ReviewJournal of experimental botany2025
Beyond the boundary: a new road to improve photosynthesis via wind.
Review in Journal of experimental botany, 2025. 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.
- Low wind, high impact: sustained low airflow alters water use efficiency and shapes plant acclimation.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Article
- Using ΦPSII and leaf temperature as indicators of non-steady-state photosynthesis and stomatal conductance during stepwise changes in light intensity.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Article
- Concurrent Temperature and Light Intensity Fluctuations Promote Stomatal Opening and Non-Steady State Photosynthesis.Plant, cell & environment · 2026Article
- When wuthering winds create fluttering fields: structural and biomechanical properties determine canopy light fluctuation properties of 10 wheat cultivars.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- Airflow and spectrum interactions jointly regulate gas exchange and biomass production in vertical farming.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
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
Plants interact with their microclimate, simultaneously responding to and influencing it. A key element in this interaction is the leaf boundary layer: a stagnant air layer enveloping the leaf, creating a resistance to heat and gas exchange. Its thickness, altered mainly by airflow and leaf morphology, determines the leaf-to-air interaction. Field crops experience wind speeds of 0-8 m s-1 at the canopy top, with wind gusts up to 20 m s-1, but wind speeds drop significantly within the canopy, creating localized low-airflow conditions. Conversely, indoor-grown crops always encounter low wind speeds (0-1 m s-1) and these, especially with larger leaves, restrict heat and gas exchange, impacting photosynthesis and transpiration. Although the effect of the leaf boundary layer on plant exchange processes has been defined, its magnitude remains poorly characterized and is frequently underestimated. This review re-examines its role, and underlying processes are further explained by using an existing modelling approach informed by published physiological parameters from relevant crops. This model suggests that in greenhouses, increases in wind speed typically smaller than 0.2 m s-1 could boost diurnal photosynthesis by 10-20%, although with possible detrimental side-effects such as growth reductions due to mechanical effects and excessive transpiration. In the field, leaves within the canopy often experience thick boundary layers (conductance <0.5 mol m-2 s-1). The role of the boundary layer needs to be re-evaluated, but this will require new tools, methods, and models to make a breakthrough in understanding this overlooked process in both field and controlled-environment agriculture crops.
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.