1992
DOI: 10.2307/2389277
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seasonal Variation in the Carbon Isotopic Composition of Desert Plants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

2
82
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 141 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
2
82
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These analyses were done in the Stable Isotope Research Facility for Ecological Research of the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, USA) using an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Model delta S, Finnigan MAT, San Jose, CA). Detailed description of the procedures can be found in Ehleringer et al (1992).…”
Section: Leaf Characteristics and Water Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These analyses were done in the Stable Isotope Research Facility for Ecological Research of the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, USA) using an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Model delta S, Finnigan MAT, San Jose, CA). Detailed description of the procedures can be found in Ehleringer et al (1992).…”
Section: Leaf Characteristics and Water Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In living plants, δ 13 C leaf values reflect the balance of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance and their coupled response to the environment (3). Edaphic factors (e.g., water availability, altitude, temperature) and plant attributes (e.g.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Edaphic factors (e.g., water availability, altitude, temperature) and plant attributes (e.g. phylogeny and leaf traits) can influence δ 13 C leaf values (4)(5)(6). The relative importance of these factors at the global scale is not known, nor is it clear how they might drive the variations in ancient δ 13 C leaf values recorded in either terrestrial organic carbon (δ 13 C TOC ) or δ 13 C values of plant biomarkers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The suggestion that during drought nonstomatal effects become important soon after begins to drop is not consistent, however, with data obtained in fluorescence studies, which indicate that leaf photochemistry is resistant to moderate drought stress (Sharkey and Badger, 1982;Genty et al, 1987;Cornic et al, 1989) and that during drought an increased flow of electrons to O, reflects decreasing ci (Cornic and Briantais, 1991). Integrated measures of ci, such as carbon isotope discrimination in leaves, also suggest that ci is lower in water-stressed plants (Smith and Osmond, 1987;Hubick et al, 1988;Ehleringer et al, 1992;Donovan and Ehleringer, 1994). This disparity between gas-exchange data and other measures of ci has been attributed to patchy stomatal closure in response to drought.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%