Cited by 106Plant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsTree-ring climate responsesIsotope Analysis in Ecology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Foliar carbon isotope discrimination in Larix species and sympatric evergreen conifers: a global comparison

Abstract

Larches (Larix spp.), deciduous conifers, occur in the northern hemisphere in cold-temperate and boreal climates - an environment normally thought to favor evergreen tree species. We compare foliar carbon isotope discrimination (Δ), instantaneous water use efficiency, total foliar nitrogen concentration, and specific leaf area (for a subset of sites) between Larix spp. and co-occurring evergreen conifers at 20 sites throughout the natural range of larches. Except for Larix occidentalis in the xeric Intermountain West, USA, Δ is significantly (P < 0.05) greater for larches than co-occurring evergreen conifers at 77% of the sites, suggesting that larches use water less efficiently. At elevations greater than 3000 m, the Δ of Larix spp. and co-occurring conifers converge, suggesting that water is not the limiting resource. Foliar nitrogen concentration and specific leaf area are two ecophysiological characteristics that are positively correlated with high photosynthetic capacity. Foliar nitrogen concentration is significantly greater for larches than evergreen conifers at 88% of the sites and specific leaf area is approximately three times greater for larches than co-occurring conifers. Future studies should examine the potential effect that global warming may have on the distribution of larch forests because the water use efficiency of larches is commonly less than co-occurring evergreen conifers and the boreal and high-latitude environments are likely to experience the greates…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s004420050431

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–106 of 106

Metadata

Authors
Kloeppel, B. D., Treichel, I. W., Kharuk, S., & Gower, S. T.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Russian Academy of Sciences (RU)
Venue
Oecologia
Published
1998-04-01
Volume
114
Issue
2
Pages
153-159
ISSN
  • 0029-8549 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1939
OpenAlex
W2171082912
Cited by
105
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oecologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Tree-ring climate responses
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
Keywords
larch, evergreen conifers, carbon isotope discrimination, water use efficiency, foliar nitrogen concentration, specific leaf area, deciduous conifers, altitude, boreal forest, global warming, photosynthetic capacity, sympatric species comparison

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