2021
DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.12.426288
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A simple explanation for declining temperature sensitivity with warming

Abstract: Temperature sensitivity—the magnitude of a biological response per °C—is a fundamental concept across scientific disciplines, especially biology, where temperature determines the rate of many plant, animal and ecosystem processes. Recently, a growing body of literature in global change biology has found temperature sensitivities decline as temperatures rise (Fuet al., 2015; Güsewell et al., 2017; Piao et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2019; Dai et al., 2019). Such observations have been used to suggest climate change… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous studies have used a linear relationship to model the effect of temperature on deacclimation (Ferguson et al, 2014; Lecomte et al, 2003), as well as the effect of temperature on plant development (Cannell & Smith, 1983; Clark & Thompson, 2010; Linkosalo et al, 2000; Richardson et al, 2018). Although this approach has been criticized due to poor predictions outside the range of temperatures modeled, it is still used as there are often only slight departures from linearity within the range of temperatures integrated into plant development models (Arnold, 1959; Keenan et al, 2020; Wolkovich et al, 2021). However, the departure from linearity can be significant below the minimum and above the optimum temperatures that stimulate plant development and deacclimation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Previous studies have used a linear relationship to model the effect of temperature on deacclimation (Ferguson et al, 2014; Lecomte et al, 2003), as well as the effect of temperature on plant development (Cannell & Smith, 1983; Clark & Thompson, 2010; Linkosalo et al, 2000; Richardson et al, 2018). Although this approach has been criticized due to poor predictions outside the range of temperatures modeled, it is still used as there are often only slight departures from linearity within the range of temperatures integrated into plant development models (Arnold, 1959; Keenan et al, 2020; Wolkovich et al, 2021). However, the departure from linearity can be significant below the minimum and above the optimum temperatures that stimulate plant development and deacclimation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Once buds are ecodormant, temperature is thought to be the main factor regulating deacclimation (Arora & Taulavuori, 2016). In general, deacclimation responses increase as temperatures increase but maximum deacclimation rates can vary genotypically (Ferguson et al, 2014; Kalberer et al, 2006) and there is disagreement whether temperature effects are linear versus curvilinear (Arnold, 1959; Wolkovich et al, 2021). Therefore, descriptions of a deacclimation response require an understanding of both dormancy stage and temperature.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such nonlinear relationships could also generate misleading inferences on temperature sensitivities of phenological change (as illustrated for leaf‐out; Wolkovich et al. 2021 ). Although some potential driving variables could be approximately linearly related to date during key seasons (most obviously photoperiod, e.g., Gienapp et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, seasonal trajectories of environmental variables that affect or represent resource abundance, such as "growing degree days" and invertebrate development and abundance, are clearly nonlinearly related to date, with relationships that vary in form and timing among years and locations (e.g., Charmantier et al 2008;Phillimore et al 2013;Cayton et al 2015;Shutt et al 2019). Such nonlinear relationships could also generate misleading inferences on temperature sensitivities of phenological change (as illustrated for leaf-out; Wolkovich et al 2021). Although some potential driving variables could be approximately linearly related to date during key seasons (most obviously photoperiod, e.g., Gienapp et al 2010;Phillimore et al 2016), the fact that mean breeding date commonly varies substantially among years and adjacent habitats (e.g., Porlier et al 2012;Bonamour et al 2019;de Villemereuil et al 2020) implies that effective date dependence is typically secondary to environment dependence (see also Cayton et al 2015).…”
Section: Implications Of Trait Conceptualizationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, spring phenology is considered to be driven by temperatures in winter and spring because plants need to accumulate su cient winter chilling units to end endodormancy and spring forcing units to break ecodormancy before spring phenological events [18][19][20][21][22] . Although warming-induced earlier spring phenology has been observed across multiple taxa, recent studies show that the response of earlier spring phenology to climate warming may be declining 17,23 . However, the mechanisms behind the slowdown in the warming-induced spring phenology are not well understood.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%