ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2026
Combining temperate fruit tree cultivars to fit spring phenology models.
Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Climate change shifts almond bloom dates in Afghanistan.International journal of biometeorology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phenological datasets for temperate fruit trees are often short, fragmented and geographically restricted, which hampers the development of cultivar-specific spring phenology models. To address this, we propose a novel calibration approach (“combined-fitting”), which pools observations from several cultivars of the same species, distinguishing between shared and cultivar-specific parameters. This method requires fewer observations per cultivar and allows jointly analyzing cultivars of the same species. We evaluate combined-fitting using the PhenoFlex framework, comparing it to a baseline model and to models that are fitted only with data for single cultivars (“cultivar-fit”). Our analysis is based on flowering data from nine almond, six apricot and six sweet cherry cultivars across Mediterranean (Spain, Morocco, Tunisia) and German climates. The combined-fit model failed to achieve higher prediction accuracy compared to the cultivar-fit and the baseline approach, as evidenced by similar root mean square errors across the data splits and calibration dataset sizes. When comparing the estimated parameters of the chill and heat accumulation submodels, we observed a large variation among cultivars of the same species in the cultivar-fit models. In contrast and by design, the combined-fit yielded only one parameter set for cultivars of the same species. Our findings demonstrate that integrating data from multiple cultivars can yield spring phenology models with high accuracy. Even though the combined-fit approach did not outperform the cultivar-fit approach, combined-fitting offers a practical solution for spring phenology modeling with limited datasets and facilitates comparison across cultivars of the same species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.