Abstract
Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object,the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)was investigated,and the allometry of the components biomass(foliage ML,new branch MNB,old branch MOB,small root MSR,large root MLR,branch MBR,aboveground MAG,and belowground MBG)versus each other and each component biomass against plant size was analyzed.The biomass allocation of the understory plants complied with allometry theory,and the allometry power exponents of the components biomass were plastic.The ML∝MNB(0.924-1.055),MOB∝MLR(0.917-1.024),MBR∝MLR(1.095-1.164),and MAG∝MBG(1.064-1.125)were isometry,the power(0.585-0.700)of new branch biomass scaling old branch biomass was nearly to 0.67,the foliage biomass nearly scaled the 0.75 power of branch biomass(0.742-0.795),the power exponent(0.853-0.918)of foliage biomass scaling root biomass was nearly to 0.86,and the allometry power of small root biomass scaling large root biomass was 0.658-0.750.The biomass allocation of understory plants complied with allometry partitioning theory,and the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively,with the root/shoot ratio being 0.272-0.866.The plant biomass allocation partitioning varied with plant species and plant size.For understory plants,the biomass allocation of foliage,new branch,and small root and the root/shoot ratio decreased significantly(P0.05)with plant growing,and the proportion of old branch biomass in plant biomass increased significantly(P0.05),only for a few plants,the allocation of large root biomass did not vary significantly(P0.05).
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Foliage biomass and new branch biomass of understory plants were isometric.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e2“The ML∝MNB(0.924-1.055),MOB∝MLR(0.917-1.024),MBR∝MLR(1.095-1.164),and MAG∝MBG(1.064-1.125) were isometry”
Claim · model-written summary
Old branch biomass and large root biomass of understory plants were isometric.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e2“The ML∝MNB(0.924-1.055),MOB∝MLR(0.917-1.024),MBR∝MLR(1.095-1.164),and MAG∝MBG(1.064-1.125) were isometry”
Claim · model-written summary
Branch biomass and large root biomass of understory plants were isometric.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e2“The ML∝MNB(0.924-1.055),MOB∝MLR(0.917-1.024),MBR∝MLR(1.095-1.164),and MAG∝MBG(1.064-1.125) were isometry”
Claim · model-written summary
Aboveground and belowground biomass of understory plants were isometric.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e2“The ML∝MNB(0.924-1.055),MOB∝MLR(0.917-1.024),MBR∝MLR(1.095-1.164),and MAG∝MBG(1.064-1.125) were isometry”
Claim · model-written summary
The power of new branch biomass scaling old branch biomass was 0.585-0.700, nearly 0.67.
- Taxon
- understory plantse0
- Organ / stage
- new branche3
- Outcome
- new branch biomass scaling old branch biomasse3
- Value
- 0.585-0.700e3
- Setting
- Maoershan Mountain of Northeast Chinae1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e3“the power(0.585-0.700)of new branch biomass scaling old branch biomass was nearly to 0.67”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliage biomass scaled the branch biomass with a power of 0.742-0.795, nearly 0.75.
- Taxon
- understory plantse0
- Organ / stage
- foliagee4
- Outcome
- foliage biomasse4
- Value
- 0.742-0.795e4
- Setting
- Maoershan Mountain of Northeast Chinae1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e4“the foliage biomass nearly scaled the 0.75 power of branch biomass(0.742-0.795)”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliage biomass scaled the root biomass with a power of 0.853-0.918, nearly 0.86.
- Taxon
- understory plantse0
- Organ / stage
- foliagee5
- Outcome
- foliage biomass scaling root biomasse5
- Value
- 0.853-0.918e5
- Setting
- Maoershan Mountain of Northeast Chinae1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e5“the power exponent(0.853-0.918)of foliage biomass scaling root biomass was nearly to 0.86”
Claim · model-written summary
Small root biomass scaled large root biomass with a power of 0.658-0.750.
- Taxon
- understory plantse0
- Organ / stage
- small roote6
- Outcome
- small root biomass scaling large root biomasse6
- Value
- 0.658-0.750e6
- Setting
- Maoershan Mountain of Northeast Chinae1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e1“Taking the secondary forest in Maoershan Mountain of Northeast China as study object”
e6“the allometry power of small root biomass scaling large root biomass was 0.658-0.750”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliage biomass proportion of understory plants was 5.83%-20.60%.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e7“the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
New branch biomass proportion of understory plants was 0.83%-7.42%.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e7“the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Old branch biomass proportion of understory plants was 36.25%-68.24%.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e7“the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Small root biomass proportion of understory plants was 1.32%-6.75%.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e7“the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Large root biomass proportion of understory plants was 16.38%-42.88%.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e7“the component biomass proportions of foliage,new branch,old branch,small root,and large root were 5.83%-20.60%,0.83%-7.42%,36.25%-68.24%,1.32%-6.75%,and 16.38%-42.88%,respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The root/shoot ratio of understory plants was 0.272-0.866.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e2“with the root/shoot ratio being 0.272-0.866”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant biomass allocation partitioning of understory plants varied with plant species and plant size.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e3“The plant biomass allocation partitioning varied with plant species and plant size”
Claim · model-written summary
Biomass allocation of foliage, new branch and small root and the root/shoot ratio of understory plants decreased significantly with plant growth.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e4“the biomass allocation of foliage,new branch,and small root and the root/shoot ratio decreased significantly(P0.05)with plant growing”
Claim · model-written summary
The proportion of old branch biomass in understory plant biomass increased significantly with plant growth.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e5“the proportion of old branch biomass in plant biomass increased significantly(P0.05)”
Claim · model-written summary
For only a few understory plants, large root biomass allocation did not vary significantly.
Verbatim
e0“the biomass allocation of its understory plants(including tree-like plants and typical shrub categories)”
e6“only for a few plants,the allocation of large root biomass did not vary significantly(P0.05)”