Flowering and leaf phenology are more variable and stronger associated to functional traits in herbaceous compared to tree species

Horbach, Sophie E.R.; Rauschkolb, Robert; Römermann, Christine

doi:10.1016/j.flora.2023.152218

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, we conclude that the botanical gardens participating in the PhenObs network indeed provide a sufficiently controlled platform for phenological research (Primack and Miller-Rushing 2009 ; Sporbert et al 2022 ). Regarding possible, even stronger associations between functional traits and phenological patterns, as observed in other studies in botanical gardens (Sporbert et al 2022 ; Horbach et al 2023 ), we consider two reasons which may have obscured our analyses. First, the observed populations have different genetic origins at each garden and therefore may show different responses to environmental factors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…We assume that the variability of the abiotic factors mentioned above (temperature, precipitation and photoperiod) will be key driving factors. In addition, species-specific and growth form-specific phenological responses to climatic conditions in herbaceous species can also be described by using functional traits (Sun and Frelich 2011 ; König et al 2018 ; Bucher et al 2018 ; Bucher and Römermann 2021 ; Sporbert et al 2022 ; Horbach et al 2023 ). Most of these studies, however, focus on the onset of a phenological stage and linear shifts in response to temperature rather than the variability in phenological stages, e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Rauschkolb,

Bucher,

Hensen

et al. 2024

Int J Biometeorol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas temporal variability of plant phenology in response to climate change has already been well studied, the spatial variability of phenology is not well understood. Given that phenological shifts may affect biotic interactions, there is a need to investigate how the variability in environmental factors relates to the spatial variability in herbaceous species’ phenology by at the same time considering their functional traits to predict their general and species-specific responses to future climate change. In this project, we analysed phenology records of 148 herbaceous species, which were observed for a single year by the PhenObs network in 15 botanical gardens. For each species, we characterised the spatial variability in six different phenological stages across gardens. We used boosted regression trees to link these variabilities in phenology to the variability in environmental parameters (temperature, latitude and local habitat conditions) as well as species traits (seed mass, vegetative height, specific leaf area and temporal niche) hypothesised to be related to phenology variability. We found that spatial variability in the phenology of herbaceous species was mainly driven by the variability in temperature but also photoperiod was an important driving factor for some phenological stages. In addition, we found that early-flowering and less competitive species characterised by small specific leaf area and vegetative height were more variable in their phenology. Our findings contribute to the field of phenology by showing that besides temperature, photoperiod and functional traits are important to be included when spatial variability of herbaceous species is investigated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Rauschkolb,

Bucher,

Hensen

et al. 2024

Int J Biometeorol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, phenological responses to changes in climate may depend on community composition (Jentsch et al, 2009), habitat type (König et al, 2018), observation site (Bucher et al, 2018), or growth form (Horbach et al, 2023;König et al, 2018). In addition to changes in temperature, changes in precipitation are identified as major drivers of phenological shifts (Jentsch et al, 2009;König et al, 2018;Lesica & Kittelson, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the direction and magnitude of phenological shifts are frequently reported to be species‐specific (Bock et al., 2014; Bucher et al., 2018; Jentsch et al., 2009; Piao et al., 2019; Root et al., 2003) and context‐specific. For example, phenological responses to changes in climate may depend on community composition (Jentsch et al., 2009), habitat type (König et al., 2018), observation site (Bucher et al., 2018), or growth form (Horbach et al., 2023; König et al., 2018). In addition to changes in temperature, changes in precipitation are identified as major drivers of phenological shifts (Jentsch et al., 2009; König et al., 2018; Lesica & Kittelson, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant species phenology differs between climate and land‐use scenarios and relates to plant functional traits

Plos,

Hensen,

Korell

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenological shifts due to changing climate are often highly species and context specific. Land‐use practices such as mowing or grazing directly affect the phenology of grassland species, but it is unclear if plants are similarly affected by climate change in differently managed grassland systems such as meadows and pastures. Functional traits have a high potential to explain phenological shifts and might help to understand species‐specific and land‐use‐specific phenological responses to changes in climate. In the large‐scale field experiment Global Change Experimental Facility (GCEF), we monitored the first flowering day, last flowering day, flowering duration, and day of peak flowering, of 17 herbaceous grassland species under ambient and future climate conditions, comparing meadows and pastures. Both climate and land use impacted the flowering phenology of plant species in species‐specific ways. We did not find evidence for interacting effects of climate and land‐use type on plant phenology. However, the data indicate that microclimatic and microsite conditions on meadows and pastures were differently affected by future climate, making differential effects on meadows and pastures likely. Functional traits, including the phenological niche and grassland utilization indicator values, explained species‐specific phenological climate responses. Late flowering species and species with a low mowing tolerance advanced their flowering more strongly under future climate. Long flowering species and species following an acquisitive strategy (high specific leaf area, high mowing tolerance, and high forage value) advanced their flowering end more strongly and thus more strongly shortened their flowering under future climate. We associated these trait–response relationships primarily with a phenological drought escape during summer. Our results provide novel insights on how climate and land use impact the flowering phenology of grassland species and we highlight the role of functional traits in mediating phenological responses to climate.

show abstract

“…We assume that the variability of the abiotic factors mentioned above (temperature, precipitation and photoperiod) will be key driving factors. In addition, species-speci c and growth form-speci c phenological responses to climatic conditions in herbaceous species can also be described by using functional traits (Sun and Horbach et al 2023). Most of these studies, however, focus on the onset of a phenological stage and linear shifts in response to temperature, rather than the variability in phenological stages, e.g., differences in the timing of phenological events over several years or across sites, but see Osada (2000) for an example on the variability in phenological stages in trees and Stemkovski et al (2023) for an example across woody species, grasses and herbaceous species.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Rauschkolb,

Bucher,

Hensen

et al. 2023

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas temporal variability of plant phenology in response to climate change has already been well studied, the spatial variability of phenology is not well understood. Given that phenological shifts may affect the magnitude of biotic interactions, there is a need to investigate how the variability in environmental factors relates to the spatial variability in herbaceous species’ phenology by at the same time considering their functional traits to predict their general and species-specific responses to future climate change. In this project, we analysed phenology records of 148 herbaceous species, which were observed for a single year by the PhenObs network in 15 botanical gardens. For each species, we characterised the spatial variability in six different phenological stages across gardens. We used boosted regression trees to link these variabilities in phenology to the variability in environmental parameters (temperature, latitude, and local habitat conditions) as well as species traits (seed mass, vegetative height, specific leaf area, and temporal niche) hypothesised to be related to phenology variability. We found that spatial variability in the phenology of herbaceous species was mainly driven by the variability in temperature but also photoperiod was an important driving factor for some phenological stages. In addition, we found that early-flowering and less competitive species indicated by small specific leaf area and vegetative height were more variable in their phenology. Our findings contribute to the field of phenology by showing that besides temperature, photoperiod and functional traits are important to be included when spatial variability of herbaceous species is investigated.

show abstract

Flowering and leaf phenology are more variable and stronger associated to functional traits in herbaceous compared to tree species

Cited by 10 publications

References 71 publications

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Plant species phenology differs between climate and land‐use scenarios and relates to plant functional traits

Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About