Abstract
A common response to low phosphorus availability is increased relative biomass allocation to roots. The resulting increase in root:shoot ratio presumably enhances phosphorus acquisition, but may also reduce growth rates by diverting carbon to the production of heterotrophic rather than photosynthetic tissues. To assess the importance of increased carbon allocation to roots for the adaptation of plants to low P availability, carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes with contrasting adaptation to low phosphorus availability in the field (‘phosphorus efficiency’). Solid‐phase‐buffered silica sand provided low (1 μM), medium (10 μM), and high (30 μM) phosphorus availability. Compared to the high phosphorus treatment, plant growth was reduced by 20% by medium phosphorus availability and by more than 90% by low phosphorus availability. Low phosphorus plants utilized a significantly larger fraction of their daytime net carbon assimilation on root respiration (c. 40%) compared to medium and high phosphorus plants (c. 20%). No significant difference was found among genotypes in this respect. Genotypes also had similar rates of P absorption per unit root weight and plant growth per unit of P absorbed. However, P‐efficient genotypes allocated a larger fraction of their biomass to root growth, especially under low P conditions. Efficient genotypes had lower rates of root respiration than inefficient genotypes, which enabled them to maintain greater root biomass allocation than inefficient genotypes without increasing overall root carbon costs.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Medium phosphorus availability reduced common bean plant growth by 20% compared with the high phosphorus treatment.
- Taxon
- common bean
Phaseolus vulgarise0 - Treatment
- medium phosphorus availabilitye1
- Outcome
- plant growthe1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 20%e1
- Comparator
- high phosphorus treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e1“Compared to the high phosphorus treatment, plant growth was reduced by 20% by medium phosphorus availability and by more than 90% by low phosphorus availability”
Claim · model-written summary
Low phosphorus availability reduced common bean plant growth by more than 90% compared with the high phosphorus treatment.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Treatment
- low phosphorus availabilitye1
- Outcome
- plant growthe1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- more than 90%e1
- Comparator
- high phosphorus treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e1“Compared to the high phosphorus treatment, plant growth was reduced by 20% by medium phosphorus availability and by more than 90% by low phosphorus availability”
Claim · model-written summary
Low phosphorus plants allocated a significantly larger fraction of daytime net carbon assimilation to root respiration than medium and high phosphorus plants.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Treatment
- Low phosphoruse2
- Outcome
- fraction of their daytime net carbon assimilation on root respiratione2
- Direction
- largere2
- Value
- c. 40%e2
- Comparator
- medium and high phosphorus plantse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e2“Low phosphorus plants utilized a significantly larger fraction of their daytime net carbon assimilation on root respiration (c. 40%) compared to medium and high phosphorus plants (c. 20%)”
Claim · model-written summary
No significant difference was found among common bean genotypes in the fraction of carbon assimilation used for root respiration.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Material
- genotypese3
- Outcome
- root respiratione3
- Direction
- No significant differencee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e3“Low phosphorus plants utilized a significantly larger fraction of their daytime net carbon assimilation on root respiration (c. 40%) compared to medium and high phosphorus plants (c. 20%). No significant difference was found among genotypes in this respect”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean genotypes had similar rates of P absorption per unit root weight and similar plant growth per unit of P absorbed.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Material
- genotypese4
- Outcome
- rates of P absorption per unit root weight and plant growth per unit of P absorbede4
- Direction
- similare4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e4“Genotypes also had similar rates of P absorption per unit root weight and plant growth per unit of P absorbed”
Claim · model-written summary
P-efficient common bean genotypes allocated a larger fraction of their biomass to root growth, especially under low P conditions.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Material
- Efficient genotypese1
- Treatment
- low P conditionse2
- Outcome
- fraction of their biomass to root growthe2
- Direction
- largere2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e1“Efficient genotypes had lower rates of root respiration than inefficient genotypes, which enabled them to maintain greater root biomass allocation than inefficient genotypes without increasing overall root carbon costs”
e2“allocated a larger fraction of their biomass to root growth, especially under low P conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Efficient common bean genotypes had lower rates of root respiration than inefficient genotypes.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Material
- Efficient genotypese1
- Outcome
- rates of root respiratione1
- Direction
- lowere1
- Comparator
- inefficient genotypese1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e1“Efficient genotypes had lower rates of root respiration than inefficient genotypes, which enabled them to maintain greater root biomass allocation than inefficient genotypes without increasing overall root carbon costs”
Claim · model-written summary
Efficient common bean genotypes maintained greater root biomass allocation than inefficient genotypes without increasing overall root carbon costs.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Material
- Efficient genotypese1
- Outcome
- root biomass allocatione1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Qualifier
- without increasing overall root carbon costse1
- Comparator
- inefficient genotypese1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“carbon budgets were constructed for four common bean genotypes”
e1“Efficient genotypes had lower rates of root respiration than inefficient genotypes, which enabled them to maintain greater root biomass allocation than inefficient genotypes without increasing overall root carbon costs”
The same questions in other papers
in vitro · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →phosphorus · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
63 papers more in this group
See all 67 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.