ArticleOecologia2016
Blade life span, structural investment, and nutrient allocation in giant kelp.
Article in Oecologia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Senescence-driven solubilization of biomass is the main source of kelp-derived dissolved organic carbon to the coastal ocean.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Seasonal and developmental stage changes in mucilage carbohydrate content shape the kelp microbiome.ISME communications · 2025Article
- A species distribution model of the giant kelpEcology and evolution · 2024Article
- The role of inputs of marine wrack and carrion in sandy-beach ecosystems: a global review.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022Article
- Standing Crop, Turnover, and Production Dynamics of Macrocystis pyrifera and Understory Species Hedophyllum nigripes and Neoagarum fimbriatum in High Latitude Giant Kelp Forests.Journal of phycology · 2022Article
- Nutrient availability and senescence spatially structure the dynamics of a foundation species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The turnover of plant biomass largely determines the amount of energy flowing through an ecosystem and understanding the processes that regulate turnover has been of interest to ecologists for decades. Leaf life span theory has proven useful in explaining patterns of leaf turnover in relation to resource availability, but the predictions of this theory have not been tested for macroalgae. We measured blade life span, size, thickness, nitrogen content, pigment content, and maximum photosynthetic rate (P max) in the giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) along a strong resource (light) gradient to test whether the predictions of leaf life span theory applied to this alga. We found that shorter blade life spans and larger blade areas were associated with increased light availability. In addition, nitrogen and P max decreased with blade age, and their decrease was greater in shorter lived blades. These observations are generally consistent with patterns observed for higher plants and the prevailing theory of leaf life span. By contrast, variation observed in pigments of giant kelp was inconsistent with that predicted by leaf life span theory, as blades growing in the most heavily shaded portion of the forest had the lowest chlorophyll content. This result may reflect the dual role of macroalgal blades in carbon fixation and nutrient absorption and the ability of giant kelp to modify blade physiology to optimize the acquisition of light and nutrients. Thus, the marine environment may place demands on resource acquisition and allocation that have not been previously considered with respect to leaf life span optimization.
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.