co2 · Growth · Lolium arundinaceum (tall fescue)
13 claims from these papers; 4 citations between them.
Papers whose results differ, checked claim by claim 2
2 pairs of papers on this question report results that differ: an effect in one paper, the opposite effect or no effect in the other. Two model reviewers reading both claims accepted each pair.
- Responses to elevated carbon dioxide for postdrought recovery of turfgrass species differing in growth characteristics (2021)
no changeElevated CO2 had no significant effect on tall fescue shoot biomass during rewatering.
Elevated atmospheric CO2 suppresses silicon accumulation and exacerbates endophyte reductions in plant phosphorus (2023)increaseElevated CO2 increased shoot biomass by 52%.
What separates themTest system: controlled environment · fieldCompare the two papers → - Proteomic Profiling for Metabolic Pathways Involved in Interactive Effects of Elevated Carbon Dioxide and Nitrogen on Leaf Growth in a Perennial Grass Species (2019)
increaseElevated carbon dioxide increased tall fescue shoot biomass under sufficient nitrate.
Responses to elevated carbon dioxide for postdrought recovery of turfgrass species differing in growth characteristics (2021)no changeElevated CO2 had no significant effect on tall fescue shoot biomass during rewatering.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers →
How these papers cite each other
4 citations between these papers: 3 on the same side, 1 across the two sides.
- 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
- positive
- positive
Response to elevated CO2 in the temperate C3 grass Festuca arundinaceae across a wide range of soils · 2015
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 3
Antiherbivore Defense Mutualism Under Elevated Carbon Dioxide Levels: A Fungal Endophyte and Grass · 1996
- negative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
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 Lolium arundinaceum (tall fescue) against other targets
co2 · growth on other organisms
- Zea mays (maize)
- Pinus taeda (loblolly pine)
- Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)
- Populus (poplar)
- Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)
- Picea abies (Norway spruce)
- Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen)
- Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce)
- Quercus mongolica (Mongolian oak)
- Agrostis capillaris (browntop)
- Sanguisorba minor
- Phleum pratense (timothy)