Advertisement

Climatic Change

, Volume 87, Supplement 1, pp 153–166 | Cite as

Accumulated winter chill is decreasing in the fruit growing regions of California

  • Dennis BaldocchiEmail author
  • Simon Wong
Article

Abstract

We examined trends in accumulated winter chill across the fruit growing region of central California and its internal coastal valleys. We tested the hypothesis that global warming is in motion in California and is causing accumulated winter chill to decrease across the fruit and nut growing regions of California. The detection of potential trends in accumulated winter chill (between 0 and 7.2°C) was determined using two complementary climate datasets. The California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) contains hourly climate data and is suitable for computing accumulated chill hours and chill degree-hours. But, its longest data records extend back only to the 1980s. The National Weather Service Coop climate record is longer, extending beyond the 1950s at many sites. But its datasets only contain information on daily maximum and minimum temperatures. To assess long term trends in winter chill accumulation, we developed an algorithm that converted information from daily maximum and minimum temperature into accumulated hours of winter chill and summations of chill-degree hours. These inferred calculations of chill hour accumulation were tested with and validated by direct measurements from hourly-based data from the CIMIS network. With the combined climate datasets, we found that the annual accumulation of winter chill hours and chill degree hours is diminishing across the fruit and nut growing regions of California. Observed trends in winter chill range between -50 and -260 chill hours per decade. We also applied our analytical algorithm to project changes in winter chill using regional climate projections of temperature for three regions in the Central Valley. Predicted rates of reduced winter chill, for the period between 1950 and 2100, are on the order of -40 h per decade. By the end of the 21st century, orchards in California are expected to experience less than 500 chill hours per winter. This chronic and steady reduction in winter chill is expected to have deleterious economic and culinary impact on fruit and nut production in California by the end of the 21st Century.

Keywords

Parallel Climate Model Regional Climate Projection Daily Climate Data Winter Chill Agric Forest Meteorol 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymous (2003) California Agriculture Overview. California Agricultural Statistics Service, Sacramento, p 10Google Scholar
  2. Aron R (1983) Availability of chilling temperatures in California. Agric Meteorol 28:351–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aron RH (1975) A method for estimating the number of hours below a selected temperature threshold. J Appl Meteorol 14:1415–1418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cayan D, Kammerdiener S, Dettinger M, Caprio J, Peterson D (2001) Changes in the onset of spring in the western United States. B Am Meteorol Soc 82:399–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cayan DR, Maurer EP, Dettinger M, Tyree M, Hayhoe K, Bonfils C, Duffy P, Santer BD (2005) Climate scenarios for California. CEC-500–2005–203-SD. California Climate Change Center, Sacramento, p 47Google Scholar
  6. Chmielewski F-M, Muller A, Bruns E (2004) Climate changes and trends in phenology of fruit trees and field crops in Germany, 1961–2000. Agric Forest Meteorol 121:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christy JR, Norris WB, Redmond K, Gallo KP (2006) Methodology and results of calculating central California surface temperature trends: evidence of human-induced climate change? J Clim 19:548–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Egea J, Ortega E, Martinez-Gomez P, Dicenta F (2003) Chilling and heat requirements of almond cultivars for flowering. Environ Exp Bot 50:79–85Google Scholar
  9. Feng S, Hu Q (2004) Changes in agro-meteorological indicators in the contiguous United States: 1951–2000. Theor Appl Climatol 78:247–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friedlingstein P, Dufresne J-L, Cox PM, Rayner P (2003) How positive is the feedback between climate change and the carbon cycle? Tellus B 55:692–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fung IY, Doney SC, Lindsay K, John J (2005) Evolution of carbon sinks in a changing climate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:11201–11206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gutierrez AP, Ponti L, Ellis CK, d'Oultremont T (2006) Analysis of climate effects on agricultural systems. CEC-500–2005–188-SF. California Climate Change Center, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayhoe K, Cayan D, Field C, Frumhoff PC, Maurer EP, Miller NL, Moser S, Schneider SH, Cahill K, Cleland EE, Dale L, Drapek R, Hanemann RM, Lalkstein L, Lenihan JM, Lunch CK, Neilson RP, Sheridan SC, Verville JH (2004) Emissions pathways, climate change and impacts on California. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:12422–12427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holets S, Swanson RN (1981) High-inversion fog episodes in Central California. J Appl Meteorol 20:890–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Izaurralde RC, Rosenberg NJ, Brown RA, Thomson AM (2003) Integrated assessment of Hadley Center (HadCM2) climate-change impacts on agricultural productivity and irrigation water supply in the conterminous United States: Part II. Regional agricultural production in 2030 and 2095. Agric Forest Meteorol 117:97–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maurer EP, Duffy PB (2005) Uncertainty in projections of streamflow changes due to climate change in California. Geophys Res Lett 32:L03704 DOI  10.1029/2004GL021462
  17. McKenney DW, Pedlar JH, Papadopol P, Hutchinson MF (2006) The development of 1901–2000 historical monthly climate models for Canada and the United States. Agric Forest Meteorol 138:69–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McNaughton KG, Spriggs TW (1986) A mixed-layer model for regional evaporation. Bound-Lay Meteorol 34:243–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Monteith JL, Unsworth MH (1990) Principles of environmental physics. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G, Vries BD, Fenhann J, Gaffin S, Gregory K, Grübler A, Jung TY, Kram T, Rovere ELL, Michaelis L, Mori S, Morita T, Pepper W, Pitcher H, Price L, Riahi K, Roehrl A, Rogner H-H, Sankovski A, Schlesinger M, Shukla P, Smith S, Swart R, Rooijen SV, Victor N, Dadi Z (2000) Special report on emission scenarios. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Nemani RR, White MA, Cayan DR, Jones GV, Running SW, Coughlan JC, Peterson DL (2001) Asymmetric warming over coastal California and its impact on the premium wine industry. Clim Res 19:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Porter JR, Semenov MA (2005) Crop responses to climatic variation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 360:2021–2035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rattigan K, Hill SJ (1986) Relationship between temperature and flowering in almond. Aust J Exp Agric 26:399–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Richardson EA, Seeley SD, Walker DR (1974) A model for estimating the completion of rest for ‘Redhaven’ and ‘Elberta’ peach trees. HortScience 9:331–332Google Scholar
  25. Rosenweig C, Hillell D (1998) Climate change and the global harvest. Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Samish RM (1954) Dormancy in woody plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 5:183–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Snyder MA, Bell JA, Sloan L, Duffy PB, Govindasamy B (2002) Climate responses to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide for a climatically vulnerable region. Geophys Res Lett 29 DOI  10.1029/2001GL014431
  28. Snyder RL, Spano D, Cesaraccio C, Duce P (1999) Determining degree-day thresholds from field observations. Int J Biometeorol V42:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Suckling PW, Mitchell MD (1988) Fog climatology of the Sacramento urban area. Prof Geogr 40:186–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Underwood SJ, Ellrod GP, Kuhnert AL (2004) A multiple-case analysis of nocturnal radiation-fog development in the Central Valley of California utilizing the GOES Nighttime Fog Product. J Appl Meteorol 43:297–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. VanRheenan NT, Wood AW, Palmer RN, Lettenmaier DP (2004) Potential implications of PCM climate change scenarios for Sacramento-San Joaquin River basin hydrology and water resources. Clim Change 62:257–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wood AW, Maurer EP, Kumar A, Lettenmaier DP (2002) Long range experimental hydrologic forecasting for the eastern U.S. J Geophys Res 107:4429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zalom F, Goodell P, Wilson LT, Barnett WW, Bentley WJ (1983) Degree days: the calculation and use of heat units in pest management. University of California DANR Leaflet. 21373. pgGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ecosystem Sciences Division, Department of Environmental Science, Policy and ManagementUniversity of California, BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations