Search

Summary: Land surface phenology (LSP), the characterization of plant phenology with satellite data, is essential for understanding the effects of climate change on ecosystem functions. Considerable LSP variation is observed within local landscapes, and the role of biotic factors in regulating such variation remains underexplored.In this study, we selected four National Ecological Observatory Network terrestrial sites with minor topographic relief to investigate how biotic factors regulate intra‐site LSP variability. We utilized plant functional type (PFT) maps, functional traits, and LSP data to assess the explanatory power of biotic factors for the start and end of season (SOS and EOS) variability.Our results indicate that PFTs alone explain only 0.8–23.4% of intra‐site SOS and EOS variation, whereas including functional traits significantly improves explanatory power, with cross‐validation correlations ranging from 0.50 to 0.85. While functional traits exhibited diverse effects on SOS and EOS across different sites, traits related to competitive ability and productivity were important for explaining both SOS and EOS variation at these sites.These findings reveal that plants exhibit diverse phenological responses to comparable environmental conditions, and functional traits significantly contribute to intra‐site LSP variability, highlighting the importance of intrinsic biotic properties in regulating plant phenology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: To what degree plant ecosystems thermoregulate their canopy temperature (Tc) is critical to assess ecosystems' metabolisms and resilience with climate change, but remains controversial, with opinions from no to moderate thermoregulation capability.With global datasets of Tc, air temperature (Ta), and other environmental and biotic variables from FLUXNET and satellites, we tested the 'limited homeothermy' hypothesis (indicated by Tc & Ta regression slope < 1 or Tc < Ta around midday) across global extratropics, including temporal and spatial dimensions.Across daily to weekly and monthly timescales, over 80% of sites/ecosystems have slopes ≥1 or Tc > Ta around midday, rejecting the above hypothesis. For those sites unsupporting the hypothesis, their Tc–Ta difference (ΔT) exhibits considerable seasonality that shows negative, partial correlations with leaf area index, implying a certain degree of thermoregulation capability. Spatially, site‐mean ΔT exhibits larger variations than the slope indicator, suggesting ΔT is a more sensitive indicator for detecting thermoregulatory differences across biomes. Furthermore, this large spatial‐wide ΔT variation (0–6°C) is primarily explained by environmental variables (38%) and secondarily by biotic factors (15%).These results demonstrate diverse thermoregulation patterns across global extratropics, with most ecosystems negating the 'limited homeothermy' hypothesis, but their thermoregulation still occurs, implying that slope < 1 or Tc < Ta are not necessary conditions for plant thermoregulation. See also the Commentary on this article by Drake, 238: 921–923. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spring phenology of temperate ecosystems is highly sensitive to climate change, generating various impacts on many important terrestrial surface biophysical processes. Although various prognostic models relying on environmental variables of temperature and photoperiod have been developed for spring phenology, comprehensive ecosystem-scale evaluations over large landscapes and long-time periods remain lacking. Further, environmental variables other than temperature and photoperiod might also importantly constrain spring phenology modelling but remain under-investigation. To address these issues, we leveraged around 20-years datasets of environmental variables (from Daymet and GLDAS products) and the spring phenology metric (i.e., the greenup date) respectively derived from MODIS and PhenoCams across 108 sites in the Northern and Eastern United States. We firstly cross-compared MODIS-derived greenup date with official PhenoCams product with high accuracy (R 2 = 0.70). Then, we evaluated the three prognostic models (i.e., Growing Degree Date (GDD), Sequential (SEQ) and optimality-based (OPT)) with MODIS-derived spring phenology, assessed the model residuals and their associations with soil moisture, rainfall, and solar radiation, and revised the two photoperiod-relevant models (SEQ, OPT) by replacing the daylength variable with solar radiation, which was found to contribute the most to model residuals. We found that 1) all models demonstrated good capability in characterizing spring phenology, with OPT performing the best (RMSE = 8.04 ± 5.05 days), followed by SEQ (RMSE = 10.57 ± 7.77 days) and GDD (RMSE = 10.84 ± 8.42 days), 2) all models displayed high model residuals showing tight correlation with solar radiation (r = 0.45–0.75), and 3) the revised models that included solar radiation significantly performed better with an RMSE reduction by 22.08%. Such results are likely because solar radiation better constrains early growing season plant photosynthesis than photoperiod, supporting the hypothesis of spring phenology as an adaptive strategy to maximize photosynthetic carbon gain (approximated by solar radiation) while minimizing frost damage risk (captured by temperature). Collectively, our study reveals the underappreciated importance of solar radiation in constraining spring phenology of temperate ecosystems, and suggests ways to improve spring phenology modelling and other phenology-related ecological processes. • Three prognostic spring phenology models using MCD12Q2 product were evaluated. • OPT model best predicts spring phenology, followed by SEQ and GDD models. • Solar radiation is found to be important but not included in current models yet. • The revised models including solar radiation performed better with a reduced RMSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]