Cranberry flowering times and climate change in southern Massachusetts
Plants in wild and agricultural settings are being affected by the warmer temperatures associated with climate change. Here we examine the degree to which the iconic New England cranberry, Vaccinium macrocarpon, is exhibiting signs of altered flowering phenology. Using contemporary records from commercial cranberry bogs in southeastern Massachusetts in the United States, we found that cranberry plants are responsive to temperature. Flowering is approximately 2 days earlier for each 1 °C increase in May temperature. We also investigated the relationship between cranberry flowering and flight dates of the bog copper, Lycaena epixanthe—a butterfly dependent upon cranberry plants in its larval stage. Cranberry flowering and bog copper emergence were found to be changing disproportionately over time, suggesting a potential ecological mismatch. The pattern of advanced cranberry flowering over time coupled with increased temperature has implications not only for the relationship between cranberry plants and their insect associates but also for agricultural crops in general and for the commercial cranberry industry.
KeywordsCranberry Phenology Climate change Massachusetts Vaccinium macrocarpon
We thank Dr. Frank Caruso and Mr. Domingo Fernandes for generously sharing their records of cranberry flowering. We also thank Caitlin McDonough MacKenzie and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.
- BBCH Working Group (ed) (2001) Growth stages of mono- and dicotyledonous plants. BBCH Monograph, 2nd edn. Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, BonnGoogle Scholar
- Bolmgren K, Vanhoenacker D, Miller-Rushing AJ (2013) One man, 73 years, and 25 species. Evaluating phenological responses using a lifelong study of first flowering dates. Int J Biometeorol 57:367–375. doi: 10.1007/s00484-012-0560-8
- DeMoranville CJ (2000) Cranberry nutrition and hardiness research. University of Massachusetts Amherst–Cranberry Experiment Station, AmherstGoogle Scholar
- DeMoranville CJ, Davenport JR, Patten K, Roper TR, Strik BC, Vorsa N, Poole AP (1996) Fruit mass development in three cranberry cultivars and five production regions. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 121(4):680–685Google Scholar
- Feldman M, Grenier D (2012) Cranberry proanthocyanidins act in synergy with licochalcone A to reduce Porphyromonas gingivalis growth and virulence properties, and to suppress cytokine secretion by macrophages. J Appl Microbiol 113(2):438–447. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05329.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Keough GR (2011) Massachusetts Cranberries. New England Agricultural Statistics, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
- Menzel A, Sparks TH, Estrella N, Koch E, Aasa A, Ahas R, Alm-Kubler K, Bissolli P, Braslavska O, Briede A, Chmielewski FM, Crepinsek Z, Curnel Y, Dahl A, Defila C, Donnelly A, Filella Y, Jatcza K, Mage F, Mestre A, Nordli O, Penuelas J, Pirinen P, Remisova V, Scheifinger H, Striz M, Susnik A, Van Vliet AJH, Wielgolaski FE, Zach S, Zust A (2006) European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern. Glob Chang Biol 12(10):1969–1976. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01193.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar