International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 347–355 | Cite as

Long-term herbarium records reveal temperature-dependent changes in flowering phenology in the southeastern USA

  • Isaac W. ParkEmail author
  • Mark D. Schwartz
Original Research Paper


In recent years, a growing body of evidence has emerged indicating that the relationship between flowering phenology and climate may differ throughout various portions of the growing season. These differences have resulted in long-term changes in flowering synchrony that may alter the quantity and diversity of pollinator attention to many species, as well as altering food availability to pollenivorous and nectarivorous animal species. However, long-term multi-season records of past flowering timing have primarily focused on temperate environments. In contrast, changes in flowering phenology within humid subtropical environments such as the southeastern USA remain poorly documented. This research uses herbarium-based methods to examine changes in flowering time across 19,328 samples of spring-, summer-, and autumn-flowering plants in the southeastern USA from the years 1951 to 2009. In this study, species that flower near the onset of the growing season were found to advance under increasing mean March temperatures (−3.391 days/°C, p = 0.022). No long-term advances in early spring flowering or spring temperature were detected during this period, corroborating previous phenological assessments for the southeastern USA. However, late spring through mid-summer flowering exhibited delays in response to higher February temperatures (over 0.1.85 days/°C, p ≤ 0.041 in all cases). Thus, it appears that flowering synchrony may undergo significant restructuring in response to warming spring temperatures, even in humid subtropical environments.


Phenology Flowering Southeastern USA Herbarium Climate change 



We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Dixie Damrel of the Clemson herbarium, John Nelson of the A. C. Moore herbarium at the University of South Carolina, and Austin Mast of the Florida State University herbarium for access to their records as well as Herrick Brown for assistance with herbarium database software and Gretchen Meyer and Alison Donnelly for advice that improved this manuscript.


  1. Abu-Asab MS, Peterson PM, Shetler SG, Orli SS (2001) Earlier plant flowering in spring as a response to global warming in the Washington, DC, area. Biodivers Conserv 10:597–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldridge G, Inouye DW, Forrest JRK, Barr WA, Miller-Rushing AJ (2011) Emergence of a mid-season period of low floral resources in a montane meadow ecosystem associated with climate change. J Ecol 99:905–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amano T, Smithers RJ, Sparks TH, Sutherland WJ (2010) A 250-year index of first flowering dates and its response to temperature changes. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:2451–2457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amano T, Freckleton RP, Queensborough SA, Doxford SW, Smithers RJ, Sparks TH, Sutherland WJ (2014) Links between plant species’ spatial and temporal responses to a warming climate. Proc R Soc Lond B 281Google Scholar
  5. Borchert R (1996) Phenology and flowering periodicity of neotropical dry forest species: evidence from herbarium collections. J Trop Ecol 12(1):65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borchert R, Meyer SA, Felger RS, Porter-Bollard L (2004) Environmental control of flowering periodicity in Costa Rican and Mexican tropical dry forests. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 13:409–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borchet R (1994) Soil and stem water storage determine phenology and distribution of tropical dry forest trees. Ecology 75:1437–1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brearley FQ, Proctor J, Suriantata NL, Dalrymple G, Voysey BC (2007) Reproductive phenology over a 10-year period in a lowland evergreen rain forest of central Borneo. J Ecol 95(4):828–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calle Z, Schlumpberger BO, Piedharita L, Leftin A, Hammer SA, Tye A, Borchet R (2010) Seasonal variation in daily insolation induces synchronous bud break and flowering in the tropics. Trees 24:865–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callinger KM, Queenborough S, Curtis PS (2013) Herbarium specimins reveal the footprint of climate change on flowering trends across north-central North America. Ecol Lett 16:1037–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cannell MGR, Smith RI (1986) Climatic warming, spring budburst and forest damage on trees. J Appl Ecol 23(1):177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cayan DR, Kammerdiener SA, Dettinger MD, Caprio JM, Peterson DH (2001) Changes in the onset of spring in the western United States. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 82(3):399–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chuine I, Cour P (1999) Climatic determinants of budburst seasonality in four temperate-zone tree species. New Phytol 143(2):339–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diskin E, Proctor H, Jebb M, Sparks T, Donnelly A (2012) The phenology of Rubus fructicosus in Ireland: herbarium specimens provide evidence for the response of phenophases to temperature, with implications for climate warming. Int J Biometeorol 56(6):1103–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Estrella N, Sparks T, Menzel A (2007) Trends and temperature in the phenology of crops in Germany. Glob Chang Biol 13(8):1737–1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitter AH, Fitter RSR (2002) Rapid changes in flowering time in British plants. Science 296:1689–1691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fitter AH, Fitter RSR, Harris ITB, Williamson MH (1995) Relationship between first flowering date and temperature in the flora of a locality in central England. Funct Ecol 9:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Funderburk DO, Skeen JN (1976) Spring phenology in a mature piedmont forest. Castanea 41(1):20–30Google Scholar
  19. Gaira KS, Dhar U, Belwal OK (2011) Potential of herbarium records to sequence phenological pattern: a case study of Aconitum heterophyllum in the Himalaya. Biodivers Conserv 20(10):2201–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordo O, Sanz JJ (2005) Phenology and climate change: a long-term study in a Mediterranean locality. Oecologia 146:484–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gordo O, Sanz JJ (2010) Impact of climate change on plant phenology in Mediterranean ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 16:1082–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hegland SJ, Nielsen A, Lázaro A, Bjerknes A-L, Totland Ø (2009) How does climate warming affect plant-pollinator interactions? Ecol Lett 12(2):184–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F (2006) World map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol Z 15:259–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lavoie C, Lachance D (2006) A new herbarium-based method for reconstructing the phenology of plant species across large areas. Am J Bot 93(4):512–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lawrimore JH, Menne MJ, Gleason BE, Williams CN, Wuertz DB, Vose RS, Rennie J (2011) An overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network monthly mean temperature data set, version 3. J Geophys Res 116(D19121):1–18Google Scholar
  26. Ledneva A, Miller-Rushing AJ, Primack RB, Imbres C (2004) Climate change as reflected in a naturalist’s diary, Middleborough, Massachusetts. Wilson Bull 116(3):224–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loiselle BA, Jørgensen PM, Consiglio T, Jiménez I, Blake JG, Lohmann LG, Montiel OM (2008) Predicting species distributions from herbarium collections: does climate bias in collection sampling influence model outcomes? J Biogeogr 35(1):105–116Google Scholar
  28. Marques MCM, Roper JJ, Salvalaggio APB (2004) Phenological patterns among plant life-forms in a subtropical forest in southern Brazil. Plant Ecol 173:203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McKinney AM, CaraDonna PJ, Inouye DW, Barr B, Bertelsen CD, Waser NM (2012) Asynchronous changes in phenology of migrating Broad-tailed Hummingbirds and their early-season nectar resources. Ecology 93(9):1987–1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Memmott J, Craze PG, Waser NM, Price MV (2007) Global warming and the disruption of plant-pollinator interactions. Ecol Lett 10:710–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Menzel A (2003) Plant phenological anomalies in Germany and their relation to air temperature and NAO. Clim Chang 57(3):243–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Menzel A, Fabian P (1999) Growing season extended in Europe. Nature 397(659)Google Scholar
  33. Menzel A, Estrella N, Fabian P (2001) Spatial and temporal variability of the phenological seasons in Germany from 1951 to 1996. Glob Chang Biol 7:657–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Menzel A, Estrella N, Testka A (2005) Temperature response rates from long-term phenological records. Clim Res 30:21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Menzel A, Sparks TH, Estrella N, Koch E, Aasa A, Ahas R, Alm-Kübler K, Bissoli P, Og B, Briede A, Chmielewski FM, Crepinsek Z, Curnel Y, Dahl Å, Defila C, Donnelly A, Fillella Y, Jatczak K, Måge F, Mestre A, Nordli Ø, Peñuelas J, Pirinen P, Remišová V, Scheifinger H, Striz M, Susnik A, van Vliet AJH, Wielgolaski F-E, Zach S, Zust A (2006) European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern. Glob Chang Biol 12(10):1969–1976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller-Rushing AJ, Primack RB (2008) Global warming and flowering times in Thoreau’s Concord: a community perspective. Ecology 89(2):332–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller-Rushing AJ, Primack RB, Primack D, Mukunda S (2006) Photographs and herbarium specimens as tools to document phenological changes in response to global warming. Am J Bot 93(11):1667–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Miller-Rushing AJ, Inouye DW, Primack RB (2008) How well do first flowering dates measure plant responses to climate change? The effects of population size and sampling frequency. J Ecol 96(6):1289–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Opler PA, Gordon WF, Baker HG (1976) Rainfall as a factor in the release, timing, and synchronization of anthesis by tropical trees and shrubs. J Biogeogr 3(3):231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Panchen ZA, Primack RB, Anísko T, Lyons RE (2012) Herbarium specimens, photographs, and field observations show Philadelphia area plants are responding to climate change. Am J Bot 99(4):751–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Park IW (2012) Digital herbarium archives as a spatially extensive, taxonomically discriminate phenological record; a comparison to MODIS satellite imagery. Int J Biometeorol 14(10):2029–2038Google Scholar
  42. Peñuelas J, Filella I, Zhang X, Llorens L, Ogaya R, Lloret F, Comas P, Estiarte M, Terradas J (2004) Complex spatiotemporal phenological shifts as a response to rainfall changes. New Phytol 161(3):837–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Primack D, Imbres C, Primack RB, Miller-Rushing AJ (2004) Herbarium specimens demonstrate earlier flowering times in response to warming in Boston. Am J Bot 91(8):1260–1264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rivera G, Borchert R (2001) Induction of flowering in tropical trees by a 30-minute reduction in photoperiod: evidence from field observations and herbarium specimens. Tree Physiol 21:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schwartz MD, Ahas R, Aasa A (2006) Onset of spring starting earlier across the northern hemisphere. Glob Chang Biol 12:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schwartz MD, Ault TR, Betancourt J (2013) Spring onset variations and trends in the continental United States: past and regional assessment using temperature-based indices. Int J Climatol 33(13):2917–2922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sherry RA, Zhou X, Gu S, Arnone JA III, Schimel DS, Verburg PS, Wallace LL, Luo Y (2007) Divergence of reproductive phenology under climate warming. PNAS 104(1):198–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spano D, Cesaraccio C, Duce P, Snyder RL (1999) Phenological stages of natural species and their use as climate indicators. Int J Biometeorol 42:124–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sparks TH, Jeffree EP, Jeffree CE (2000) An examination of the relationship between flowering times and temperature at the national scale using long term phenological records from the UK. Int J Biometeorol 44:82–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Staggemeier VG, Diniz-Filho JAF, Morellato LPC (2010) The shared influence of phylogeny and ecology on the reproductive patterns of Myrteae (Myrtaceae). J Ecol 98:1409–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tachiki Y, Iwasa Y, Satake A (2010) Pollinator coupling can induce synchronized flowering in different plant species. J Theor Biol 267:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wall MA, Timmerman-Erskine M, Boyd RS (2003) Conservation impact of climatic variability on pollination of the federally endangered plant, Clematis socialis (Ranunculaceae). Southeast Nat 2(1):11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waser NM (1978) Competition for hummingbird pollination and sequential flowering in two Colorado wildflowers. Ecology 59(5):934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wolfe DW, Schwartz MD, Lasko AN, Otsuki Y, Pool RM, Shaulis NJ (2005) Climate change and shifts in spring phenology of three horticultural woody perennials in northeastern USA. Int J Biometeorol 49(5):303–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wolkovich EM, Cook BI, Allen JM, Crimmins TM, Betancourt JL, Travers SE, Pau S, Regetz J, Davies TJ, Kraft NJB, Ault TR, Bolmgren K, Mazer SJ, McCabe GJ, McGill BJ, Parmesan C, Salamin N, Schwartz MD, Cleland EE (2012) Warming experiments underpredict plant phenological responses to climate change. Nature 2(485):494–497Google Scholar
  56. Zalamea P-C, Munoz F, Stevenson PR, Paine CET, Sarmiento C, Sabatier D, Heuret P (2011) Continental-scale patterns of Cecropia reproductive phenology: evidence from herbarium specimens. Proc R Soc Lond B 278(1717):2437–2445CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of WisconsinMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations