The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A continental phenology model for monitoring vegetation responses to interannual climatic variability
Abstract
Regional phenology is important in ecosystem simulation models and coupled biosphere/atmosphere models. In the continental United States, the timing of the onset of greenness in the spring (leaf expansion, grass green‐up) and offset of greenness in the fall (leaf abscission, cessation of height growth, grass brown‐off) are strongly influenced by meteorological and climatological conditions. We developed predictive phenology models based on traditional phenology research using commonly available meteorological and climatological data. Predictions were compared with satellite phenology observations at numerous 20 km × 20 km contiguous landcover sites. Onset mean absolute error was 7.2 days in the deciduous broadleaf forest (DBF) biome and 6.1 days in the grassland biome. Offset mean absolute error was 5.3 days in the DBF biome and 6.3 days in the grassland biome. Maximum expected errors at a 95% probability level ranged from 10 to 14 days. Onset was strongly associated with temperature summations in both grassland and DBF biomes; DBF offset was best predicted with a photoperiod function, while grassland offset required a combination of precipitation and temperature controls. A long‐term regional test of the DBF onset model captured field‐measured interannual variability trends in lilac phenology. Continental application of the phenology models for 1990–1992 revealed extensive interannual variability in onset and offset. Median continental growing season length ranged from a low of 129 days in 1991 to a high of 146 days in 1992. Potential uses of the models include regulation of the timing and length of the growing season in large‐scale biogeochemical models and monitoring vegetation response to interannual climatic variability.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Climate-induced variations in global wildfire danger from 1979 to 2013
Jolly, W. M., Cochrane, M. A., Freeborn, P. H., Holden, Z. A., Brown, T. J., Williamson, G. J., & Bowman, D. M. J. S. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms8537 · Cited by 2,200
Plant phenology and global climate change: Current progresses and challenges
Piao, S., Liu, Q., Chen, A., Janssens, I. A., Fu, Y., Dai, J., Liu, L., Lian, X., Shen, M., & Zhu, X. (2019) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14619 · Cited by 2,120
Onset of spring starting earlier across the Northern Hemisphere
SCHWARTZ, M. D., AHAS, R., & AASA, A. (2006) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01097.x · Cited by 1,037
Joint control of terrestrial gross primary productivity by plant phenology and physiology
Xia, J., Niu, S., Ciais, P., Janssens, I. A., Chen, J., Ammann, C., Arain, A., Blanken, P. D., Cescatti, A., Bonal, D., et al. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1413090112 · Cited by 438
Xiao, X., Boles, S., Liu, J., Zhuang, D., & Liu, M. (2002) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/s0034-4257(02)00051-2 · Cited by 355
Metadata
- Authors
- White, M. A., Thornton, P. E., & Running, S. W.
- Venue
- Global Biogeochemical Cycles
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1997-06
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 217-234
- ISSN
- 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-9224
- OpenAlex
- W2115952782
- Cited by
- 1,261
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A continental phenology model for monitoring vegetation responses to interannual climatic variability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97gb00330
- The paper
- White, M. A., Thornton, P. E., & Running, S. W. (1997). A continental phenology model for monitoring vegetation responses to interannual climatic variability. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1029/97gb00330
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.