ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2020
A comparison of ground-based methods for obtaining large-scale, high-resolution data on the spring leaf phenology of temperate tree species.
Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Winter climate change mediates the sensitivity of vegetation leaf-out to spring warming in high latitudes in China.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- A comparison of herbarium and citizen science phenology datasets for detecting response of flowering time to climate change in Denmark.International journal of biometeorology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phenological variation in spring leafing between and within species can determine plant responses to warmer winter and spring temperatures in the short term. Methods are needed for monitoring canopy development that can be replicated on a large-scale, while retaining fine-scale resolution at the level of individual trees. Citizen science has the potential to provide this, but a range of approaches exist in terms of the phenophase recorded (e.g. budburst or leaf expansion), how the phenophase is characterised (first events or intensity monitoring) and the portion of tree crown assessed and observation frequency. A comparison of spring budburst and leaf expansion of four tree species (Fraxinus excelsior, Fagus sylvatica, Quercus robur and Acer pseudoplatanus) was monitored in one woodland using (1) counts of expanded leaves on three crown sections, (2) percentage estimates of expanded leaves across the whole crown and (3) a greenness index from photography. Logistic growth models were applied to make comparisons. First-event dates were found to be misleading due to high variation in leaf development rates within and between species. Percentage estimates and counts produced similar estimates of leaf expansion timing and rate. The greenness index produced similar estimates of timing, but not rate, and was compromised by practicalities of photographing individual crowns in closed-canopy woodland. Citizen scientists could collect data across the period of spring leafing, with visual counts and/or estimates made every 3-4 days, subject to tests of reliability in pilot citizen science studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31834494What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.