Search for: All records

Abstract The success of plant species under climate change will be determined, in part, by their phenological responses to temperature. Despite the growing need to forecast such outcomes across entire species ranges, it remains unclear how phenological sensitivity to temperature might vary across individuals of the same species. In this study, we harnessed community science data to document intraspecific patterns in phenological temperature sensitivity across the multicontinental range of six herbaceous plant species. Using linear models, we correlated georeferenced temperature data with 23 220 plant phenological records from iNaturalist to generate spatially explicit estimates of phenological temperature sensitivity across the shared range of species. We additionally evaluated the geographic association between local historic climate conditions (i.e. mean annual temperature [MAT] and interannual variability in temperature) and the temperature sensitivity of plants. We found that plant temperature sensitivity varied substantially at both the interspecific and intraspecific levels, demonstrating that phenological responses to climate change have the potential to vary both within and among species. Additionally, we provide evidence for a strong geographic association between plant temperature sensitivity and local historic climate conditions. Plants were more sensitive to temperature in hotter climates (i.e. regions with high MAT), but only in regions with high interannual temperature variability. In regions with low interannual temperature variability, plants displayed universally weak sensitivity to temperature, regardless of baseline annual temperature. This evidence suggests that pheno-climatic forecasts may be improved by accounting for intraspecific variation in phenological temperature sensitivity. Broad climatic factors such as MAT and interannual temperature variability likely serve as useful predictors for estimating temperature sensitivity across species’ ranges. 

ABSTRACT Anthropogenic nitrogen (N) deposition is unequally distributed across space and time, with inputs to terrestrial ecosystems impacted by industry regulations and variations in human activity. Soil carbon (C) content normally controls the fraction of mineralized N that is nitrified (ƒ_nitrified), affecting N bioavailability for plants and microbes. However, it is unknown whether N deposition has modified the relationships among soil C, net N mineralization, and net nitrification. To test whether N deposition alters the relationship between soil C and net N transformations, we collected soils from coniferous and deciduous forests, grasslands, and residential yards in 14 regions across the contiguous United States that vary in N deposition rates. We quantified rates of net nitrification and N mineralization, soil chemistry (soil C, N, and pH), and microbial biomass and function (as beta‐glucosidase (BG) andN‐acetylglucosaminidase (NAG) activity) across these regions. Following expectations, soil C was a driver ofƒ_nitrifiedacross regions, whereby increasing soil C resulted in a decline in net nitrification andƒ_nitrified. Theƒ_nitrifiedvalue increased with lower microbial enzymatic investment in N acquisition (increasing BG:NAG ratio) and lower active microbial biomass, providing some evidence that heterotrophic microbial N demand controls the ammonium pool for nitrifiers. However, higher total N deposition increasedƒ_nitrified, including for high soil C sites predicted to have lowƒ_nitrified, which decreased the role of soil C as a predictor ofƒ_nitrified. Notably, the drop in contemporary atmospheric N deposition rates during the 2020 COVID‐19 pandemic did not weaken the effect of N deposition on relationships between soil C andƒ_nitrified. Our results suggest that N deposition can disrupt the relationship between soil C and net N transformations, with this change potentially explained by weaker microbial competition for N. Therefore, past N inputs and soil C should be used together to predict N dynamics across terrestrial ecosystems. 

Abstract Field research can be an important component of the career trajectories for researchers in numerous academic fields; however, conducting research in field settings poses risks to health and safety, and researchers from marginalized groups often face greater risks than those experienced by other researchers in their fields; If these additional risks are not actively and thoughtfully mitigated, they are likely to hinder the participation of qualified investigators in field research and counteract efforts to improve and promote diversity, equity and inclusion in the field sciences.Here we provide, from our perspectives as co‐authors of a field safety manual for the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, United States, (A) background on risks and barriers that should be considered when planning and conducting field research and (B) suggestions on how to work as a collaborative team for developing an inclusive field safety manual.As an example of a manual this proposed process has yielded, we have included our own field safety manual written with diversity, equity and inclusion as a central focus.We hope this publication serves as a starting point for those interested in developing a similar document for use in their laboratory group, department or institution.