ArticleAnnals of botany2020
No carbon limitation after lower crown loss in Pinus radiata.
Article in Annals of botany, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Light Limitation and Foliar Pathogenic Infection Impact Phloem Anatomy and Function in Pinus radiata D. Don.Plant, cell & environment · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsBiotic and abiotic stressors can cause different defoliation patterns within trees. Foliar pathogens of conifers commonly prefer older needles and infection with defoliation that progresses from the bottom crown to the top. The functional role of the lower crown of trees is a key question to address the impact of defoliation caused by foliar pathogens.
methodsA 2 year artificial defoliation experiment was performed using two genotypes of grafted Pinus radiata to investigate the effects of lower-crown defoliation on carbon (C) assimilation and allocation. Grafts received one of the following treatments in consecutive years: control-control, control-defoliated, defoliated-control and defoliated-defoliated.
resultsNo upregulation of photosynthesis either biochemically or through stomatal control was observed in response to defoliation. The root:shoot ratio and leaf mass were not affected by any treatment, suggesting prioritization of crown regrowth following defoliation. In genotype B, defoliation appeared to impose C shortage and caused reduced above-ground growth and sugar storage in roots, while in genotype A, neither growth nor storage was altered. Root C storage in genotype B decreased only transiently and recovered over the second growing season.
conclusionsIn genotype A, the contribution of the lower crown to the whole-tree C uptake appears to be negligible, presumably conferring resilience to foliar pathogens affecting the lower crown. Our results suggest that there is no C limitation after lower-crown defoliation in P. radiata grafts. Further, our findings imply genotype-specific defoliation tolerance in P. radiata.
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.