Abstract
Existing models of leaf area expansion of Gramineae species based on individual leaf growth are descriptive and assume that there is no effect of tiller type on individual leaf area. However, sound experimental data on the growth of individual leaves on a plant are lacking. A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants, and individual leaf area parameters were measured. Treatments were temperature (daily mean 10n5, 15n5 and 20n5 mC) and light intensity (111, 191 and 286 mol m -# s -" ). Effects of leaf position and tiller type on maximum leaf width and leaf elongation rate (LER) could be explained by a new assumption, that maximum leaf width, and LER, of a leaf depend on the values for the previous foliar leaf on the same tiller, or on the parent tiller. LER increased linearly with temperature and was not affected by light intensity, whereas maximum leaf width was not influenced by temperature or light intensity. Leaf elongation duration was closely related to phyllochron expressed in days, although this relation was slightly modified by light intensity. Equations formulated for each leaf area parameter accounted for 90 % of the variation in leaf area between different leaf types, temperatures and light intensities. The results give a better general understanding of individual leaf growth of Gramineae species and can be used in the development of more mechanistic models for the simulation of leaf area expansion.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf elongation rate of spring wheat increased linearly with temperature.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- temperaturee1
- Outcome
- LERe1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- linearlye1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e1“LER increased linearly with temperature and was not affected by light intensity”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf elongation rate of spring wheat was not affected by light intensity.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)Triticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- light intensitye1
- Outcome
- LERe1
- Direction
- not affectede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e1“LER increased linearly with temperature and was not affected by light intensity”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum leaf width of spring wheat was not influenced by temperature.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)Triticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- temperaturee2
- Outcome
- maximum leaf widthe2
- Direction
- not influencede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e2“whereas maximum leaf width was not influenced by temperature or light intensity”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum leaf width of spring wheat was not influenced by light intensity.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)Triticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- light intensitye2
- Outcome
- maximum leaf widthe2
- Direction
- not influencede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e2“whereas maximum leaf width was not influenced by temperature or light intensity”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf elongation duration was closely related to phyllochron expressed in days, a relation slightly modified by light intensity.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)Triticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- Leaf elongation duratione3
- Qualifier
- slightly modified by light intensitye3
- Comparator
- phyllochron expressed in dayse3
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e3“Leaf elongation duration was closely related to phyllochron expressed in days, although this relation was slightly modified by light intensity”
Claim · model-written summary
Equations formulated for each leaf area parameter accounted for 90 % of the variation in leaf area.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e4“Equations formulated for each leaf area parameter accounted for 90 % of the variation in leaf area between different leaf types, temperatures and light intensities”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum leaf width and leaf elongation rate of a leaf may depend on the previous foliar leaf on the same tiller, or on the parent tiller.
- Taxon
- spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.)Triticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- maximum leaf width and leaf elongation rate (LER)e5
- Qualifier
- previous foliar leaf on the same tiller, or on the parent tillere5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A growth chamber experiment was carried out with young spring wheat (Triticum aesti um L.) plants”
e5“Effects of leaf position and tiller type on maximum leaf width and leaf elongation rate (LER) could be explained by a new assumption, that maximum leaf width, and LER, of a leaf depend on the values for the previous foliar leaf on the same tiller, or on the parent tiller”
The same questions in other papers
light · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 46 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
81 papers more in this group
See all 85 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.