Claim · model-written summary
Leaf area increased with sapwood area.
- Taxon
- Erica arborea L., Myrtus communis L. and Juniperus communis L.
Juniperus communis_in_Athens_on_July_4%2C_2023.jpg?width=60)
Myrtus communis
Erica arboreae0 - Organ / stage
- sapwoode5
- Outcome
- leaf areae5
- Direction
- increasede5
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_in_Athens_on_July_4%2C_2023.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Erica arborea L., Myrtus communis L. and Juniperus communis L.”
e5“Hydraulic properties varied as a function of shoot biomass and leaf area, and the latter increased with increasing sapwood area”
Title
Roberto Tognetti; Anna Longobucco; Antonio Raschi; et al. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 2001. doi:10.1071/pp00125
Other claims from this paper (12)
- Association Native embolism in Erica arborea changed seasonally, segregated by the growth CO2 concentration.
- Association Native embolism in Myrtus communis changed seasonally, segregated by the growth CO2 concentration.
- Association Juniperus communis had constantly lower percentage embolism than the other two species.
- Association Summer embolism differences among the three species and between sites were in accordance with vulnerability curves.
- Association Mean specific hydraulic conductivity in Erica arborea was strongly affected by site.
- Association Mean specific hydraulic conductivity in Myrtus communis was strongly affected by site, in the opposite direction to Erica arborea.
- Association Hydraulic properties varied with shoot biomass and leaf area.
- Association Differences between sites were somewhat significant in Myrtus communis.
- Association Foliage biomass increased with stem biomass.
- Association Erica arborea had higher foliage biomass than at the control site at similar stem biomass.
- Association Altering branch biomass allocation may or may not influence hydraulic adjustment, depending on the species.
- Mechanism Plant responses to increasing CO2 tend to compensate for the resource imbalance through changes in hydraulic properties and biomass allocation.