4.4 Article

Trembling aspen, balsam poplar, and white birch respond differently to experimental warming in winter months

Journal

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
Volume 44, Issue 12, Pages 1469-1476

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/cjfr-2014-0302

Keywords

cold hardiness; winter warming; dehardening; temperature; boreal broadleaves

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Climatic warming may increase temperature variability, especially in winter months, leading to increased risk of early loss of cold hardiness and therefore freezing damage. In this study, changes in cold hardiness (measured based on electrolyte leakage), budbreak, and survival were used to indicate the responses of seedlings of 3 boreal broadleaf species-trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.), balsam poplar (P. balsamifera L.), and white birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.) - to experimental warming. Seedling responses were greater in winter (January) and spring (March) than fall (November), and were greater in trembling aspen and balsam poplar than white birch. Warming for 5 or 10 days at 16 degrees C day/-2 degrees C night with a 10-h photoperiod in winter and spring generally reduced cold hardiness. Combined with freezing temperatures in the postwarming ambient environment, this reduction increased seedling mortality and stem dieback and extended time to budbreak. Cold hardiness increased somewhat 10 days after seedlings were returned to the outdoor environment following warming in spring, when ambient temperatures were less damaging. The resistance of white birch to warming, likely because of its greater thermal requirement for budbreak and slower natural dehardening, suggests that this species is better suited to withstand increasing winter temperature variability that might occur under climate change. To improve the accuracy of phenological modelling, the effects of winter freezing on budbreak should be factored in.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available