Warming experiments are increasingly relied on to estimate plant responses to global climate change. For experiments to provide meaningful predictions of future responses, they should reflect the empirical record of responses to temperature variability and recent warming, including advances in the timing of flowering and leafing. We compared phenology (the timing of recurring life history events) in observational studies and warming experiments spanning four continents and 1,634 plant species using a common measure of temperature sensitivity (change in days per degree Celsius). We show that warming experiments underpredict advances in the timing of flowering and leafing by 8.5-fold and 4.0-fold, respectively, compared with long-term observations. For species that were common to both study types, the experimental results did not match the observational data in sign or magnitude. The observational data also showed that species that flower earliest in the spring have the highest temperature sensitivities, but this trend was not reflected in the experimental data. These significant mismatches seem to be unrelated to the study length or to the degree of manipulated warming in experiments. The discrepancy between experiments and observations, however, could arise from complex interactions among multiple drivers in the observational data, or it could arise from remediable artefacts in the experiments that result in lower irradiance and drier soils, thus dampening the phenological responses to manipulated warming. Our results introduce uncertainty into ecosystem models that are informed solely by experiments and suggest that responses to climate change that are predicted using such models should be re-evaluated.

Abstract. Earlier spring phenology observed in many plant species in recent decades provides compelling evidence that species are already responding to the rising global temperatures associated with anthropogenic climate change. There is great variability among species, however, in their phenological sensitivity to temperature. Species that do not phenologically ''track'' climate change may be at a disadvantage if their growth becomes limited by missed interactions with mutualists, or a shorter growing season relative to earlieractive competitors. Here, we set out to test the hypothesis that phenological sensitivity could be used to predict species performance in a warming climate, by synthesizing results across terrestrial warming experiments. We assembled data for 57 species across 24 studies where flowering or vegetative phenology was matched with a measure of species performance. Performance metrics included biomass, percent cover, number of flowers, or individual growth. We found that species that advanced their phenology with warming also increased their performance, whereas those that did not advance tended to decline in performance with warming. This indicates that species that cannot phenologically ''track'' climate may be at increased risk with future climate change, and it suggests that phenological monitoring may provide an important tool for setting future conservation priorities.

Disparate ecological datasets are often organized into databases post hoc and then analyzed and interpreted in ways that may diverge from the purposes of the original data collections. Few studies, however, have attempted to quantify how biases inherent in these data (for example, species richness, replication, climate) affect their suitability for addressing broad scientific questions, especially in under-represented systems (for example, deserts, tropical forests) and wild communities. Here, we quantitatively compare the sensitivity of species first flowering and leafing dates to spring warmth in two phenological databases from the Northern Hemisphere. One-PEP725-has high replication within and across sites, but has low species diver- Author Contributions: All authors contributed to the study design and offered comments on this manuscript as part of the ''Forecasting Phenology'' working group funded by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis. Author Cook conceived of and designed the study, analyzed the data, and wrote the paper. Wolkovich and Davies contributed significantly to the refinement of the ideas and analyses and assisted with the writing. Ault contributed significantly to the analyses, including processing of the GHCN climate data. Betancourt contributed significantly to the writing and study design. The first five authors are listed in order of their contributions; all other authors are listed alphabetically.*Corresponding author; e-mail: benjamin.i.cook@nasa.gov Ecosystems DOI: 10.1007/s10021-012-9584-5 Ó 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC (outside the USA) sity and spans a limited climate gradient. The other-NECTAR-includes many more species and a wider range of climates, but has fewer sites and low replication of species across sites. PEP725, despite low species diversity and relatively low seasonality, accurately captures the magnitude and seasonality of warming responses at climatically similar NECTAR sites, with most species showing earlier phenological events in response to warming. In NECTAR, the prevalence of temperature responders significantly declines with increasing mean annual temperature, a pattern that cannot be detected across the limited climate gradient spanned by the PEP725 flowering and leafing data. Our results showcase broad areas of agreement between the two databases, despite significant differences in species richness and geographic coverage, while also noting areas where including data across broader climate gradients may provide added value. Such comparisons help to identify gaps in our observations and knowledge base that can be addressed by ongoing monitoring and research efforts. Resolving these issues will be critical for improving predictions in understudied and undersampled systems outside of the temperature seasonal mid-latitudes.

No abstract

No abstract