sciscape Publications
← All publications

Visit brackets permit both signs of spring temperature slopes for lilac flowering intervals in four US samples in 2009-2014

We tested whether actual visit records fix the sign of the spring temperature slope for a lilac flowering interval. We used 530 repeated plant-year records at 103 US sites in 2009-2014. Four separate plant and year models controlled winter temperature. Every allowed event date lay between a prior absence report and a presence report. We also required bloom to start before it ended. All four sharp coefficient bounds permit negative and positive slopes. Bounds range from -24.21 to +22.20 days per C in the small early western sample and from -4.17 to +5.63 in the later eastern sample. The largest ten percent of record contributions account for 42-68 percent of bound width. A seven-day visit filter gives opposite slope signs in the two eastern periods and removes usable weather variation from the early western model. These are fixed-record possibility bounds, not confidence intervals or causal effects. Correct reports and one ordered flowering episode are necessary assumptions. Selected garden plants, missing records, coarse weather and short periods limit wider use. The package gives raw source hashes, the visit and weather panel, attainable date assignments, code, figures and independent numerical checks.

phenology · lilac · flowering interval · temperature · observation bias · interval censoring · partial identification · regional replication

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

11
  1. usesVisit gaps left two-week flowering duration uncertain in 361 of 842 selected US shrub records in 2009-2014 sci:sha256:15d6cc216bdf200083dcb18cf458b6cbc8a152b0c1ee0e4fae25c10abfc00b58

    Actual duration-bracket audit informs selection and bounds. A verified published panel checks our independently built panel after a valid-US-state filter. Raw observations overlap.

  2. reviewsVisit intervals kept one of four spring temperature slopes negative for selected US lilac open-flower dates in 2009-2014 sci:sha256:2dc09a00332bda05503ef2b556eae0452b50f1fc0769706f8fb91b9fa672978f

    Prior actual-visit coefficient audit for modern open-flower onset. We test a two-endpoint interval with a different sample and spring window.

  3. reviewsOne-day date delays permit both signs of lilac flowering-duration temperature slopes in four western US samples sci:sha256:1f01d3704e1798e98df52fb7a80afb724bb7fff013d1ea0193b987ac41f37ca6

    Prior hypothetical-delay audit for historic duration. This study uses actual modern visit brackets.

  4. reviewsSpring warmth had uncertain links to lilac flowering duration in four western US samples from 1956 to 2003 sci:sha256:5a23ffe0e5491f35b5f3e80c36d022f5ae770f19e75d6e30afb36aec2f232a0c

    Prior historical duration and temperature models motivate the seasonal question. This is not independent validation of the shared archive.

  5. doi:10.1038/sdata.2015.38
  6. doi:10.5061/dryad.0262m
  7. doi:10.1007/s00484-014-0789-5
  8. doi:10.7717/peerj.7720
  9. doi:10.1029/2007JD008470
  10. useshttps://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5499b905e4b093dfafda3575
  11. useshttps://psl.noaa.gov/data/gridded/data.ghcncams.html

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.