Claim · model-written summary
Treatments had no effect on foliage biomass at the bottom of the live crown or its position.
- Taxon
- lodgepole pine
Pinus contortat0 - Treatment
- treatmente0
- Outcome
- foliage biomass at the bottom of the live crown, the position of the bottom of the live crowne0
- Direction
- lack of treatment effectse0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lodgepole pine”
e0“The lack of treatment effects on foliage biomass at the bottom of the live crown, the position of the bottom of the live crown”
Title
The influence of nutrition and density on repressed lodgepole pine
Blevins, David Preston cIRcle (University of British Columbia) 2009. doi:10.14288/1.0075078
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect Nutrient addition increased stand volume growth from 2 to 7 m /ha/year on unthinned plots.
- Intervention effect Fertilizer raised volume growth on thinned plots to 5 m3/ha/year.
- Intervention effect Thinning increased tree-level foliage biomass and growth efficiency.
- Intervention effect Nitrogen, sulfur and boron additions improved tree and stand growth through greater foliage biomass and growth efficiency.
- Association Fertilization and thinning had additive growth effects.
- Observation More fascicles contributed more than fascicle weight to foliage biomass responses.
- Observation With fertilizer, more foliated branches contributed more than foliage per branch to the foliage biomass increase.
- Observation Under thinning, branch number and foliage per branch contributed nearly equally to foliage biomass increase.
- Observation The number of cohorts declined toward the base of the live crown.