Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ecological impacts of a widespread frost event following early spring leaf‐out

Hufkens, Koen, Friedl, Mark A., Keenan, Trevor F., Sonnentag, Oliver, Bailey, Amey, O'Keefe, John, Richardson, Andrew D.·2012·Global Change Biology

Abstract

In the spring of 2010, temperatures averaged ~3 °C above the long‐term mean (M arch–M ay) across the northeastern U nited S tates. However, in mid‐to‐late spring, much of this region experienced a severe frost event. The spring of 2010 therefore provides a case study on how future spring temperature extremes may affect northeastern forest ecosystems. We assessed the response of three northern hardwood tree species (sugar maple, A merican beech, yellow birch) to these anomalous temperature patterns using several different data sources and addressed four main questions: (1) Along an elevational gradient, how was each species affected by the late spring frost? (2) How did differences in phenological growth strategy influence their response? (3) How did the late spring frost affect ecosystem productivity within the study domain? (4) What are the potential long‐term impacts of spring frost events on forest community ecology? Our results show that all species exhibited early leaf development triggered by the warm spring. However, yellow birch and A merican beech have more conservative growth strategies and were largely unaffected by the late spring frost. In contrast, sugar maples responded strongly to warmer temperatures and experienced widespread frost damage that resulted in leaf loss and delayed canopy development. Late spring frost events may therefore provide a competitive advantage for yellow birch and A merican beech at the expense of sugar maple. Results from satellite remote sensing confirm that frost damage was widespread throughout the region at higher elevations (>500 m). The frost event is estimated to have reduced gross ecosystem productivity by 70–153 g C m−2, or 7–14% of the annual gross productivity (1061 ± 82 g C m−2) across 8753 km 2 of high‐elevation forest. We conclude that frost events following leaf out, which are expected to become more common with climate change, may influence both forest composition and ecosystem productivity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02712.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 283

Metadata

Authors
Hufkens, K., Friedl, M. A., Keenan, T. F., Sonnentag, O., Bailey, A., O'Keefe, J., & Richardson, A. D.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05-12
Volume
18
Issue
7
Pages
2365-2377
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2126708624
Cited by
283
References
3
FWCI
9.39
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: Ecological impacts of a widespread frost event following early spring leaf‐out. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02712.x
The paper
Hufkens, K., Friedl, M. A., Keenan, T. F., Sonnentag, O., Bailey, A., O'Keefe, J., & Richardson, A. D. (2012). Ecological impacts of a widespread frost event following early spring leaf‐out. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02712.x

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.