Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 465

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the conservative behavior of biomass water productivity

Open access
Steduto, Pasquale, Hsiao, Theodore C., Fereres, Elìas·2007·Irrigation Science

Abstract

The ever-increasing demand and competition for the finite water resource worldwide call for more efficient use of water in all sectors, including firstly agricultural food production. One important consideration is the existence of a limit to the amount of biomass a crop can produce per unit of water consumed. This article analyzes the theoretical background and the experimental evidence for the conservative behavior of the efficiency in water use by crops to produce biomass, i.e., biomass water productivity (WP b ), under variable environmental conditions. Particularly, WP b is approximately constant for a given crop species after normalization for evaporative demand of the atmosphere and air carbon dioxide concentration. A stepwise scaling up approach, from leaf to canopy, is undertaken to underline the processes involved at the different hierarchical levels of biological organization that lead to the conservative behavior of WP b . Starting at the leaf level, the basic gas exchange equations are outlined to demonstrate that the normalized photosynthetic WP b at the leaf scale is proportional to the ambient CO 2 concentration. New experimental evidence in support of that conclusion is presented for several C 3 and a C 4 crops. Additional factors are introduced to assess photosynthetic WP b at the canopy scale, including the extent of radiation capture and the role of respiration. The composition of biomass was then considered in the analysis of WP b over a season. The paper highlights the need to normalize WP b for differences in climate, specifically, in evaporative demand of the atmosphere to extrapolate WP b values between climatic zones, and in atmospheric CO 2 concentration to account for changes in CO 2 with time, when looking at the past and into the future. Two procedures for normalization for differences in evaporative demand are presented, and a procedure for normalization for changes in CO 2 concentration is derived for the leaf scale and shown to be applicable to canopy scale. Some knowledge gaps and research needs are pointed out and the potential offered by the near constancy of normalized WP b in crop simulation modeling is emphasized.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00271-007-0064-1

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 465

Metadata

Authors
Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C., & Fereres, E.
Venue
Irrigation Science
Published
2007-02-02
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
189-207
ISSN
  • 0342-7188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1319
OpenAlex
W2170593417
Cited by
465
References
2
FWCI
14.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: On the conservative behavior of biomass water productivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00271-007-0064-1
The paper
Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C., & Fereres, E. (2007). On the conservative behavior of biomass water productivity. Irrigation Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-007-0064-1

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.