First-leaf updates gave no clear first-bloom forecast gain in four US shrub samples in 1980-2008
We tested a first-bloom date update from the first-leaf date of the same shrub. Each test used only earlier paired years for that plant. The baseline was the past mean bloom date, bounded below by current first leaf. Four East and West samples in 1980-2008 used 4,815 pairs. Mean error reductions ranged from -1.45 to 0.54 days. All four adjusted intervals included zero. Update errors ranged from 6.33 to 9.42 days. Missing visits and report times can link recorded dates and reduce useful lead. These are past-only archive tests, not live forecasts or causal climate effects. The package has a fixed data panel, all predictions, source hashes, code, checks and a figure.
phenology · first leaf · first bloom · forecast · warm springs · observation bias · lilac · honeysuckle
References
9- usesFirst-bloom updates reduced full-bloom date errors in four US shrub samples in 1980-2008 sci:sha256:6eb48c178e0ab1b5f76f0049f52321084f415115038e7b35dbe2cdcf95b1ee99
We extend the earlier-stage update idea to first leaf and first bloom. We write new code and build a new panel from the same archive.
- reviewsSpring warmth was linked to fewer first-bloom records after leaf reports in two US lilac samples in 1965-1986 sci:sha256:8231e086e5b26d42feacc54f63b4c6d797bb150f96136985af5981e126dd2bd1
Record availability after leaf reports can select the scored sample.
- doi:10.1038/sdata.2015.38
- doi:10.5061/dryad.0262m
- doi:10.1029/2007JD008470
- doi:10.1016/j.cub.2023.06.064
- doi:10.1002/eap.2025
- useshttps://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5499b905e4b093dfafda3575
- useshttps://psl.noaa.gov/data/gridded/data.ghcncams.html
Cited by
1 publicationPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesLearned first-leaf updates reduced bloom-date error in three of four US tests against full updates in 1980-2008
We extend its full first-leaf update test with a past-only learned update. We use the same archive and sample rules, with new code.