ArticleEcology and evolution2014
Allometric scaling relationship between above- and below-ground biomass within and across five woody seedlings.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2014. 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.
- Biomass Allocation and Allometric Relationships Among Major Plant Formations in the Alpine Peat Swamp Wetlands of the Yellow River on the Gannon Plateau, Gansu Province, China.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Grade-specific biomass allocation and allometric growth strategies in Pinus yunnanensis seedlings.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Scaling of cotyledon and primary leaf mass versus area inAoB PLANTS · 2024Article
- Differences in Allometric Relationship of Two Dominant Woody Species Among Various Terrains in a Desert Region of Central Asia.Frontiers in plant science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Allometric biomass allocation theory predicts that leaf biomass (M L ) scaled isometrically with stem (M S ) and root (M R ) biomass, and thus above-ground biomass (leaf and stem) (M A ) and root (M R ) scaled nearly isometrically with below-ground biomass (root) for tree seedlings across a wide diversity of taxa. Furthermore, prior studies also imply that scaling constant should vary with species. However, litter is known about whether such invariant isometric scaling exponents hold for intraspecific biomass allocation, and how variation in scaling constants influences the interspecific scaling relationship between above- and below-ground biomass. Biomass data of seedlings from five evergreen species were examined to test scaling relationships among biomass components across and within species. Model Type II regression was used to compare the numerical values of scaling exponents and constants among leaf, stem, root, and above- to below-ground biomass. The results indicated that M L and M S scaled in an isometric or a nearly isometric manner with M R , as well as M A to M R for five woody species. Significant variation was observed in the Y-intercepts of the biomass scaling curves, resulting in the divergence for intraspecific scaling and interspecific scaling relationships for M L versus M S and M L versus M R , but not for M S versus M R and M A versus M R . We conclude, therefore, that a nearly isometric scaling relationship of M A versus M R holds true within each of the studied woody species and across them irrespective the negative scaling relationship between leaf and stem.
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.