On the uncertainty of phenological responses to climate change, and implications for a terrestrial biosphere model

Abstract. Phenology, the timing of recurring life cycle events, controls numerous land surface feedbacks to the climate system through the regulation of exchanges of carbon, water and energy between the biosphere and atmosphere. Terrestrial biosphere models, however, are known to have systematic errors in the simulation of spring phenology, which potentially could propagate to uncertainty in modeled responses to future climate change. Here, we used the Harvard Forest phenology record to investigate and characterize sources of uncertainty in predicting phenology, and the subsequent impacts on model forecasts of carbon and water cycling. Using a model-data fusion approach, we combined information from 20 yr of phenological observations of 11 North American woody species, with 12 leaf bud-burst models that varied in complexity. Akaike's Information Criterion indicated support for spring warming models with photoperiod limitations and, to a lesser extent, models that included chilling requirements. We assessed three different sources of uncertainty in phenological forecasts: parameter uncertainty, model uncertainty, and driver uncertainty. The latter was characterized running the models to 2099 using 2 different IPCC climate scenarios (A1fi vs. B1, i.e. high CO2 emissions vs. low CO2 emissions scenario). Parameter uncertainty was the smallest (average 95% Confidence Interval – CI: 2.4 days century−1 for scenario B1 and 4.5 days century−1 for A1fi), whereas driver uncertainty was the largest (up to 8.4 days century−1 in the simulated trends). The uncertainty related to model structure is also large and the predicted bud-burst trends as well as the shape of the smoothed projections varied among models (±7.7 days century−1 for A1fi, ±3.6 days century−1 for B1). The forecast sensitivity of bud-burst to temperature (i.e. days bud-burst advanced per degree of warming) varied between 2.2 days °C−1 and 5.2 days °C−1 depending on model structure. We quantified the impact of uncertainties in bud-burst forecasts on simulated photosynthetic CO2 uptake and evapotranspiration (ET) using a process-based terrestrial biosphere model. Uncertainty in phenology model structure led to uncertainty in the description of forest seasonality, which accumulated to uncertainty in annual model estimates of gross primary productivity (GPP) and ET of 9.6% and 2.9%, respectively. A sensitivity analysis shows that a variation of ±10 days in bud-burst dates led to a variation of ±5.0% for annual GPP and about ±2.0% for ET. For phenology models, differences among future climate scenarios (i.e. driver) represent the largest source of uncertainty, followed by uncertainties related to model structure, and finally, related to model parameterization. The uncertainties we have quantified will affect the description of the seasonality of ecosystem processes and in particular the simulation of carbon uptake by forest ecosystems, with a larger impact of uncertainties related to phenology model structure, followed by uncertainties related to phenological model parameterization.

[1]  J. Monteith,et al.  Principles of Environmental Physics , 2014 .

[2]  E. Davidson,et al.  Using model‐data fusion to interpret past trends, and quantify uncertainties in future projections, of terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycling , 2012 .

[3]  Philippe Ciais,et al.  Terrestrial biosphere model performance for inter‐annual variability of land‐atmosphere CO2 exchange , 2012 .

[4]  Z. Govindarajulu,et al.  Rank Correlation Methods (5th ed.) , 2012 .

[5]  Y. Xue,et al.  Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis , 2012 .

[6]  Markus Reichstein,et al.  The model–data fusion pitfall: assuming certainty in an uncertain world , 2011, Oecologia.

[7]  J. Chen,et al.  Spatially distributed modeling of the long-term carbon balance of a boreal landscape , 2011 .

[8]  Sylvain Delzon,et al.  Assessing the effects of climate change on the phenology of European temperate trees , 2011 .

[9]  Chang-Hoi Ho,et al.  Phenology shifts at start vs. end of growing season in temperate vegetation over the Northern Hemisphere for the period 1982–2008 , 2011 .

[10]  D. Lawrence,et al.  Parameterization improvements and functional and structural advances in Version 4 of the Community Land Model , 2011 .

[11]  P. Ciais,et al.  Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  Allison L. Steiner,et al.  Ecological forecasting under climatic data uncertainty: a case study in phenological modeling , 2010 .

[13]  C. Körner,et al.  Response—Warming, Photoperiods, and Tree Phenology , 2010 .

[14]  Harald Bugmann,et al.  Warming, photoperiods, and tree phenology. , 2010, Science.

[15]  Jacques Roy,et al.  Changes in leaf phenology of three European oak species in response to experimental climate change. , 2010, The New phytologist.

[16]  E. Davidson,et al.  Estimating parameters of a forest ecosystem C model with measurements of stocks and fluxes as joint constraints , 2010, Oecologia.

[17]  Ian G. Enting,et al.  A review of applications of model–data fusion to studies of terrestrial carbon fluxes at different scales , 2009 .

[18]  Peter E. Thornton,et al.  Systematic assessment of terrestrial biogeochemistry in coupled climate–carbon models , 2009 .

[19]  J. Abatzoglou,et al.  Tracking the rhythm of the seasons in the face of global change: phenological research in the 21st century. , 2009 .

[20]  Weimin Ju,et al.  A spatially explicit hydro-ecological modeling framework (BEPS-TerrainLab V2.0): Model description and test in a boreal ecosystem in Eastern North America , 2009 .

[21]  C. Augspurger,et al.  Leaf phenology in 22 North American tree species during the 21st century , 2009 .

[22]  D. Hollinger,et al.  Influence of spring phenology on seasonal and annual carbon balance in two contrasting New England forests. , 2009, Tree physiology.

[23]  Michele Meroni,et al.  Modeling Gross Primary Production of Agro-Forestry Ecosystems by Assimilation of Satellite-Derived Information in a Process-Based Model , 2009, Sensors.

[24]  Andrew D. Richardson,et al.  Phenological Differences Between Understory and Overstory , 2009 .

[25]  Andrew D. Richardson,et al.  Phenological Differences Between Understory and Overstory: A Case Study Using the Long-Term Harvard Forest Records , 2009 .

[26]  J. Paruelo,et al.  How to evaluate models : Observed vs. predicted or predicted vs. observed? , 2008 .

[27]  Jinhong Zhu,et al.  Regional climate change projections for the Northeast USA , 2008 .

[28]  Weimin Ju,et al.  Spatially explicit simulation of peatland hydrology and carbon dioxide exchange: Influence of mesoscale topography , 2008 .

[29]  V. Dose,et al.  Norway spruce (Picea abies): Bayesian analysis of the relationship between temperature and bud burst , 2008 .

[30]  D. Baldocchi ‘Breathing’ of the terrestrial biosphere: lessons learned from a global network of carbon dioxide flux measurement systems , 2008 .

[31]  S. Schneider,et al.  Climate Change 2007 Synthesis report , 2008 .

[32]  S. Wofsy,et al.  Factors controlling CO2 exchange on timescales from hourly to decadal at Harvard Forest , 2007 .

[33]  Cynthia Rosenzweig,et al.  Assessment of observed changes and responses in natural and managed systems , 2007 .

[34]  T. A. Black,et al.  Modelling multi-year coupled carbon and water fluxes in a boreal aspen forest , 2006 .

[35]  J. Peñuelas,et al.  European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern , 2006 .

[36]  S. Klein,et al.  GFDL's CM2 Global Coupled Climate Models. Part I: Formulation and Simulation Characteristics , 2006 .

[37]  R. Ahas,et al.  Onset of spring starting earlier across the Northern Hemisphere , 2006 .

[38]  C. Körner,et al.  Responses of deciduous forest trees to severe drought in Central Europe. , 2005, Tree physiology.

[39]  W. Ju,et al.  Distribution of soil carbon stocks in Canada's forests and wetlands simulated based on drainage class, topography and remotely sensed vegetation parameters , 2005 .

[40]  A. G. Barr,et al.  Response of Net Ecosystem Productivity of Three Boreal Forest Stands to Drought , 2005, Ecosystems.

[41]  Gordon B. Bonan,et al.  Simulating Springtime Temperature Patterns in the Community Atmosphere Model Coupled to the Community Land Model Using Prognostic Leaf Area , 2004 .

[42]  David M. Lawrence,et al.  An annual cycle of vegetation in a GCM. Part I: implementation and impact on evaporation , 2004 .

[43]  M. Lechowicz,et al.  Foliage quality changes during canopy development of some northern hardwood trees , 1992, Oecologia.

[44]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[45]  Jörg Schaber,et al.  Physiology-based phenology models for forest tree species in Germany , 2003, International journal of biometeorology.

[46]  F. Turkheimer,et al.  On the Undecidability among Kinetic Models: From Model Selection to Model Averaging , 2003, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[47]  Peter E. Thornton,et al.  Modeling and measuring the effects of disturbance history and climate on carbon and water budgets in evergreen needleleaf forests , 2002 .

[48]  Josef Cihlar,et al.  Net primary productivity mapped for Canada at 1-km resolution , 2002 .

[49]  K. E. Moore,et al.  Climatic Consequences of Leaf Presence in the Eastern United States , 2001 .

[50]  I. Chuine,et al.  A unified model for budburst of trees. , 2000, Journal of theoretical biology.

[51]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Null Hypothesis Testing: Problems, Prevalence, and an Alternative , 2000 .

[52]  Alexei G. Sankovski,et al.  Special report on emissions scenarios , 2000 .

[53]  Peter E. Thornton,et al.  Parameterization and Sensitivity Analysis of the BIOME–BGC Terrestrial Ecosystem Model: Net Primary Production Controls , 2000 .

[54]  Keith Beven,et al.  Multi-objective conditioning of a simple SVAT model. , 1999 .

[55]  S. Running,et al.  The impact of growing-season length variability on carbon assimilation and evapotranspiration over 88 years in the eastern US deciduous forest , 1999, International journal of biometeorology.

[56]  Denis-Didier Rousseau,et al.  Selecting models to predict the timing of flowering of temperate trees: implications for tree phenology modelling , 1999 .

[57]  Denis-Didier Rousseau,et al.  Fitting models predicting dates of flowering of temperate‐zone trees using simulated annealing , 1998 .

[58]  J. Chen,et al.  A process-based boreal ecosystem productivity simulator using remote sensing inputs , 1997 .

[59]  S. Running,et al.  A continental phenology model for monitoring vegetation responses to interannual climatic variability , 1997 .

[60]  Robert J. Scholes,et al.  Observations and modeling of biomass and soil organic matter dynamics for the grassland biome worldwide , 1993 .

[61]  W. Cleveland,et al.  Locally Weighted Regression: An Approach to Regression Analysis by Local Fitting , 1988 .

[62]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[63]  Risto Sarvas,et al.  Investigations on the annual cycle of development of forest trees. Active period. , 1972 .

[64]  H. Lieth,et al.  Phenology, Resource Management, and Synagraphic Computer Mapping , 1971 .

[65]  P. Sen Estimates of the Regression Coefficient Based on Kendall's Tau , 1968 .

[66]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[67]  Maurice G. Kendall,et al.  Rank Correlation Methods , 1949 .

[68]  H. B. Mann Nonparametric Tests Against Trend , 1945 .