Claim · model-written summary
Leaf width accounted for 90% of leaf-area variance and estimated area better.
- Taxon
- TOMATO
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Outcome
- leaf area variancee0
- Direction
- much bettere0
- Value
- 90%e0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e0“Leaf area estimation was much better using only leaf width, which accounted for 90% of leaf area variance.”
t0“TOMATO”
Title
ALLOMETRY TO ESTIMATE LEAF AREA OF TOMATO
Dietmar Schwarz; Hans-Peter Kläring Journal of Plant Nutrition 2001. doi:10.1081/pln-100106982
Other claims from this paper (5)
- Method / resource Total leaf length explained 75% of tomato leaf-area variance.
- Observation Rachis-to-distal-petiole length had the same variance as total length.
- Method / resource Using both length and width did not further improve estimation.
- Method / resource Length- or width-based estimation was robust across growing system, nutrient-solution salinity and measurement date.
- Method / resource A universal relationship may produce considerable systematic estimation error for some genotypes and strong changes in assimilate partitioning.