Claim · model-written summary
Leaf nitrogen allocation was particularly important in Groups I and II.
- Taxon
- temperate treest0
- Compound
- nitrogene0
- Outcome
- allocation of nitrogen to leavese0
- Qualifier
- Groups I and IIe0
Not reportedMaterialGeneOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValue
Verbatim
e0“the allocation of nitrogen to leaves was particularly important in Groups I and II”
t0“temperate trees”
Title
Differences in nitrogen economy of temperate trees
T. Shinano; M. Osaki; M. Kato Tree Physiology 2001. doi:10.1093/treephys/21.9.617
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Method / resource Twenty-four tree species were classified into three nitrogen economy groups.
- Observation Relative growth rate was high in Group II, moderate in Group I and low in Group III.
- Association The RGR versus leaf nitrogen regression coefficient was higher in Group II than Group I.
- Association No RGR versus leaf nitrogen relationship was observed in Group III.
- Association RGR per unit leaf nitrogen was important in all three groups.
- Observation Dark respiration to net photosynthesis ratio was higher in Group I than Group II.
- Association Leaf nitrogen concentration and net photosynthetic rate had a linear relationship in Group II.
- Association That relationship was not evident in Group I.