National Phenology Network Workshop
Science Breakout
Native and Indicator Plants
Notes by Abraham Miller-Rushing, Aug 23, 2005
Criteria ideas:
Plants easy to find
Sharp phenophases
Ecological significance
Natives and invasives
Buffelgrass—short phenophase in regards to control
Use of collections
Herbariums, arboretums
Linkages to weather stations
Seedling emergence (germination)
Wind pollinated plants
Hay fever
Plants dependent on photoperiod in addition to those dependent on temperature
Agricultural crops
Long-term data sets like at Madison State College and Nebraska
Wheat and corn
Flowering in corn
Complexity because farmer behavior is a factor with crop phenology
Time of sowing
Additional complexity with varieties within each crop species
End of season is largely human determined
Difference between backyard gardens and field crops
Advantage of huge body of phenological research
Models sophisticated but simple
Potential criteria:
Planting date records
Tillage records
Fertilization records
Leaf phenology (emergence, stem establishment)
Flowering, anthesis
Decadal time period of current data
Black layer (final maturation point for corn)
Focus on perennials, annuals too difficult
Agricultural weeds
Drive agricultural decision-making, especially when herbicides are not used
Species range
Incorporate other variables into phenology—e.g., nitrogen deposition, ozone, drought
Functional groups – taxon free
Meadow annuals and desert annuals
Riparian species – indicators of hydrology
Pollination mechanism
Fungal relationships
Media potential
Fall color
Cherry tree flowering
Lilac flowering
Peach tree and other orchard crops flowering
Pollen counts
Sugar maple sap flow
Norway maple
Roadside species
Species from long-term studies, not necessarily on short list of species
LTREB and LTER
SEEK database
Maintain flexibility in species
Tap into other monitoring groups
Monarchs, birds
Need for local species in addition to wide ranging species
Collections—herbaria, photographs
Opportunity for historical information
Limitations—timing of collections
Flowering, fruit, leafout, leaf drop
Good fall foliage
Is it hopeless?
Color change, not drop (drop is affected by wind and rain)
Genetic diversity, mating systems, selection
Advantages of using species with extensive genetic manipulation to make phenophases very obvious
Early flowering – for climate signal
Wild species with horticultural cultivars
Possible confusion
Age of individual, lifespan
Long lived may be better
Species that will be here over long period of time
Maybe not sugar maple
Region specific species vs. wide ranging
Local interests may vary, e.g., papaya in Hawaii
Evolutionary/taxonomic representation
Local / regional / national range for species
Conspicuous flowers
Grow in disturbed habitats (schools, suburban areas)
Species that address specific hypotheses
Are local species more sensitive to climate change?
Are species more sensitive to climate at edges of range?
Edible fruit
Masting
Pollen records
Ecotones/edge of range
Mountain slopes
Short and tallgrass prairie in Great Plains
Aquatic species
Native species with wide ranges
Clonal species
Agricultural/horticultural species
Weeds
Potential species in the South:
Bradford pear
Short flowering period
Wide range
Ornamental
Flowering dogwood
Other potential species:
Edible fruits
Blueberries
Weeds
Box elder
Ragweed
CO2 gradients in cities
Dandelions
Milkweed
Wild radish
Fall color change
Red maple
Trembling aspen
Bradford pear
Cherries
Other concerns:
Scientific or public purposes
Misidentification
Focus on leaf fall for autumn end of growing season
Avoid oaks, lilacs
Look at Fraxinus, Bradford pears, Red maple
Complications of other factors besides temperature
Nitrogen, ozone
Current models have problems with speed of development in warmer environment
In addition to plants:
Insect phenology also important
Honeybees
Butterflies
Mosquitoes (bites)
Aquatic invertebrates
Outbreaks
Root phenology
Frogs
Earthworms
Method:
Create grid and check criteria