A birch pollen emission model is described and its main features are discussed. The development of the model is based on a double-threshold temperature sum model that describes the propagation of the flowering season and naturally links to the thermal time models to predict the onset and duration of flowering. For the flowering season, the emission model considers ambient humidity and precipitation rate, both of which suppress the pollen release, as well as wind speed and turbulence intensity, which promote it. These dependencies are qualitatively evaluated using the aerobiological observations. Reflecting the probabilistic character of the flowering of an individual tree in a population, the model introduces relaxation functions at the start and end of the season. The physical basis of the suggested birch pollen emission model is compared with another comprehensive emission module reported in literature. The emission model has been implemented in the SILAM dispersion modelling system, the results of which are evaluated in a companion paper.

According to prevailing theory, air temperature is the main environmental factor regulating the timing of bud burst of boreal and temperate trees. Air temperature has a dual role in this regulation. First, after the cessation of growth in autumn, prolonged exposure to chilling causes rest completion, i.e., removes the physiological growth-arresting conditions inside the bud. After rest completion, prolonged exposure to warm conditions causes ontogenetic development leading to bud burst or flowering. During the past three decades, several simulation models based on chilling and forcing have been developed and tested. In recent modeling studies of the timing of bud burst in mature trees, the simpler thermal-time models that assume forcing starts on a fixed date in the spring have outperformed the chilling-forcing models. We hypothesize that this discrepancy may be due to some element missing from the chilling-forcing models. We tested two new model formulations by introducing reversing, temperature-driven elements that precede forcing and by fitting the models to seven historical time series of data of flowering and leaf bud burst of common boreal tree species. In these tests, both of the new models were generally more accurate in predicting the timing of bud burst than a classical chilling-forcing model, but less accurate than the simple thermal-time model. We therefore conclude that besides chilling, other environmental factors are involved in the regulation of the timing of bud burst. Further work is needed to determine if the regulatory factors derive from air temperature or from some other environmental condition such as changes in light conditions, like day length or night length.

We compared and tested Thermal Time, Sequential, Parallel and Flexible phenological models of leaf bud burst in birch (Betula pendula Roth. and B. pubescens Ehrh.) and flowering in bird cherry (Prunus padus L.) and rowan (Sorbus aucuparia L.). We used phenological records from Oulainen-Ohineva (64 degrees 13' N, 24 degrees 53' E) in central Finland from 1953 to 2002 to estimate model parameters. We tested the models with data collected in all but six years between 1896 and 2002 in southern and central Finland; we divided this dataset into two 50-year datasets. The use of three datasets enabled us to test the models with data that were independent of the parameter fitting data, facilitating robust evaluation of model performance. Several models that fitted the parameterization data well showed poorer performance when tested with the independent data. This may be because the models were over-parameterized and able to adapt to noise in the data in addition to the phenological phenomenon itself. Simple Thermal Time models performed best with independent data, and Sequential and Parallel models were similar in prediction accuracy. Although Thermal Time models simulated boreal phenological events under current climatic conditions, some precautions are needed with simulations of climatic warming. For example, changed conditions may increase the relative importance of chilling in the timing of bud burst under elevated temperature conditions, which could alter the performance of phenological models.

Timing of bud burst and frost damage risk for leaves of Betula spp. in response to climatic warming in Finland was examined with two models. In the first model, ontogenetic development in spring was triggered by an accumulation of chilling temperatures. The second model assumed an additional signal from the light climate. The two models gave radically different estimates of frost damage risk in response to climate warming. The chilling-triggered model forecast a significant and increasing risk with increased warming, whereas the light-climate-triggered model predicted little or no risk. The chilling-triggered model is widely applied in phenological research; however, there is increasing experimental evidence that light conditions play a role in the timing of spring phenology. Although it is not clear if the light response mechanisms are appropriately represented in our model, the results imply that reliance on a light signal for spring development would afford a degree of protection against possible frost damage under climate warming that would not be present if chilling were the sole determinant. Further experimental tests are required to ascertain the light-related mechanisms controlling phenological timing, so that credible model extrapolations can be undertaken.

We tested three theories predicting the timing of bud burst in mature birch (Betula pendula Roth) trees utilizing a 60-year phenological time series together with meteorological temperature observations. Predictions of the timing of bud burst based on light conditions in addition to temperature were more accurate than predictions based on dormancy development and temperature (prediction standard error of 2.4 days versus 4.3 days). The signal from light conditions, represented by fixed calendar date, determined the start of bud ontogenesis rather than dormancy release. We suggest that models developed to predict the timing of bud burst be utilized in the analysis of plant responses to climate change and of climate change itself.