2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.11.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of partial defoliation on closed canopy Eucalyptus globulus Labilladière: Growth, biomass allocation and carbohydrates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
35
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
5
35
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, significant biomass reduction following defoliation have been observed as defoliation limits carbon uptake by reducing the total leaf area, indicating that increases in photosynthesis cannot offset carbon losses [39]. Several studies have found that defoliation reduces growth due to nitrogen loss or water stress [22] but this is not the case in our study, as individuals in our study were well watered and fertilized. Besides, we found some evidence that defoliation increases the N content in roots and leaves (Fig.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 54%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Moreover, significant biomass reduction following defoliation have been observed as defoliation limits carbon uptake by reducing the total leaf area, indicating that increases in photosynthesis cannot offset carbon losses [39]. Several studies have found that defoliation reduces growth due to nitrogen loss or water stress [22] but this is not the case in our study, as individuals in our study were well watered and fertilized. Besides, we found some evidence that defoliation increases the N content in roots and leaves (Fig.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 54%
“…Although leaf loss can lead to significant reductions in stem biomass, root biomass, and total biomass [52][53][54], P. deltoides allocates more carbon to the aboveground biomass through compensatory growth. The present study found that defoliation was partially compensated by increased photosynthetic rate [22]. To compensate for leaf removal, plant requires large amounts of energy investment.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 47%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Changes in canopy structure which rearrange leaf area within the canopy have implications for canopy light interception and thus carbon storage rates [8,9,[40][41][42][43]. Such patterns were observed in a hemlock-dominated forest in southern Appalachia, where growth of successor species increased due to increased light availability in the first two years following mortality of Eastern hemlock [37] and similar results in numerous stand thinning experiments document increased stand production rates [12,13,18,32,33,36,37,39,[44][45][46][47]. These studies document ecosystem functional resilience to partial stand disturbance despite mortality rates of canopy dominants approaching 40%, and attribute such resilience to redistribution of light in the canopy and rearrangement of foliage such that light interception and canopy carbon uptake rates do not decline in proportion to disturbance.…”
Section: Functional Consequencesmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The absorption of incident radiation by crops depends on their leaf area index (Behling et al, 2015a), solar angle or solar zenith angle, geometry, size, leaf angle and leaf distribution, age, plant arrangement, time of year, cloud cover (Varlet-Grancher et al, 1989), meteorological conditions and crop management practices (Quentin et al, 2011;Caron et al, 2012). The efficiency of radiation use may vary, depending on how the dry matter (air or total) and solar radiation (incident, intercepted, and absorbed) are defined and determined (Gallo et al, 1993).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%