The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL PATTERNS OF SPECIFIC LEAF WEIGHT IN SUCCESSIONAL NORTHERN HARDWOOD TREE SPECIES
Open accessAbstract
Temporal and spatial patterns of specific leaf weight (SLW, g/m 2) were determined for deciduous hardwood tree species in natural habitats in northern lower Michigan to evaluate the utility of SLW as an index of leaf photosynthetic capacity. No significant diurnal changes in SLW were found. Specific leaf weight decreased and then increased during leaf expansion in the spring. Most species, especially those located in the understory, then had relatively constant SLW for most of the growing season, followed by a decline in SLW during autumn. Specific leaf weight decreased exponentially down through the canopy with increasing cumulative leaf area index. Red oak (Quercus rubra), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), bigtooth aspen (Populus grandidentata), red maple (Acer rubrum), sugar maple (A. saccharum), and beech (Fagus grandifolia) generally had successively lower SLW, for leaves at any one level in the canopy. On a given site, comparisons between years and comparisons of leaves growing within 35 cm of each other showed that differences in SLW among species were not due solely to microenvironmental effects on SLW. Bigtooth aspen, red oak, and red maple on lower‐fertility sites had lower SLW than the same species on higher‐fertility sites. Maximum CO 2 exchange rate, measured at light‐saturation in ambient CO 2 and leaf temperatures of 20 to 25 C, increased with SLW. Photosynthetic capacities of species ranked by SLW in a shaded habitat suggest that red oak, red maple, sugar maple, and beech are successively better adapted to shady conditions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Comparative photosynthesis of sun and shade plants
Boardman, N. K. (1977) · Annual Review of Plant Physiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.28.060177.002035 · Cited by 1,826
Cited by
PLANT FUNCTIONAL MARKERS CAPTURE ECOSYSTEM PROPERTIES DURING SECONDARY SUCCESSION
Garnier, E., Cortez, J., Billès, G., Navas, M.-L., Roumet, C., Debussche, M., Laurent, G., Blanchard, A., Aubry, D., Bellmann, A., et al. (2004) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/03-0799 · Cited by 2,313
Leaf Life‐Span in Relation to Leaf, Plant, and Stand Characteristics among Diverse Ecosystems
Reich, P. B., Walters, M. B., & Ellsworth, D. S. (1992) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937116 · Cited by 1,646
A standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content
Garnier, E., Shipley, B., Roumet, C., & Laurent, G. (2001) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.0269-8463.2001.00563.x · Cited by 773
Leaf specific mass confounds leaf density and thickness
Witkowski, E. T. F., & Lamont, B. B. (1991) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/bf00317710 · Cited by 770
Koike, T. (1988) · Plant Species Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1442-1984.1988.tb00173.x · Cited by 306
Metadata
- Authors
- Jurik, T. W.
- Venue
- American Journal of Botany
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1986-08
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1083-1092
- ISSN
- 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2197
- OpenAlex
- W2034453853
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL PATTERNS OF SPECIFIC LEAF WEIGHT IN SUCCESSIONAL NORTHERN HARDWOOD TREE SPECIES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1986.tb08555.x
- The paper
- Jurik, T. W. (1986). TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL PATTERNS OF SPECIFIC LEAF WEIGHT IN SUCCESSIONAL NORTHERN HARDWOOD TREE SPECIES. American Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1986.tb08555.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.