Spring phenology temperature sensitivity at Japanese weather stations did not decrease in 1953–2025 beyond a forcing-only model, which also explains lower cherry sensitivity at warmer stations
Question: does the apparent temperature sensitivity (days per °C) of spring phenology decrease with warming, as reported for European leaf-out, or is the decrease a result of heat-sum (forcing) arithmetic? Data: Japan Meteorological Agency records 1953–2025 (regular species only) for eight spring events: cherry 'Somei-yoshino' (one clone) first flower and full bloom, plum, dandelion, wisteria and azalea flowering, ginkgo and mulberry budburst; 36–80 stations and 1,718–4,776 station-years per event; GHCN-Daily temperature from the same stations. Method: per-station OLS slopes of event day on mean temperature in a fixed 60-day or 30-day pre-event window. A growing-degree-day null model (common start day and base temperature, station-specific requirement) simulated event days from the same daily temperatures, and we put the simulated days through the same regressions. 95% intervals come from a 1,000-replicate bootstrap of whole years shared by all stations. Robustness: two windows, detrending, an instrumental-variable slope with neighbour-station temperature, on-premises cherry records only, and a null fitted on the colder half of stations. Results: the null predicts lower sensitivity at warmer stations for all events (+0.14 to +0.27 days/°C per °C of winter temperature). For cherry first flower, the observed gradient was +0.25 (0.15 to 0.33) and the null gradient was +0.24 (0.19 to 0.28), with a difference of 0.00 (−0.06 to 0.07). Only the four warmest stations (winter mean 9–12.5 °C) were clearly less sensitive than the null. In 32 tests (8 events × 4 specifications), no event had a significant decrease in sensitivity between 1953–1988 and 1989–2025. Wisteria had a significant increase. The observed-minus-null change was never significantly positive. The plum decrease (+1.5 days/°C, not significant) agreed with the null. Between 1980–1994 and 1999–2013, the cherry first-flower sensitivity changed by +13% (−27% to +62%; positive = stronger). In 20-year moving windows, cherry sensitivity became stronger until about 1995 and then weaker, so two-period comparisons can show either sign. Limits: one urban reference tree per station, a simple forcing null with little skill for plum and dandelion, fewer stations after 2010, and no chilling model, so the cause of the excess at the warmest stations is not tested.
phenology · temperature sensitivity · growing degree days · cherry blossom · Somei-yoshino · Japan Meteorological Agency · GHCN-Daily · climate change · null model · spring flowering · budburst
References
8- challengesdoi:10.1038/nature15402
Reported declining temperature sensitivity of spring leaf-out with warming; we use its two periods and find no decrease in Japanese records.
- supportsdoi:10.1111/gcb.15746
Proposed that declining sensitivity follows from forcing arithmetic; our forcing-only null reproduces the spatial gradient for cherry.
- doi:10.1111/nph.16114
Methodological issues of apparent temperature sensitivity (window length, variance, errors in variables).
- doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2023.109571
Chilling-forcing analysis of JMA cherry bloom data; reduced chilling at low latitudes.
- doi:10.1007/s00484-026-03185-6
Chilling deficit of Somei-yoshino at its southern range in Japan.
- usesdoi:10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00103.1
GHCN-Daily station temperature.
- Station temperature explains 1953–2025 trends in spring plant phenology at Japanese weather stations, but animal first-detection dates and autumn leaf dates became later than temperature predicts sci:sha256:36e60936c071be9d4b3c6da9b602265e2e7d9cd7afb88b52a30ee46f10e2710f
Temperature attribution of JMA phenology trends in the same records.
- usesEarlier budburst did not cause earlier autumn yellowing or leaf fall in the same ginkgo and mulberry trees at Japanese weather stations in 1953–2020 when autumn temperature is controlled sci:sha256:11f49f6ad83249631ee87728c5812f778dc56e0d8946e8e047891f31291f2783
We reuse the JMA and GHCN-Daily files retained with this work (SCI dataset sha256-eded9775...).
Cited by
9 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- Thermal-time models fitted to 1960–1990 air temperature predict 44–64% of the later lake ice freeze-up in 1991–2026, and 73–84% of the earlier break-up, at lakes in Finland and the LIAG database
Forcing-only null model for temperature sensitivity of spring phenology.
- supportsAt JMA stations in 1953–2020, the excess increase of phenology temperature slopes over thermal-time models is in the network-wide yearly temperature signal, not in station-specific variation
Our results agree with its finding that JMA spring sensitivity did not decrease beyond a forcing-only model.
- The excess spring temperature sensitivity at Japanese stations over a thermal-time model continued in 2002–2025, did not increase with local warming, and came with stronger winter-warmth delays
Its moving-window weakening of cherry sensitivity after about 1995 is what the thermal-time model predicts; the model-relative excess continues, which reconciles it with sci:sha256:a372304ce3a1aadd55322628f187e2740d8c2ae143952729f53d47badda6abbb.
- A degree-day model with gridded air temperature, fitted to 1951–1985 only, predicts 85–91% of the 5.7-day earlier ice-off at 100 Northern Hemisphere lakes in 1986–2020
Forcing-only null model for temperature sensitivity of spring phenology.
- supportsIn 31 German spring phases, temperature sensitivity did not decrease from 1952–1966 to 2012–2025, and the 1980–1994 to 1999–2013 decrease agrees with a forcing-only model
Same question for Japanese stations; our German result also shows no decrease in sensitivity beyond a forcing-only model, and a peak in sensitivity near the mid-1990s.
- supportsIn 31 German spring phases, temperature sensitivity did not decrease from 1952–1966 to 2012–2025, and the 1980–1994 to 1999–2013 decrease agrees with a forcing-only model
Same question for Japanese stations; our German result also shows no decrease in sensitivity beyond a forcing-only model, and a peak in sensitivity near the mid-1990s.
- supportsCherry, wisteria and ginkgo dates at Japanese stations became 0.7–1.1 days/°C more temperature-sensitive after 1986 than heat-sum models predict; a changed heat requirement does not explain this
We also find that a forcing-only model explains the weaker cherry sensitivity at warmer stations, and that cherry sensitivity in moving windows was strongest near 1995-2005.
- supportsCherry, wisteria and ginkgo dates at Japanese stations became 0.7–1.1 days/°C more temperature-sensitive after 1986 than heat-sum models predict; a changed heat requirement does not explain this
We also find that a forcing-only model explains the weaker cherry sensitivity at warmer stations, and that cherry sensitivity in moving windows was strongest near 1995-2005.
- A heat-sum model fitted to year-to-year variation predicts 84% of the spatial flowering gradient of clonal Somei-yoshino cherry at 81 Japanese stations in 1953–2025; adding chilling gives 94–98%
It found that cherry at the warmest stations was less sensitive than a forcing-only null and did not test chilling; we test a chill-dependent requirement for the spatial gradient.