co2 · Physiology: photosynthesis · Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine)

Positive and negative results8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

16 claims from these papers; 5 citations between them.

Papers here report positive and negative or no-effect results. No pair of them has been accepted in the claim-by-claim check.

How these papers cite each other

5 citations between these papers: 4 on the same side, 1 across the two sides.

Positive resultNegative result or no effect1995200020052010201520202025
  • Positive result
  • Negative result or no effect
  • Citation, pointing to the cited paper
  • Citation across the two sides
  • Larger circle: more citations overall

Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.

Papers reporting a positive result 6

  1. Effects of needle age, long-term temperature and CO2 treatments on the photosynthesis of Scots pine · 1995

    cited by 3 papers here

  2. Long‐term responses of boreal vegetation to global change: an experimental and modelling investigation · 1999

    cites 1 paper here

  3. Effects of season, needle age and elevated atmospheric CO2 on photosynthesis in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) · 2000

    cites 1 paper herecited by 2 papers here

  4. Variable photosynthetic acclimation in consecutive cohorts of Scots pine needles during 3 years of growth at elevated CO2 and elevated temperature · 2003

    cites 2 papers here

  5. Soil microbial community differences drive variation in Pinus sylvestris physiology, productivity, and responses to elevated CO2 · 2025

  6. Soil microbial community differences drive variation in Pinus sylvestris physiology, productivity, and responses to elevated CO2 · 2026

Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 2

  1. Photosynthetic responses of Scots pine to elevated CO2 and nitrogen supply: results of a branch-in-bag experiment · 1997

  2. Carbon budget of Pinus sylvestris saplings after four years of exposure to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration · 2005

    cites 1 paper here

A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.

co2 on Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine) against other targets

co2 · physiology: photosynthesis on other organisms