A comparison of phenological models of leaf bud burst and flowering of boreal trees using independent observations

Tree Physiology

Volumn 28, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1873-1882

  Linkosalo, Tapio ^a   Lappalainen, Hanna K ^a,b   Hari, Pertti ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b FINNISH METEOROLOGICAL INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Betula pendula; Betula pubescens; Chilling; Dormancy; Forcing; Prunus padus; Sorbus aucuparia; Spring phenology

Indexed keywords

BOREAL FOREST; BUDBURST; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECIDUOUS TREE; DORMANCY; ECOSYSTEM MODELING; FLOWERING; PARAMETERIZATION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PHENOLOGY; PREDICTION; WARMING;

AVES; BETULA PENDULA; BETULA PUBESCENS; PRUNUS; PRUNUS PADUS; SORBUS; SORBUS AUCUPARIA;

EID: 57149104740     PISSN: 0829318X     EISSN: 17584469     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/28.12.1873     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Cannell, M.G.R. and R.I. Smith. 1983. Thermal time, chill days and prediction of budburst in Picea sitchensis. J. Appl. Ecol. 20:951-963.
2. Chuine, I. 2000. A unified model for budburst of trees. J. Theor. Biol. 207:337-347.
3. Drebs, A., A. Nordlund, P. Karlsson, J. Helminen and P. Rissanen. 2002. Climatological statistics of Finland 1971-2000. Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, 99 p.
4. Häkkinen, R. 1999. Statistical evaluation of bud development theories: application to bud burst of Betula pendula leaves. Tree Physiol. 19:613-618.
5. Häkkinen, R., T. Linkosalo and P. Hari. 1995. Methods for combining phenological time series: application to bud burst in birch (Betula pendula) in Central Finland for the period 1896-1955. Tree Physiol. 15:721-726.
6. Häkkinen, R., T. Linkosalo and P. Hari. 1998. Effects of dormancy and environmental factors on timing of bud burst in Betula pendula. Tree Physiol. 18:707-712.
7. Hänninen, H. 1990. Modeling bud dormancy release in trees from cool and temperate regions. Acta For. Fenn. 213:1-47.
8. Hänninen, H. 1995. Effects of climatic change on trees from cool and temperate regions: an ecophysiological approach to modeling of bud burst phenology. Can. J. Bot. 73:183-199.
9. Heide, O.M. 1993. Dormancy release in beech buds (Fagus sylvatica) requires both chilling and long days. Physiol. Plant. 89:187-191.
10. Hooke, R. and T.A. Jeeves. 1961. "Direct search" solution of numerical and statistical problems. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 8:212-229.
11. Jones, P.D. and A. Moberg. 2003. Hemispheric and large-scale surface air temperature variations: An extensive revision and update to 2001. J. Climatol. 16:206-223.
12. Kolari, P., H.K. Lappalainen, H. Hänninen and P. Hari. 2007. Relationship between temperature and the seasonal course of photosynthesis in Scots pine at nothern timberline and in southern boreal zone. Tellus 59B:542-552.
13. Kramer, K. 1994a. A modeling analysis of the effects of climatic warming on the probability of spring frost damage to tree species in The Netherlands and Germany. Plant Cell Environ. 17:367-377.
14. Kramer, K. 1994b. Selecting a model to predict the onset of growth of Fagus sylvatica. J. Appl. Ecol. 31:172-181.
15. Landsberg, J.J. 1974. Apple fruit bud development and growth; analysis and an empirical model. Ann. Bot. 38:1013-1023.
16. Lappalainen, H.K., T. Linkosalo, and A. Venäläinen. 2008. Long-term trends in spring phenology in a boreal forest in central Finland. Boreal Environ. Res. 13:303-318.
17. Linkosalo, T. 2000. Analyses of the spring phenology of boreal trees and its response to climate change. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Helsinki Department of Forest Ecology Publication No. 22. (http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:951-45-9166-6).
18. Linkosalo, T. and M.J. Lechowicz. 2006. Twilight far-red treatment advances leaf bud burst of silver birch (Betula pendula). Tree Physiol. 26:1249-1256.
19. Linkosalo, T., T.R. Carter, R. Häkkinen and P. Hari. 2000. Predicting spring phenology and frost damage risk of Betula spp. under climatic wanning: a comparison of two models. Tree Physiol. 20:1175-1182.
20. Linkosalo, T., R. Häkkinen and H. Hänninen. 2006. Models of the spring phenology of boreal and temperate trees: is there something missing? Tree Physiol. 26:1165-1172.
21. Menzel, A. and P. Fabian. 1999. Growing season extended in Europe. Nature 397:659.
22. Samish, R.M. 1954. Dormancy in woody plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 5:183-204.
23. Sarvas, R. 1972. Investigations on the annual cycle of development of forest trees. Active period. Commun. Inst. For. Fenn. 76.3:1-110.
24. Sarvas, R. 1974. Investigations on the annual cycle of development of forest trees II. Autumn dormancy and winter dormancy. Commun. Inst. For. Fenn. 84:1-101.
25. Schaber J., F.-W. Badeck. 2003. Physiology-based phenology models for forest tree species in Germany. Int. J. Biometeorol. 47:193-201.
26. Tuomenvirta, H. 2004. Reliable estimation of climatic variations in Finland. Finnish Meteorological Institute Contributions, No. 43. Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, 80 p.
27. Vegis, A. 1964. Dormancy in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 15:185-224.
28. Wallach, D. and B. Goffinet. 1987. Mean squared error of prediction in models for studying ecological and agronomic systems. Biometrics 43:561-573.
29. Wareing, P.F. 1969. The control of bud dormancy in seed plants. In Dormancy and Survival. Ed. H.W. Woolhouse. Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 23. Campbridge University Press, pp 241-262.