Global Spring–Autumn Phenology Coupling Inferred from Satellite Observations and Reanalysis-Based Climate Limitations.
Saved in:
| Title: | Global Spring–Autumn Phenology Coupling Inferred from Satellite Observations and Reanalysis-Based Climate Limitations. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Li, Xiaolu1 (AUTHOR), Wei, Yu2 (AUTHOR), Qiu, Tong2,3 (AUTHOR), Donnelly, Alison1,3 (AUTHOR), Wang, Yetang1,2 (AUTHOR) yetangwang@sdnu.edu.cn |
| Source: | Remote Sensing. Apr2026, Vol. 18 Issue 7, p1002. 19p. |
| Subjects: | Phenology, Autumn, Growing season, Humidity, Land-atmosphere interactions, Remote sensing |
| Abstract: | Highlights: What are the main findings? Spring and autumn phenology are positively linked globally, with autumn timing dominated by a direct effect rather than growing season climate mediation. Higher growing season water availability delays autumn senescence, but spring onset does not induce large-scale shifts in energy or water limitation regimes. What are the implications of the main findings? Observed spring–autumn phenology correlations primarily reflect direct phenological coupling, rather than systematic climate mediation. Climate-mediated phenological effects are region-specific, identifying where land–atmosphere interactions modulate seasonal transitions. Spring and autumn phenology jointly regulate terrestrial carbon, water, and energy exchanges, yet the mechanisms linking seasonal transitions remain debated under increasing hydroclimatic stress. Here, we integrate satellite-derived phenology with reanalysis-based indicators of land–atmosphere coupling to examine how spring onset interacts with growing season controlling factors and how these interactions shape autumn senescence at the global scale. Globally, start-of-season (SOS) and end-of-season (EOS) timings are positively coupled, with later SOS generally followed by later EOS, and this relationship becomes stronger when only later-SOS years are considered. However, SOS does not induce coherent global shifts in growing season climate limitation. Piecewise structural equation modeling reveals that SOS influences EOS primarily through a direct phenological pathway, with a mean path coefficient of ~0.4 day·day−1 explaining approximately 26% of global EOS variability. In contrast, energy and water-mediated pathways contribute smaller but spatially heterogeneous effects, together accounting for ~5% of explained variance on average. SOS–EOS coupling is strongest in water-limited regimes, particularly in grasslands and shrublands. Managed croplands exhibit distinct and more heterogeneous responses, reflecting partial decoupling of phenology from natural hydroclimatic constraints. Collectively, our results indicate that spring phenology exerts a robust but spatially variable influence on autumn timing, dominated by direct effects rather than indirect mediation through growing season climate limitations, with regional modulation imposed by background hydroclimatic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Remote Sensing is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 1 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 192958537 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Global Spring–Autumn Phenology Coupling Inferred from Satellite Observations and Reanalysis-Based Climate Limitations. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Li%2C+Xiaolu%22">Li, Xiaolu</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wei%2C+Yu%22">Wei, Yu</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Qiu%2C+Tong%22">Qiu, Tong</searchLink><relatesTo>2,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Donnelly%2C+Alison%22">Donnelly, Alison</searchLink><relatesTo>1,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Yetang%22">Wang, Yetang</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> yetangwang@sdnu.edu.cn</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Remote+Sensing%22">Remote Sensing</searchLink>. Apr2026, Vol. 18 Issue 7, p1002. 19p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Phenology%22">Phenology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Autumn%22">Autumn</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Growing+season%22">Growing season</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Humidity%22">Humidity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Land-atmosphere+interactions%22">Land-atmosphere interactions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Remote+sensing%22">Remote sensing</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Highlights: What are the main findings? Spring and autumn phenology are positively linked globally, with autumn timing dominated by a direct effect rather than growing season climate mediation. Higher growing season water availability delays autumn senescence, but spring onset does not induce large-scale shifts in energy or water limitation regimes. What are the implications of the main findings? Observed spring–autumn phenology correlations primarily reflect direct phenological coupling, rather than systematic climate mediation. Climate-mediated phenological effects are region-specific, identifying where land–atmosphere interactions modulate seasonal transitions. Spring and autumn phenology jointly regulate terrestrial carbon, water, and energy exchanges, yet the mechanisms linking seasonal transitions remain debated under increasing hydroclimatic stress. Here, we integrate satellite-derived phenology with reanalysis-based indicators of land–atmosphere coupling to examine how spring onset interacts with growing season controlling factors and how these interactions shape autumn senescence at the global scale. Globally, start-of-season (SOS) and end-of-season (EOS) timings are positively coupled, with later SOS generally followed by later EOS, and this relationship becomes stronger when only later-SOS years are considered. However, SOS does not induce coherent global shifts in growing season climate limitation. Piecewise structural equation modeling reveals that SOS influences EOS primarily through a direct phenological pathway, with a mean path coefficient of ~0.4 day·day−1 explaining approximately 26% of global EOS variability. In contrast, energy and water-mediated pathways contribute smaller but spatially heterogeneous effects, together accounting for ~5% of explained variance on average. SOS–EOS coupling is strongest in water-limited regimes, particularly in grasslands and shrublands. Managed croplands exhibit distinct and more heterogeneous responses, reflecting partial decoupling of phenology from natural hydroclimatic constraints. Collectively, our results indicate that spring phenology exerts a robust but spatially variable influence on autumn timing, dominated by direct effects rather than indirect mediation through growing season climate limitations, with regional modulation imposed by background hydroclimatic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Remote Sensing is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=192958537 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.3390/rs18071002 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 19 StartPage: 1002 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Phenology Type: general – SubjectFull: Autumn Type: general – SubjectFull: Growing season Type: general – SubjectFull: Humidity Type: general – SubjectFull: Land-atmosphere interactions Type: general – SubjectFull: Remote sensing Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Global Spring–Autumn Phenology Coupling Inferred from Satellite Observations and Reanalysis-Based Climate Limitations. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Li, Xiaolu – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wei, Yu – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Qiu, Tong – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Donnelly, Alison – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wang, Yetang IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 04 Text: Apr2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 20724292 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 18 – Type: issue Value: 7 Titles: – TitleFull: Remote Sensing Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
