Assessing plant phenological changes based on drivers of spring phenology

  1. Yong Jiang
  2. Stephen J Mayor
  3. Xiuli Chu
  4. Xiaoqi Ye
  5. Rongzhou Man  Is a corresponding author
  6. Jing Tao  Is a corresponding author
  7. Qing-Lai Dang
  1. Key Laboratory of Ecology of Rare and Endangered Species and Environmental Protection of Ministry of Education, Guangxi Normal University, China
  2. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Ontario Forest Research Institute, Canada
  3. Shanghai Botanical Garden, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Sustainable Plant Innovation, China
  4. Research Institute of Subtropical Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, China
  5. Jilin Provincial Academy of Forestry Sciences, China
  6. Faculty of Natural Resources Management, Lakehead University, Canada
3 figures, 2 tables and 2 additional files

Figures

Observed responses and phenological lags (least square means ± standard errors) in leafing and flowering (left and right set of bars in each pair, respectively) by research approach (observational and experimental), species origin (native and exotic), climatic region (boreal and temperate), and growth form (tree, shrub, herb, and grass) extracted from reported plant phenological changes in spring.

Phenological lags are calculated from the differences between observed responses and those expected from species-specific changes in spring temperatures. Different letters indicate means that differ significantly (P<0.05).

A diagram showing the relationships among forcing change (FC, difference in spring forcing (degree days) between baseline 1iTCi and warmer 1iTWi climates at budburst with the baseline climate OCi), expected response (NE, difference between baseline and warmer climates in reaching species forcing threshold, i.e., 1iTCi at OCi), budburst temperature (FC/NE, average temperature or rate of forcing accumulation at budburst with the warmer climate), and phenological lag (NC, difference between expected NE and observed NO responses or between expected EWi and observed OWi phenology with the warmer climate).
Distribution of phenological studies used in this synthesis.

Numbers correspond to study information in Supplementary file 1A. For studies reporting average phenological responses for multiple locations, geographic centers are shown.

Tables

Table 1
Mean values of climatic, phenological, and biological variables by budburst (leafing or flowering), research approach (observational or experimental), species origin (native or exotic), climatic region (boreal or temperate), and growth form (tree, shrub, herb, or grass).

Budburst temperature = average temperature at budburst under the warmer climate, forcing change = warming-induced changes in spring forcing prior to budburst, spring warming = average spring temperature change, and phenological lag = difference between observed response and that expected from forcing change and budburst temperature.

BudburstSpring phenology (Julian)Budburst temperature (°C)Altitude(m)Latitude (°N)MAT (°C)Forcing change (degree days)Spring warming (°C)Phenological lag (day)Sample size(N)
Leafing11111.168742.87.8851.31.8447
Observational10611.048742.68.4791.11.2359
Experimental13011.2150043.85.61061.84.188
Native11311.074443.37.4851.31.9379
Exotic10011.736640.010.2781.21.168
Boreal12810.2114745.72.0651.32.4154
Temperate10211.544441.310.9941.31.5293
Tree10511.736441.910.11011.41.9246
Shrub10910.943343.57.8801.41.1107
Herb13110.0195543.31.8510.81.254
Grass1238.9163745.92.1370.73.640
Flowering13813.753445.59.01261.33.51080
Observational13613.445446.09.21201.23.3956
Experimental15416.7115341.87.31741.84.7124
Native14213.861745.98.51241.33.7850
Exotic12513.522944.310.91351.42.4230
Boreal16714.6199842.93.31091.41.3175
Temperate13313.625146.010.11301.33.9905
Tree11412.728943.510.51191.51.4183
Shrub12512.344644.88.51031.32.9148
Herb14614.260846.18.71291.43.8659
Grass15015.363646.58.91601.45.890
  1. Note: effects of forcing change and budburst temperature illustrated in Partitioning observed changes.

  2. a) the difference in forcing change between boreal and temperate regions for leafing is 29 (94 – 65), equivalent to 2.8 day expected responses under the average budburst temperature of boreal region (10.2). Similarly, the difference in flowering is equivalent to 1.4 day expected responses, i.e., 21/14.6.

  3. b) the difference in forcing change between grasses and trees + shrubs for leafing is 53 ((101+80)/2 – 37), equivalent to 6.0 day expected responses under the average budburst temperature of grasses (8.9).

  4. c) the difference in forcing change between experimental and observational studies for leafing is 27 (106 –79), equivalent to 2.5 day expected responses under the average budburst temperature of observational studies (11.0).

  5. d) different budburst temperatures explain 2.6 day difference in flowering responses between experimental and observational studies, i.e., 174/13.4 – 174/16.7, and 1.8 day difference in flowering responses between woody (trees and shrubs) and non-woody (herbs and grasses) plants, i.e., (129+160)/(12.7+12.3) – (129+160)/(14.2+15.3).

Table 2
Final stepwise regression coefficients and variable influence on observed phenological responses using Akaike information criterion (AIC).
BudburstInterceptBudburst temperatureAltitudeLatitudeMATForcing changeSpring warmingPhenological lagR2 sample (N)
Leafing2.6439–0.60750.00030.07320.14800.07360.9463–0.97380.9453
AIC (%)449 (27.7)340 (20.9)2 (0.1)15 (0.9)11 (0.7)68 (4.2)7 (0.4)732 (45.1)(447)
Flowering4.5210–0.59170.00030.08690.14660.05210.7620–0.98930.9653
AIC (%)785 (18.1)247 (5.7)7 (0.2)20 (0.5)32 (0.7)826 (19.1)5 (0.1)2409 (55.6)(1080)
  1. Note: Budburst temperature (°C) = average temperature at budburst (leafing or flowering) with the warmer climate.

  2. MAT (°C) = long-term mean annual temperature.

  3. Forcing change = warming-induced changes in spring forcing prior to budburst.

  4. Spring warming (°C) = average spring temperature change (Julian day 1 to 182).

  5. Phenological lag (days) = difference between observed response and that expected from forcing change and budburst temperature.

  6. Spring phenology (date of budburst with the baseline climate; Julian days) and long-term mean precipitation (MAP, mm) were excluded from final models due to lack of significance.

  7. Forcing change, budburst temperature, and phenological lag are calculated from phenological and temperature data for individual species, spring phenology and observed responses are provided in the original studies, and spring warming and long-term MAT and MAP are provided in the original studies, calculated from baseline temperatures, or extracted from Google Maps, FreeMapTools, or WorldClim Database (Fick and Hijmans, 2017).

Additional files

Supplementary file 1

A global dataset of observational and experimental studies.

(A) A list of references for all studies included. (B) A summary of study information. (C) MetaData containing all data used in the analysis. (D) Sources of weather data.

https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/106655/elife-106655-supp1-v1.xls
MDAR checklist
https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/106655/elife-106655-mdarchecklist1-v1.pdf

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Yong Jiang
  2. Stephen J Mayor
  3. Xiuli Chu
  4. Xiaoqi Ye
  5. Rongzhou Man
  6. Jing Tao
  7. Qing-Lai Dang
(2025)
Assessing plant phenological changes based on drivers of spring phenology
eLife 14:RP106655.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.106655.4