ArticleTree physiology2022
Forest stand and canopy development unaltered by 12 years of CO2 enrichment.
Article in Tree physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conceptual pitfalls in the forest carbon debate : Comment solicited by Prof Yiping (Rocky) Wu, 30 Aug. 2025, revised Dec 2025.Carbon balance and management · 2026Article
- Elevated COGlobal change biology · 2025Article
- The weak land carbon sink hypothesis.Science advances · 2025Review
- Modelling the impact of forest management and COScientific reports · 2023Article
- Structural and Functional Responses of the Heteromorphic Leaves of Different Tree Heights onPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Canopy structure-the size and distribution of tree crowns and the spatial and temporal distribution of leaves within them-exerts dominant control over primary productivity, transpiration and energy exchange. Stand structure-the spatial arrangement of trees in the forest (height, basal area and spacing)-has a strong influence on forest growth, allocation and resource use. Forest response to elevated atmospheric CO2 is likely to be dependent on the canopy and stand structure. Here, we investigated elevated CO2 effects on the forest structure of a Liquidambar styraciflua L. stand in a free-air CO2 enrichment experiment, considering leaves, tree crowns, forest canopy and stand structure. During the 12-year experiment, the trees increased in height by 5 m and basal area increased by 37%. Basal area distribution among trees shifted from a relatively narrow distribution to a much broader one, but there was little evidence of a CO2 effect on height growth or basal area distribution. The differentiation into crown classes over time led to an increase in the number of unproductive intermediate and suppressed trees and to a greater concentration of stand basal area in the largest trees. A whole-tree harvest at the end of the experiment permitted detailed analysis of canopy structure. There was little effect of CO2 enrichment on the relative leaf area distribution within tree crowns and there was little change from 1998 to 2009. Leaf characteristics (leaf mass per unit area and nitrogen content) varied with crown depth; any effects of elevated CO2 were much smaller than the variation within the crown and were consistent throughout the crown. In this young, even-aged, monoculture plantation forest, there was little evidence that elevated CO2 accelerated tree and stand development, and there were remarkably small changes in canopy structure. Questions remain as to whether a more diverse, mixed species forest would respond similarly.
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.