Thermal Forcing Versus Chilling? Misspecification of Temperature Controls in Spring Phenology Models

IF 6.3 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Xiaojie Gao, Andrew D. Richardson, Mark A. Friedl, Minkyu Moon, Josh M. Gray
{"title":"Thermal Forcing Versus Chilling? Misspecification of Temperature Controls in Spring Phenology Models","authors":"Xiaojie Gao,&nbsp;Andrew D. Richardson,&nbsp;Mark A. Friedl,&nbsp;Minkyu Moon,&nbsp;Josh M. Gray","doi":"10.1111/geb.13932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Climate-change-induced shifts in the timing of leaf emergence during spring have been widely documented and have important ecological consequences. However, mechanistic knowledge regarding what controls the timing of spring leaf emergence is incomplete. Field-based studies under natural conditions suggest that climate-warming-induced decreases in cold temperature accumulation (chilling) have expanded the dormancy duration or reduced the sensitivity of plants to warming temperatures (thermal forcing) during spring, thereby slowing the rate at which the timing of leaf emergence is shifting earlier in response to ongoing climate change. However, recent studies have argued that the apparent reductions in temperature sensitivity may arise from artefacts in the way that temperature sensitivity is calculated, while other studies based on statistical and mechanistic models specifically designed to quantify the role of chilling have shown conflicting results.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We analysed four commonly used combinations of phenology and temperature datasets obtained from remote sensing and ground observations to elucidate whether current model-based approaches robustly quantify how chilling, in concert with thermal forcing, controls the timing of leaf emergence during spring under current climate conditions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We show that widely used modeling approaches that are calibrated using field-based observations misspecify the role of chilling under current climate conditions as a result of statistical artefacts inherent to the way that chilling is parameterised. Our results highlight the limitations of existing modelling approaches and observational data in quantifying how chilling affects the timing of spring leaf emergence and suggest that decreasing chilling arising from climate warming may not constrain near-future shifts towards earlier leaf emergence in extra-tropical ecosystems worldwide.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":176,"journal":{"name":"Global Ecology and Biogeography","volume":"33 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Ecology and Biogeography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/geb.13932","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Climate-change-induced shifts in the timing of leaf emergence during spring have been widely documented and have important ecological consequences. However, mechanistic knowledge regarding what controls the timing of spring leaf emergence is incomplete. Field-based studies under natural conditions suggest that climate-warming-induced decreases in cold temperature accumulation (chilling) have expanded the dormancy duration or reduced the sensitivity of plants to warming temperatures (thermal forcing) during spring, thereby slowing the rate at which the timing of leaf emergence is shifting earlier in response to ongoing climate change. However, recent studies have argued that the apparent reductions in temperature sensitivity may arise from artefacts in the way that temperature sensitivity is calculated, while other studies based on statistical and mechanistic models specifically designed to quantify the role of chilling have shown conflicting results.

Methods

We analysed four commonly used combinations of phenology and temperature datasets obtained from remote sensing and ground observations to elucidate whether current model-based approaches robustly quantify how chilling, in concert with thermal forcing, controls the timing of leaf emergence during spring under current climate conditions.

Results

We show that widely used modeling approaches that are calibrated using field-based observations misspecify the role of chilling under current climate conditions as a result of statistical artefacts inherent to the way that chilling is parameterised. Our results highlight the limitations of existing modelling approaches and observational data in quantifying how chilling affects the timing of spring leaf emergence and suggest that decreasing chilling arising from climate warming may not constrain near-future shifts towards earlier leaf emergence in extra-tropical ecosystems worldwide.

热强迫还是寒冷?春季物候模型中温度控制的错误规范
气候变化引起的春季叶片萌发时间的变化已被广泛记录,并对生态产生了重要影响。然而,有关控制春季叶片萌发时间的机理知识尚不完整。在自然条件下进行的实地研究表明,气候变暖引起的低温积累(寒冷)减少,延长了植物的休眠期,或降低了植物对春季温度升高(热强迫)的敏感性,从而减缓了因气候变化而提前萌叶的速度。然而,最近的研究认为,温度敏感性的明显降低可能是由于计算温度敏感性的方法出现了误差,而其他基于统计和机理模型、专门用于量化寒冷作用的研究则显示了相互矛盾的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Global Ecology and Biogeography 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
3.10%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Global Ecology and Biogeography (GEB) welcomes papers that investigate broad-scale (in space, time and/or taxonomy), general patterns in the organization of ecological systems and assemblages, and the processes that underlie them. In particular, GEB welcomes studies that use macroecological methods, comparative analyses, meta-analyses, reviews, spatial analyses and modelling to arrive at general, conceptual conclusions. Studies in GEB need not be global in spatial extent, but the conclusions and implications of the study must be relevant to ecologists and biogeographers globally, rather than being limited to local areas, or specific taxa. Similarly, GEB is not limited to spatial studies; we are equally interested in the general patterns of nature through time, among taxa (e.g., body sizes, dispersal abilities), through the course of evolution, etc. Further, GEB welcomes papers that investigate general impacts of human activities on ecological systems in accordance with the above criteria.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信