coefficient, there is a difference on a second decimal place. Correlation between standardized chronologies is 0.9773, while between residual chronologies it reaches 0.9776graphically, the differences are also small and low numbered. As the true difference between the programs lies merely in the working environment, it is for users to decide, which program suit them best
