While there is overwhelming evidence for phenological responses of animal and plant populations to climate change, most studies have been conducted at the level of entire populations, thus neglecting the scale at which much selection operates and at which animals and plants respond to their environments. Here, using data from a 60-year study, we demonstrate marked small-scale spatial variation in the rate of change in timing of egg laying in great tits (Parus major). We show, further, that this variation is linked to changes in the health of a key primary producer, oak (Quercus robur). The existence of small-scale spatial variability in responses to climate change has important implications for understanding the extent to which local adaptation and phenotypic plasticity govern responses to climate change and for the role of behavioural responses such as habitat selection and dispersal in ameliorating challenges due to climate extremes.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
The data needed to replicate the analyses presented in this paper are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14345960.v1.
Parmesan, C. & Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421, 37–42 (2003).
Root, T. L. et al. Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants. Nature 421, 57–60 (2003).
Scheffers, B. R. et al. The broad footprint of climate change from genes to biomes to people. Science 354, aaf7671 (2016).
Cohen, J. M., Lajeunesse, M. J. & Rohr, J. R. A global synthesis of animal phenological responses to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 224–228 (2018).
Piao, S. et al. Plant phenology and global climate change: current progresses and challenges. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 1922–1940 (2019).
Merilä, J. & Hendry, A. P. Climate change, adaptation, and phenotypic plasticity: the problem and the evidence. Evol. Appl. 7, 1–14 (2014).
Chevin, L. M. & Hoffmann, A. A. Evolution of phenotypic plasticity in extreme environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 372, 20160138 (2017).
Fox, R. J., Donelson, J. M., Schunter, C., Ravasi, T. & Gaitán-Espitia, J. D. Beyond buying time: the role of plasticity in phenotypic adaptation to rapid environmental change. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 374, 20180174 (2019).
Thackeray, S. J. et al. Trophic level asynchrony in rates of phenological change for marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments. Glob. Change Biol. 16, 3304–3313 (2010).
Kharouba, H. M. et al. Global shifts in the phenological synchrony of species interactions over recent decades. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 5211–5216 (2018).
Radchuk, V. et al. Adaptive responses of animals to climate change are most likely insufficient. Nat. Commun. 10, 3109 (2019).
Visser, M. E. & Gienapp, P. Evolutionary and demographic consequences of phenological mismatches. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 879–885 (2019).
Kharouba, H. M. & Wolkovich, E. M. Disconnects between ecological theory and data in phenological mismatch research. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 406–415 (2020).
Samplonius, J. M. et al. Strengthening the evidence base for temperature-mediated phenological asynchrony and its impacts. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 155–164 (2021).
Charmantier, A. et al. Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in response to climate change in a wild bird population. Science 320, 800–803 (2008).
Tomotani, B. M. et al. Climate change leads to differential shifts in the timing of annual cycle stages in a migratory bird. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 823–835 (2018).
Moyes, K. et al. Advancing breeding phenology in response to environmental change in a wild red deer population. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 2455–2469 (2011).
Lane, J. E., Kruuk, L. E. B., Charmantier, A., Murie, J. O. & Dobson, F. S. Delayed phenology and reduced fitness associated with climate change in a wild hibernator. Nature 489, 554–557 (2012).
Todd, B. D., Scott, D. E., Pechmann, J. H. K. & Whitfield Gibbons, J. Climate change correlates with rapid delays and advancements in reproductive timing in an amphibian community. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 278, 2191–2197 (2011).
Taylor, S. G. Climate warming causes phenological shift in pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha, behavior at Auke Creek, Alaska. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 229–235 (2008).
Mills, L. S. et al. Camouflage mismatch in seasonal coat color due to decreased snow duration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 7360–7365 (2013).
Lameris, T. K. et al. Arctic geese tune migration to a warming climate but still suffer from a phenological mismatch. Curr. Biol. 28, 2467–2473.e4 (2018).
Singer, M. C. & Parmesan, C. Phenological asynchrony between herbivorous insects and their hosts: signal of climate change or pre-existing adaptive strategy? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365, 3161–3176 (2010).
Charmantier, A. & Gienapp, P. Climate change and timing of avian breeding and migration: evolutionary versus plastic changes. Evol. Appl. 7, 15–28 (2014).
Keogan, K. et al. Global phenological insensitivity to shifting ocean temperatures among seabirds. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 313–317 (2018).
Both, C. & Visser, M. E. Adjustment to climate change is constrained by arrival date in a long-distance migrant bird. Nature 411, 296–298 (2001).
Both, C., van Asch, M., Bijlsma, R. G., van den Burg, A. B. & Visser, M. E. Climate change and unequal phenological changes across four trophic levels: constraints or adaptations? J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 73–83 (2009).
Cresswell, W. & McCleery, R. How great tits maintain synchronization of their hatch date with food supply in response to long-term variability in temperature. J. Anim. Ecol. 72, 356–366 (2003).
Visser, M. E., Van Noordwijk, A. J., Tinbergen, J. M. & Lessells, C. M. Warmer springs lead to mistimed reproduction in great tits (Parus major). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 265, 1867–1870 (1998).
Sanz, J. J., Potti, J., Moreno, J., Merino, S. & Frías, O. Climate change and fitness components of a migratory bird breeding in the Mediterranean region. Glob. Change Biol. 9, 461–472 (2003).
Marrot, P., Charmantier, A., Blondel, J. & Garant, D. Current spring warming as a driver of selection on reproductive timing in a wild passerine. J. Anim. Ecol. 87, 754–764 (2018).
Burgess, M. D. et al. Tritrophic phenological match–mismatch in space and time. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 970–975 (2018).
Visser, M. E., Holleman, L. J. M. & Gienapp, P. Shifts in caterpillar biomass phenology due to climate change and its impact on the breeding biology of an insectivorous bird. Oecologia 147, 164–172 (2006).
Pearce-Higgins, J. W., Yalden, D. W. & Whittingham, M. J. Warmer springs advance the breeding phenology of golden plovers Pluvialis apricaria and their prey (Tipulidae). Oecologia 143, 470–476 (2005).
Nussey, D. H., Clutton-Brock, T. H., Elston, D. A., Albon, S. D. & Kruuk, L. E. B. Phenotypic plasticity in a maternal trait in red deer. J. Anim. Ecol. 74, 387–396 (2005).
Husby, A. et al. Contrasting patterns of phenotypic plasticity in reproductive traits in two great tit (Parus major) populations. Evolution 64, 2221–2237 (2010).
Matthysen, E., Adriaensen, F. & Dhondt, A. A. Multiple responses to increasing spring temperatures in the breeding cycle of blue and great tits (Cyanistes caeruleus, Parus major). Glob. Change Biol. 17, 1–16 (2011).
Fisher, J. I., Mustard, J. F. & Vadeboncoeur, M. A. Green leaf phenology at Landsat resolution: scaling from the field to the satellite. Remote Sens. Environ. 100, 265–279 (2006).
Duparc, A. et al. Co-variation between plant above-ground biomass and phenology in sub-alpine grasslands. Appl. Veg. Sci. 16, 305–316 (2013).
Hinks, A. E. et al. Scale-dependent phenological synchrony between songbirds and their caterpillar food source. Am. Nat. 186, 84–97 (2015).
Lambrechts, M. M., Blondel, J., Maistre, M. & Perret, P. A single response mechanism is responsible for evolutionary adaptive variation in a bird’s laying date. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 5153–5155 (1997).
Dawson, A. Control of the annual cycle in birds: endocrine constraints and plasticity in response to ecological variability. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 363, 1621–1633 (2008).
Visser, M. E. et al. Phenology, seasonal timing and circannual rhythms: towards a unified framework. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365, 3113–3127 (2010).
Caro, S. P., Schaper, S. V., Hut, R. A., Ball, G. F. & Visser, M. E. The case of the missing mechanism: how does temperature influence seasonal timing in endotherms? PLoS Biol. 11, e1001517 (2013).
Bourgault, P., Thomas, D., Perret, P. & Blondel, J. Spring vegetation phenology is a robust predictor of breeding date across broad landscapes: a multi-site approach using the Corsican blue tit (Cyanistes caeruleus). Oecologia 162, 885–892 (2010).
Bison, M. et al. Best environmental predictors of breeding phenology differ with elevation in a common woodland bird species. Ecol. Evol. 10, 10219–10229 (2020).
Bernhardt, J. R., O’Connor, M. I., Sunday, J. M. & Gonzalez, A. Life in fluctuating environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 375, 20190454 (2020).
Gienapp, P., Reed, T. E. & Visser, M. E. Why climate change will invariably alter selection pressures on phenology. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 281, 20141611 (2014).
Lönnstedt, O. M., McCormick, M. I., Chivers, D. P. & Ferrari, M. C. O. Habitat degradation is threatening reef replenishment by making fish fearless. J. Anim. Ecol. 83, 1178–1185 (2014).
Pellerin, F., Cote, J., Bestion, E. & Aguilée, R. Matching habitat choice promotes species persistence under climate change. Oikos 128, 221–234 (2019).
Firth, J. A., Verhelst, B. L., Crates, R. A., Garroway, C. J. & Sheldon, B. C. Spatial, temporal and individual-based differences in nest-site visits and subsequent reproductive success in wild great tits. J. Avian Biol. 49, e01740 (2018).
Naef-Daenzer, B. & Keller, L. F. The foraging performance of great and blue tits (Parus major and P. caeruleus) in relation to caterpillar development, and its consequences for nestling growth and fledging weight. J. Anim. Ecol. 68, 708–718 (1999).
Naef-Daenzer, B. Patch time allocation and patch sampling by foraging great and blue tits. Anim. Behav. 59, 989–999 (2000).
Bouwhuis, S., Sheldon, B. C., Verhulst, S. & Charmantier, A. Great tits growing old: selective disappearance and the partitioning of senescence to stages within the breeding cycle. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 276, 2769–2777 (2009).
Cole, E. F. & Sheldon, B. C. The shifting phenological landscape: within- and between-species variation in leaf emergence in a mixed-deciduous woodland. Ecol. Evol. 7, 1135–1147 (2017).
Wint, W. The role of alternative host-plant species in the life of a polyphagous moth, Operophtera brumata (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). J. Anim. Ecol. 52, 439–450 (1983).
Keller, L. F. & van Noordwijk, A. J. Effects of local environmental conditions on nestling growth in the great tit Parus major L. Ardea 82, 349–362 (1994).
Wilkin, T. A., Garant, D., Gosler, A. G. & Sheldon, B. C. Density effects on life-history traits in a wild population of the great tit Parus major: analyses of long-term data with GIS techniques. J. Anim. Ecol. 75, 604–615 (2006).
Wilkin, T. A. & Sheldon, B. C. Sex differences in the persistence of natal environmental effects on life histories. Curr. Biol. 19, 1998–2002 (2009).
Gagen, M. et al. The tree ring growth histories of UK native oaks as a tool for investigating chronic oak decline: an example from the Forest of Dean. Dendrochronologia 55, 50–59 (2019).
Sturrock, R. N. et al. Climate change and forest diseases. Plant Pathol. 60, 133–149 (2011).
MacColl, A. D. C. The ecological causes of evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 514–522 (2011).
Grant, P. R. & Price, T. D. Population variation in continuously varying traits as an ecological genetics problem. Integr. Comp. Biol. 21, 795–811 (1981).
Hereford, J. A quantitative survey of local adaptation and fitness trade-offs. Am. Nat. 173, 579–588 (2009).
Hadfield, J. D. The spatial scale of local adaptation in a stochastic environment. Ecol. Lett. 19, 780–788 (2016).
Porlier, M. et al. Variation in phenotypic plasticity and selection patterns in blue tit breeding time: between- and within-population comparisons. J. Anim. Ecol. 81, 1041–1051 (2012).
Hidalgo Aranzamendi, N., Hall, M. L., Kingma, S. A., van de Pol, M. & Peters, A. Rapid plastic breeding response to rain matches peak prey abundance in a tropical savanna bird. J. Anim. Ecol. 88, 1799–1811 (2019).
Caro, S. P., Lambrechts, M. M., Balthazart, J. & Perret, P. Non-photoperiodic factors and timing of breeding in blue tits: impact of environmental and social influences in semi-natural conditions. Behav. Process. 75, 1–7 (2007).
Bourret, A., Bélisle, M., Pelletier, F. & Garant, D. Multidimensional environmental influences on timing of breeding in a tree swallow population facing climate change. Evol. Appl. 8, 933–944 (2015).
Nussey, D. H., Wilson, A. J. & Brommer, J. E. The evolutionary ecology of individual phenotypic plasticity in wild populations. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 831–844 (2007).
Morris, D. W. Toward an ecological synthesis: a case for habitat selection. Oecologia 136, 1–13 (2003).
Long, R. A. et al. Linking habitat selection to fitness-related traits in herbivores: the role of the energy landscape. Oecologia 181, 709–720 (2016).
Morris, D. W. Spatial scale and the cost of density-dependent habitat selection. Evol. Ecol. 1, 379–388 (1987).
Patten, M. A. & Kelly, J. F. Habitat selection and the perceptual trap. Ecol. Appl. 20, 2148–2156 (2010).
Ponchon, A., Garnier, R., Grémillet, D. & Boulinier, T. Predicting population responses to environmental change: the importance of considering informed dispersal strategies in spatially structured population models. Divers. Distrib. 21, 88–100 (2015).
Nilsson, A. L. K. et al. Hydrology influences breeding time in the white-throated dipper. BMC Ecol. 20, 70 (2020).
Nilsson, A. L. K. et al. Location is everything, but climate gets a share: analyzing small-scale environmental influences on breeding success in the white-throated dipper. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 542846 (2020).
Martin, R. O., Cunningham, S. J. & Hockey, P. A. R. Elevated temperatures drive fine-scale patterns of habitat use in a savanna bird community. Ostrich 86, 127–135 (2015).
Bailey, L. D. et al. Habitat selection can reduce effects of extreme climatic events in a long-lived shorebird. J. Anim. Ecol. 88, 1474–1485 (2019).
Kirby, K. J. et al. Changes in the tree and shrub layer of Wytham Woods (southern England) 1974–2012: local and national trends compared. Forestry 87, 663–673 (2014).
Perrins, C. & McCleery, R. Laying dates and clutch size in the great tit. Wilson Bull. 101, 236–253 (1989).
Wilkin, T. A., Perrins, C. M. & Sheldon, B. C. The use of GIS in estimating spatial variation in habitat quality: a case study of lay-date in the great tit Parus major. Ibis 149, 110–118 (2007).
Perrins, C. M. Population fluctuations and clutch-size in the great tit, Parus major L. J. Anim. Ecol. 34, 601–647 (1965).
Wesołowski, T. & Rowiński, P. Timing of bud burst and tree-leaf development in a multispecies temperate forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 237, 387–393 (2006).
Gibson, C. W. D. in Woodland Conservation and Research in the Clay Vale of Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire (eds Kirby, K. J. & Write, F. J.) 32–40 (JNCC, 1988).
Dawkin, H. C. & Field, D. R. B. A Long-Term Surveillance System for British Woodland Vegetation. Commonwealth Forestry Institute, Oxford, Occasional Paper No. 1. (1978).
Horsfall, A. S. & Kirby, K. J. The Use of Permanent Quadrats to Record Changes in the Structure and Composition of Wytham Woods, Oxfordshire Research and Survey in Nature Conservation No. 1 (JNCC, 1992).
Wilkin, T. A., King, L. E. & Sheldon, B. C. Habitat quality, nestling diet, and provisioning behaviour in great tits Parus major. J. Avian Biol. 40, 135–145 (2009).
Van Noordwijk, M. & Purnomosidhi, P. Root architecture in relation to tree–soil–crop interactions and shoot pruning in agroforestry. Agrofor. Syst. 30, 161–173 (1995).
Bailey, L. D. & van de Pol, M. climwin: an R toolbox for climate window analysis. PLoS ONE 11, e0167980 (2016).
van de Pol, M. et al. Identifying the best climatic predictors in ecology and evolution. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1246–1257 (2016).
Simmonds, E. G., Cole, E. F. & Sheldon, B. C. Cue identification in phenology: a case study of the predictive performance of current statistical tools. J. Anim. Ecol. 88, 1428–1440 (2019).
Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package: R Package v.2.5-6 (2019); https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
Sturges, H. A. The choice of a class interval. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 21, 65–66 (1926).
Hadfield, J. D. MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J. Stat. Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v033.i02 (2010).
R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020); http://www.R-project.org/
We thank all those who have contributed to the long-term nestbox study in Wytham Woods and the collection of associated data. The long-term population study has been supported by numerous funding sources, including recently by grants from BBSRC (BB/L006081/1), ERC (AdG250164), and NERC (NE/K006274/1, NE/S010335/1).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Climate Change thanks Suzanne Bonamour, Michał Glądalski, Eunbi Kwon and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
(a) The spatial structure of oak crown dieback across Wytham. Shown are all 5,748 mature oak trees, coloured according to the amount of crown dieback (where a score of 1 denotes a tree whose canopy has 0 to 25 % dieback and a value of 5 denotes a tree that is dead) (b) Mantel correlogram showing the direction and strength of spatial autocorrelation in the dieback scores of oak trees in different distance classes.
Survival probability of 394 oaks over a 39-year period (1975–2014) in relation to the degree of local oak dieback.
Extended Data Fig. 3 The estimated relationship between oak dieback score and the rate of laying date change was consistent across buffer sizes.
Shown are posterior means and credible intervals from models of the rate of laying date change with average oak dieback score calculated using buffers of different sizes.
Extended Data Fig. 4 Oak dieback was the only fixed effect whose 95% credible interval did not overlap zero.
Shown are fixed effect posterior distributions from the mixed effects model with rate of laying date change as the response, the fixed effects shown in the figure, a spatial similarity matrix, and each data point weighted according to its standard error.
A score of 1 corresponds to a tree with 0–25% dieback, 2 to a tree with 25%–50% dieback, 3 to a tree with 50%–75% dieback, 4 to a tree with 75% to 100% dieback, and 5 to a tree that is dead.
Extended Data Fig. 6 There were no consistent effects of environmental explanatory variables on oak dieback score.
Shown are posterior means and 95% credible intervals from the 100 models exploring the relationships between local environmental factors and oak dieback scores for random samples of 200 trees. Each model included a spatial similarity matrix to account for potential spatial autocorrelation in dieback scores.
About this article
Cite this article
Cole, E.F., Regan, C.E. & Sheldon, B.C. Spatial variation in avian phenological response to climate change linked to tree health. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11, 872–878 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01140-4
This article is cited by
Nature Ecology & Evolution (2022)
Nature Climate Change (2021)