ArticleAnnals of botany2010
Allocation of biomass and photoassimilates in juvenile plants of six Patagonian species in response to five water supply regimes.
Article in Annals of botany, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stand structure adjustment influences the biomass allocation in naturally generatedFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Composition and Protein Precipitation Capacity of Condensed Tannins in Purple Prairie Clover (Frontiers in plant science · 2021Article
- Morphological plasticity and adaptation level of distylousPlant diversity · 2018Article
- A water availability gradient reveals the deficit level required to affect traits in potted juvenile Eucalyptus globulus.Annals of botany · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe growth-differentiation balance hypothesis (GDBH) states that there is a physiological trade-off between growth and secondary metabolism and predicts a parabolic effect of resource availability (such as water or nutrients) on secondary metabolite production. To test this hypothesis, the response of six Patagonian Monte species (Jarava speciosa, Grindelia chiloensis, Prosopis alpataco, Bougainvillea spinosa, Chuquiraga erinacea and Larrea divaricata) were investigated in terms of total biomass and resource allocation patterns in response to a water gradient.
methodsOne-month-old seedlings were subjected to five water supply regimes (expressed as percentage dry soil weight: 13 %, 11 %, 9 %, 7 % or 5 % - field water capacity being 15 %). After 150 d, plants were harvested, oven-dried and partitioned into root, stem and leaf. Allometric analysis was used to correct for size differences in dry matter partitioning. Determinations of total phenolics (TP), condensed tannins (CT), nitrogen (N) and total non-structural carbohydrates (TNC) concentrations were done on each fraction. Based on concentrations and biomass data, contents of TP and CT were estimated for whole plants, and graphical vector analysis was applied to interpret drought effect. KEY
resultsFour species (J. speciosa, G. chiloensis, P. alpataco and B. spinosa) showed a decrease in total biomass in the 5 % water supply regime. Differences in dry matter partitioning among treatments were mainly due to size variation. Concentrations of TP, CT, N and TNC varied little and the effect of drought on contents of TP and CT was not adequately predicted by the GDBH, except for G. chiloensis.
conclusionsWater stress affected growth-related processes (i.e. reduced total biomass) rather than defence-related secondary metabolism or allocation to different organs in juvenile plants. Therefore, the results suggest that application of the GDBH to plants experiencing drought-stress should be done with caution, at least for Patagonian Monte species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.