Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels

Abstract

in all months, and mean precipitation increased in most months (Fig. 2a). 68Spatial variability in climatic change (Fig. 2b,c), necessitates local matching of phenological 69 and climatic datasets rather than the use of regionally-averaged climate data (e.g. Central 70England Temperatures) or large-scale climatic indicators (e.g. North Atlantic Oscillation). 71We did not make the restrictive assumption that biological events would be related to annual CSP precip varied less among trophic levels than the upper limit (Fig. 3d,f) consumers were less than those for primary consumers (Fig. 5a). This occurred because, 195averaged across species, the opposing climate responses of primary producers and secondary 196consumers are more similar in magnitude than are those for primary consumers (Fig. 3), 197 effectively "cancelling each other out". Our models suggest greater average advances for 198 crustacea, fish and insects than for other groups, such as freshwater phytoplankton, birds and 199 mammals (Fig. 5b). However, response-variation is high for crustacea (Fig. 5b). not estimated for marine plankton data (see above), and so the second-phase LME models 441 were run twice: once to examine correlations with temperature and precipitation for all but 442 the marine plankton phenological series (9,800 series), and once to examine only correlations 443 with temperature for the whole data set (10,003 series).

How do phenology, plasticity, and evolution determine the fitness consequences of climate change for montane butterflies?

“…Changes in seasonal timing (phenology) are a common response to recent climate changes in many systems (Parmesan, 2006; Thackeray et al., 2016). The fitness consequences of phenological shifts can be heterogeneous and depend on the environmental and community context (Forrest, 2016; Forrest & Miller‐Rushing, 2010; Pau et al., 2011).…”

Estimating the ability of plants to plastically track temperature‐mediated shifts in the spring phenological optimum

“…For temperate plants, the timing of spring events, such as leafing and flowering, has been especially well recorded by both professional and citizen scientists. Analysis of the resultant longitudinal data sets reveals that spring phenology has advanced in many species over the past few decades, coincident with rising temperatures (Fitter & Fitter, 2002;Amano et al, 2010;Thackeray et al, 2016). Some of the advancement in phenology will be due to microevolutionary change (Franks et al, 2014), but plastic responses to temperature probably dominate (Nicotra et al, 2010).…”

The shifting phenological landscape: Within‐ and between‐species variation in leaf emergence in a mixed‐deciduous woodland

“…In deciduous habitats, for example, the timing of leaf emergence determines the availability of food for many herbivorous insect species (Coyle et al., 2010; Feeny, 1970) and, in turn, insectivorous birds (Perrins, 1991; Van Noordwijk et al., 1995). Any disruption to such trophic synchrony, caused by changes in vegetation phenology, could have far‐reaching consequences for community structure and population dynamics (Post et al., 2009; Thackeray et al., 2010, 2016). Recent research has demonstrated that species and populations can differ considerably in their phenological responses to climate change (Roberts et al., 2015; Thackeray et al., 2010), and this can lead to ecological mismatch between trophic levels (Both et al., 2009; Sagarin et al., 1999).…”