Warming-induced phenological mismatch between trees and shrubs explains high-elevation forest expansion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the importance of species interaction in modulating the range shifts of plants, little is known about the responses of coexisting life forms to a warmer climate. Here, we combine long-term monitoring of cambial phenology in sympatric trees and shrubs at two treelines of the Tibetan Plateau, with a meta-analysis of ring-width series from 344 shrubs and 575 trees paired across 11 alpine treelines in the Northern Hemisphere. Under a spring warming of + 1°C, xylem resumption advances by 2–4 days in trees, but delays by 3–8 days in shrubs. The divergent phenological response to warming was due to shrubs being 3.2 times more sensitive than trees to chilling accumulation. Warmer winters increased the thermal requirement for cambial reactivation in shrubs, leading to a delayed response to warmer springs. Our meta-analysis confirmed such a mechanism across continental scales. The warming-induced phenological mismatch may give a competitive advantage to trees over shrubs, which would provide a new explanation for increasing alpine treeline shifts under the context of climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".