Warmer Temps May Bollux Botanicals

Although higher temperatures can initially spur plant growth, the boost looks short-lived. Sophie Bushwick reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Global warming might seem like a botanical boon. After all, milder temperatures and more carbon dioxide and nitrogen should feed flora. But a ten-year study has found that any initial positive effect on plant growth from climate change may soon disappear. The report is in the journal Nature Climate Change. [Sarah C. Elmendorf et al.,"Plot-scale evidence of tundra vegetation change and links to recent summer warming"]

Researchers transplanted vegetation from four grassland ecosystems to lower, warmer elevations. They also modified the precipitation at the transplant sites based on altered rainfall estimates. For the first year, the plants did great, producing more biomass and churning out more oxygen for us. But their productivity went down for the rest of the decade.

What happened? Warming did speed up the nitrogen cycle, which should have increased nitrogen’s availability as plant fertilizer. But a lot of the nitrogen left the soil through run-off or uptake into the atmosphere. In addition, productive native plants began to lose out to species that thrive at higher temperatures, but are less productive than the natives. Warmer temperatures may spur immediate growth, but in the long term, we can’t expect plants to like it hot.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Sophie Bushwick

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[Scientific American is part of the Nature Publishing Group.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe