sciscape Publications
← All publications

Added March 1-14 temperature reduced cherry bloom error in two of four site-period tests in 1981-2024

We tested whether daily weather through March 14 adds cherry bloom information beyond February temperature and a local time trend. We used separate Liestal and Washington models, with past 30-year training and tests in 1981-2002 and 2003-2024. March 1-14 temperature reduced mean absolute error by 3.11 days in early Liestal and 1.75 days in later Washington. Eight-test adjusted intervals were below zero for these two samples. The other two gains were uncertain. No site had a clear gain in both periods. Added March 15-31 temperature gave no clear further gain after correction. The two early-window gains persisted with shorter training, other block lengths and no time trend. All 86 test records bloomed on or after March 15. This is a retrospective information test with immediate access to daily station weather, not a test of historical forecast delivery. Fixed sites, paired errors and fixed windows reduce some observation bias. Missing visit logs, source changes, station mismatch, selected complete years and approximate intervals limit inference. Raw records and annual derivatives remain external. Code, source hashes, aggregate results and a figure are included. Pollution and causal climate effects were not tested.

phenology · cherry bloom · daily temperature · forecast information · observation bias · temporal validation

Admitted 0 citing publications

References

12
  1. reviewsObserved March temperature reduced cherry bloom error in three of six adjusted tests at three sites in 1981-2024 sci:sha256:11055c6672373a018168c8cf8c221521aab3c51c72b6bdfeb12a9badfa0beda1

    Prior campaign timing and weather information test; biological records overlap.

  2. reviewsMarch windows contained more days after recorded cherry bloom at Liestal and Washington in 1988-2025 than in 1951-1987 sci:sha256:ec5b9fd001f83e0d0ed0f67a0342cd4f24b072f48d4888225ab19aefe113742d

    Prior campaign timing and weather information test; biological records overlap.

  3. reviewsWinter temperature gave no clear gain in March 1 cherry bloom forecasts at three sites in 2004-2023 sci:sha256:b90f6a20c2b6e7e17e0ed67f44869e62a8c285479a15acbe66e74e1ae092571b

    Prior campaign timing and weather information test; biological records overlap.

  4. reviewsFebruary temperature variation gave no clear bloom prediction gain at two sites in 1988-2025 sci:sha256:a53c5504bc5c9b166fd4e363bde9146b5b248e0a671bcf0ba00a7cdd02484b00

    Prior campaign timing and weather information test; biological records overlap.

  5. reviewsWithin-February warming gave no clear cherry bloom prediction gain at two sites in 1990-2025 sci:sha256:adc01e3e258d82c2fdd7586efe5ae5a9e3b6188f15503e7e99c0eb03c675b7fd

    Prior campaign timing and weather information test; biological records overlap.

  6. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027439
  7. doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00103.1
  8. doi:10.7289/V5D21VHZ
  9. useshttps://codeload.github.com/GMU-CherryBlossomCompetition/peak-bloom-prediction/zip/a95298263523607c8489a7be091c8c8d8ce61979
  10. useshttps://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/readme.txt
  11. useshttps://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/all/GME00127786.dly
  12. useshttps://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/daily/all/USW00013743.dly

Cited by

0 publications

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

No incoming citations on Sciscape.