Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2001 Feb 7;268(1464):289–294. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1363

Warmer springs disrupt the synchrony of oak and winter moth phenology.

M E Visser 1, L J Holleman 1
PMCID: PMC1088605  PMID: 11217900

Abstract

Spring temperatures have increased over the past 25 years, to which a wide variety of organisms have responded. The outstanding question is whether these responses match the temperature-induced shift of the selection pressures acting on these organisms. Organisms have evolved response mechanisms that are only adaptive given the existing relationship between the cues organisms use and the selection pressures acting on them. Global warming may disrupt ecosystem interactions because it alters these relationships and micro-evolution may be slow in tracking these changes. In particular, such shifts have serious consequences for ecosystem functioning for the tight multitrophic interactions involved in the timing of reproduction and growth. We determined the response of winter moth (Operophtera brumata) egg hatching and oak (Quercus robur) bud burst to temperature, a system with strong selection on synchronization. We show that there has been poor synchrony in recent warm springs, which is due to an increase in spring temperatures without a decrease in the incidence of freezing spells in winter. This is a clear warning that such changes in temperature patterns may affect ecosystem interactions more strongly than changes in mean temperature.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (135.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brown J. L., Li S. H., Bhagabati N. Long-term trend toward earlier breeding in an American bird: a response to global warming? Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 May 11;96(10):5565–5569. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.10.5565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Harrington R, Woiwod I, I, Sparks T. Climate change and trophic interactions. Trends Ecol Evol. 1999 Apr;14(4):146–150. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01604-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hughes I., I Biological consequences of global warming: is the signal already apparent? Trends Ecol Evol. 2000 Feb;15(2):56–61. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01764-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hurrell J. W. Decadal trends in the north atlantic oscillation: regional temperatures and precipitation. Science. 1995 Aug 4;269(5224):676–679. doi: 10.1126/science.269.5224.676. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  6. Stevenson I. R., Bryant D. M. Climate change and constraints on breeding. Nature. 2000 Jul 27;406(6794):366–367. doi: 10.1038/35019151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Van Tienderen P. H., Koelewijn H. P. Selection on reaction norms, genetic correlations and constraints. Genet Res. 1994 Oct;64(2):115–125. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300032729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Wuethrich B. Ecology. How climate change alters rhythms of the wild. Science. 2000 Feb 4;287(5454):793–795. doi: 10.1126/science.287.5454.793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES