Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16733690›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2006

Changes in stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis during phenological development in spring wheat: implications for gas exchange modelling.

Johan Uddling, Håkan Pleijel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johan UddlingDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Göteborg University, P.O. Box 461, 405 30, Göteborg, Sweden.
Håkan Pleijel
University of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gas exchange was measured from 1 month before the onset of anthesis until the end of grain filling in field-grown spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L., cv. Vinjett, in southern Sweden. Two g ( s ) models were parameterised using these data: one Jarvis-type multiplicative g ( s ) model (J-model), and one combined stomatal-photosynthesis model (L-model). In addition, the multiplicative g ( s ) model parameterisation for wheat used within the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP-model) was tested and evaluated. The J-model performed well (R (2)=0.77), with no systematic pattern of the residuals plotted against the driving variables. The L-model explained a larger proportion of the variation in g ( s ) data when observations of A (n) were used as input data (R (2)=0.71) compared to when A (n) was modelled (R (2)=0.53). In both cases there was a systematic model failure, with g (s) being over- and underestimated before and after anthesis, respectively. This pattern was caused by the non-parallel changes in g ( s ) and A (n) during plant phenological development, with A (n) both peaking and starting to decline earlier as compared to g ( s ). The EMEP-model accounted for 41% of the variation in g ( s ) data, with g ( s ) being underestimated after anthesis. We conclude that, under the climatic conditions prevailing in southern Scandinavia, the performance of the combined stomatal-photosynthesis approach is hampered by the non-parallel changes in g ( s ) and A (n), and that the phenology function of the EMEP-model, having a sharp local maximum at anthesis, should be replaced by a function with a broad non-limiting period after anthesis.

Indexed as

Carbon DioxideMeteorological ConceptsModels, BiologicalPhotosynthesisPlant LeavesSwedenTriticumCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID16733690
OpenAlexW2004830598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.