Advertisement

Climatic Change

, Volume 100, Issue 3–4, pp 685–702 | Cite as

Implications of twenty-first century climate change on Northeastern United States maple syrup production: impacts and adaptations

  • Christopher B. Skinner
  • Arthur T. DeGaetanoEmail author
  • Brian F. Chabot
Article

Abstract

Previous research on the impacts of maple syrup production in the Northeastern United States has been based on correlative relationships between syrup production and average temperature. Here a simple biologically and physically-based model of sapflow potential is used to assess observed changes in sapflow across the Northeastern US from 1980 to 2006; document the correspondence between these observations and independent downscaled atmosphere ocean general circulation model (AOGCM) simulations of conditions during this period; and quantify changes in sapflow potential through 2100. The sapflow model is able to capture the spatial and temporal (in terms of the start date of sapflow) variations of sapflow that are observed across the Northeast. Likewise the AOGCM simulations reflect the mean number of sapflow days and the timing of sapflow during the 1980–2006 overlap period. Through the twenty-first century, warming winter temperatures will result in a decline in the number of sapflow days if traditional sap collection schedules are maintained. Under the A1fi emissions scenario the number of sapflow days decreases by up to 14 days. However, the changes in climate also translate the optimal timing of sap collection to earlier in the year. Across the region, the time period that maximizes the number of sapflows days becomes as much as 30 days earlier by 2100 under the A1fi emissions scenario. Provided this change is accounted for by modifying the start of the traditional sap collection schedule, there is essentially no net loss of sapflow days across the majority of the region, with a net increase of sapflow days indicated in the extreme north.

Keywords

Emission Scenario Maple Sugaring Parallel Climate Model GFDL Model North American Regional Reanalysis 
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. Cirelli D, Jagels R, Tyree MT (2008) Toward an improved model of maple sap exudation: the location and role of osmotic barriers in sugar maple, butternut, and white birch. Tree Physiol 28:1145–1155Google Scholar
  2. DeGaetano AT, Belcher BN (2007) Spatial interpolation of daily maximum and minimum air temperature based on meteorological model analyses and independent observations. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 46:1981–1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Delworth TL, Broccoli AJ, Rosati A, Stouffer RJ, Balaji V, Beesley JA, Cooke WF, Dixon KW, Dunne J, Dunne KA, Durachta JW, Findell KL, Ginoux P, Gnanadesikan A, Gordon CT, Griffies SM, Gudgel R, Harrison MJ, Held IM, Hemler RS, Horowitz LW, Klein SA, Knutson TR, Kushner PJ, Langenhorst AR, Lee H-C, Lin S-J, Lu J, Malyshev SL, Milly PCD, Ramaswamy V, Russell J, Schwarzkopf MD, Shevliakova E, Sirutis JJ, Spelman MJ, Stern WF, Winton M, Wittenberg AT, Wyman B, Zeng F, Zhang R (2006) GFDLs CM2 global coupled climate models. Part 1—formulation and simulation characteristics. J Climate 19:643–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Frumhoff PC, McCarthy JJ, Melillo JM, Moser SC, Wuebbles DJ (2007) Confronting climate change in the U.S. Northeast: science, impacts and solutions. Synthesis report of the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA). Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Heiligmann RB, Koelling MR, Perkins TD (eds) (2006) North American maple syrup producers manual. Ohio State University Press, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  6. Ho E, Gough WA (2006) Freeze thaw cycles in Toronto, Canada in a changing climate. Theor Appl Climatol 83:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Iverson LR, Prasad AM (2002) Potential tree species shifts with five climate change scenarios in the eastern United States. For Ecol Manag 155:205–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Maclver DC, Karsh M, Comer N, Klaassen J, Auld H, Fenech A (2006) Atmospheric influences on the sugar maple industry of North America. Environment Canada, Adaptation and Impacts Research Division, Occasional Paper 7Google Scholar
  9. Mesinger FG, DiMego E, Kalnay K, Mitchell PC, Shafran W, Ebisuzaki D, Jovic J, Woollen E, Rogers EH, Berbery MB, Ek Y, Fan R, Higgins GW, Li H, Lin Y, Manikin G, Parrish D, Shi W (2006) North American regional reanalysis. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 87:343–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G, de Vries B, Fenhann J, Gaffin S, Gregory K, Grübler A, Jung TY, Kram T, La Rovere E, Michaelis L, Mori S, Morita T, Pepper W, Pitcher H, Price L, Riahi K, Roehrl A, Rogner H, Sankovski A, Schlesinger M, Shukla P, Smith S, Swart R, van Rooijen S, Victor N, Zhou D (2000) IPCC special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. New England Regional Assessment Group (2001) Preparing for a changing climate, the potential consequences of climate variability and change, New England regional overview. U.S. Global Change Research Program. University of New Hampshire, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  12. Pope VD, Gallani ML, Rowntree PR, Stratton RA (2000) The impact of new physical parameterizations in the Hadley Centre climate model—HadCM3. Clim Dyn 16:123–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rock B, Spencer S (2001) Preparing for a changing climate, the potential consequences of climate variability and change, New England regional overview. U.S. Global Change Research Program. University of New Hampshire, Durham, pp 39–42Google Scholar
  14. Tyree MT, Zimmerman MH (2002) Xylem structure and the ascent of sap. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  15. Washington WM, Weatherly JW, Meehl GA, Semtner AJ Jr, Bettge TW, Craig AP, Strand WG Jr, Arblaster JM, Wayland VB, James R, Zhang Y (2000) Parallel Climate Model (PCM) control and transient simulations. Clim Dyn 16:755–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wood AW, Maurer EP, Kumar A, Lettenmaier DP (2002) Long-range experimental hydrologic forecasting for the eastern United States. J Geophys Res 107(D20):4429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wood A, Leung LR, Sridhar V, Lettenmaier DP (2004) Hydrologic implications of dynamical and statistical approaches to downscaling climate model surface temperature and precipitation fields. Clim Change 62:189–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher B. Skinner
    • 1
  • Arthur T. DeGaetano
    • 1
    Email author
  • Brian F. Chabot
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Northeast Regional Climate CenterCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations