Paper · 2000 · Annals of Botany

Above- and Below-ground Production of Young Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) Trees after Three Years of Growth in the Field under Elevated CO2

M Jach

12
claims
34
verbatim quotes
42
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings were grown for 3 years in the ground in open top chambers and exposed to two concentrations of atmospheric CO 2 (ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1 ) without addition of nutrients and water. Biomass production (above-ground and below-ground) and allocation, as well as canopy structure and tissue nitrogen concentrations and contents, were examined by destructive harvest after 3 years. Elevated CO 2 increased total biomass production by 55%, reduced needle area and needle mass as indicated, respectively, by lower leaf area ratio and leaf mass ratio. A relatively smaller total needle area was produced in relation to fine roots under elevated CO 2 . The proportion of dry matter in roots was increased by elevated CO 2 , as indicated by increased root-to-shoot ratio and root mass ratio. Within the root system, there was a significant shift in the allocation towards fine roots. Root litter constituted a much higher fraction of fine roots in trees grown in the elevated CO 2 than in those grown in ambient CO 2 . Growth at elevated CO 2 caused a significant decline in nitrogen concentration only in the needles, while nitrogen content significantly increased in branches and fine roots (with diameter less than 1 mm). There were no changes in crown structure (branch number and needle area distribution). Based upon measurements of growth made throughout the 3 years, the greatest increase in biomass under elevated CO 2 took place mainly at the beginning of the experiment, when trees grown in elevated CO 2 had higher relative growth rates than those grown under ambient CO 2 ; these differences disappeared with time. Symptoms of acclimation of trees to growth in the elevated CO 2 treatment were observed and are discussed. Copyright 2000 Annals of Botany Company

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 increased total Scots pine biomass production by 55%.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
Elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
total biomass productione1
Direction
increasede1
Value
55%e1
Comparator
ambiente2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Elevated CO 2 increased total biomass production by 55%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–489 · show in text ↑
e2

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 reduced Scots pine needle area and needle mass.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
Elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
needle area and needle masse1
Direction
reducede1
Comparator
ambiente2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Elevated CO 2 increased total biomass production by 55%, reduced needle area and needle mass as indicated, respectively, by lower leaf area ratio and leaf mass ratio”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–599 · show in text ↑
e2

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 produced less needle area relative to fine roots.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
total needle areae1
Direction
smallere1
Qualifier
in relation to fine rootse1
Comparator
ambiente2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“A relatively smaller total needle area was produced in relation to fine roots under elevated CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 601–698 · show in text ↑
e2

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 increased the fraction of pine dry matter allocated to roots.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
proportion of dry matter in rootse1
Direction
increasede1
Comparator
ambiente2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“The proportion of dry matter in roots was increased by elevated CO 2 , as indicated by increased root-to-shoot ratio and root mass ratio”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 701–837 · show in text ↑
e2

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Root allocation shifted significantly toward fine roots under elevated CO2.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e2
Outcome
allocation towards fine rootse1
Direction
towardse1
Comparator
ambient CO 2e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Within the root system, there was a significant shift in the allocation towards fine roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 839–929 · show in text ↑
e2

“Root litter constituted a much higher fraction of fine roots in trees grown in the elevated CO 2 than in those grown in ambient CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1063 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root litter made up a higher fraction of fine roots under elevated CO2 than ambient CO2.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
fraction of fine rootse1
Direction
much highere1
Comparator
ambient CO 2e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Root litter constituted a much higher fraction of fine roots in trees grown in the elevated CO 2 than in those grown in ambient CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1063 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 significantly decreased pine needle nitrogen concentration.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
nitrogen concentration only in the needlese1
Direction
declinee1
Comparator
ambiente2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Growth at elevated CO 2 caused a significant decline in nitrogen concentration only in the needles”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1066–1164 · show in text ↑
e2

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 significantly increased nitrogen content in pine branches and fine roots.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Organ / stage
branches and fine rootse1
Treatment
elevated CO 2e2
Outcome
nitrogen contente1
Direction
increasede1
Comparator
ambiente3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen content significantly increased in branches and fine roots (with diameter less than 1 mm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1172–1270 · show in text ↑
e2

“Growth at elevated CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1066–1089 · show in text ↑
e3

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Elevated CO2 did not change pine crown structure.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e2
Outcome
crown structure (branch number and needle area distribution)e1
Direction
no changese1
Comparator
ambiente3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“There were no changes in crown structure (branch number and needle area distribution)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1272–1357 · show in text ↑
e2

“Growth at elevated CO 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1066–1089 · show in text ↑
e3

“ambient or ambient + 400 μ mol mol −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 157–194 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The largest elevated-CO2 biomass increase occurred early in the experiment.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Outcome
biomasse1
Direction
greatest increasee1
Qualifier
mainly at the beginning of the experimente1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“the greatest increase in biomass under elevated CO 2 took place mainly at the beginning of the experiment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1422–1527 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pines under elevated CO2 initially had higher relative growth rates than ambient-grown pines, but the difference disappeared with time.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2e1
Outcome
relative growth ratese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
these differences disappeared with timee1
Comparator
ambient CO 2e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“trees grown in elevated CO 2 had higher relative growth rates than those grown under ambient CO 2 ; these differences disappeared with time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1534–1673 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors observed symptoms of acclimation to elevated CO2 in Scots pine.

Taxon
Scots pinePinus sylvestrise0
Treatment
elevated CO 2 treatmente1
Outcome
Symptoms of acclimatione1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pinus sylvestris
Pinus sylvestris · TaxonHello, I am Bruce on Flickr · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–43 · show in text ↑
e1

“Symptoms of acclimation of trees to growth in the elevated CO 2 treatment were observed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1675–1762 · show in text ↑

co2 · yield · Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine)Results differ

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

co2 · nutrient: content · Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.