Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39628546›Full record

ArticleApplications in plant sciences

Guidelines for quantifying leaf chlorophyll content via non-destructive spectrometry.

Giancarlo M Chiarenza, Eve Slavich, Angela T Moles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applications in plant sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Giancarlo M ChiarenzaEvolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Sydney 2052 New South Wales Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6277-6942
Eve SlavichMark Wainwright Analytical Centre, UNSW Sydney 2052 New South Wales Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6520-6195
Angela T MolesEvolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Sydney 2052 New South Wales Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2041-7762

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Premise: Leaf chlorophyll is a fundamental bioindicator used in several fields; however, we lack clear guidelines for optimizing sampling efforts and producing comparable studies. Methods: We estimated the leaf chlorophyll content of 10 plant species using nondestructive spectrometry methods. We stored half of the leaves at 4°C and half at room temperature under similar light levels to assess the role of storage in the chlorophyll degradation rate. Results: The chilled mature leaves maintained a chlorophyll content within 5% of the original value for ~1.5 d, while the chlorophyll content of unrefrigerated mature leaves decreased rapidly, indicating that their chlorophyll content should be measured within 4 h. When refrigerated, the chlorophyll content of the expanding leaves remained within 5% of the original level for at least 5 d, but we suggest analyzing them within 3 d. In mature leaves, 73% of the variation in chlorophyll content is at the species level, 15% is between individuals, and the variation within leaves is negligible (<1%). Measuring one mature leaf from eight individuals was sufficient to provide a species chlorophyll estimate within 5% of the true value at least 80% of the time. Discussion: We advise researchers to prioritize sampling more individuals rather than repeating measures within leaves or individuals. Our findings will help researchers to optimize their time and research efforts, and to obtain more robust ecological data.

Indexed as

chlorophyll degradationchlorophyll estimationhyperspectral indexrefrigerationsampling effort

Identifiers

PMID39628546
PMCPMC11610418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.