The DOI matches its Crossref record; 136 of the 136 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance
Abstract
Changes in the efficiency of light interception and in the costs for light harvesting along the light gradients from the top of the plant canopy to the bottom are the major means by which efficient light harvesting is achieved in ecosystems. In the current review analysis, leaf, shoot and canopy level determinants of plant light harvesting, the light‐driven plasticity in key traits altering light harvesting, and variations among different plant functional types and between species of different shade tolerance are analyzed. In addition, plant age‐ and size‐dependent alterations in light harvesting efficiency are also examined. At the leaf level, the variations in light harvesting are driven by alterations in leaf chlorophyll content modifies the fraction of incident light harvested by given leaf area, and in leaf dry mass per unit area ( M A ) that determines the amount of leaf area formed with certain fraction of plant biomass in the leaves. In needle‐leaved species with complex foliage cross‐section, the degree of foliage surface exposure also depends on the leaf total‐to‐projected surface area ratio. At the shoot scale, foliage inclination angle distribution and foliage spatial aggregation are the major determinants of light harvesting, while at the canopy scale, branching frequency, foliage distribution and biomass allocation to leaves ( F L ) modify light harvesting significantly. F L decreases with increasing plant size from herbs to shrubs to trees due to progressively larger support costs in plant functional types with greater stature. Among trees, F L and stand leaf area index scale positively with foliage longevity. Plant traits altering light harvesting have a large potential to adjust to light availability. Chlorophyll per mass increases, while M A , foliage inclination from the horizontal and degree of spatial aggregation decrease with decreasing light availability. In addition, branching frequency decreases and canopies become flatter in lower light. All these plastic modifications greatly enhance light harvesting in low light. Species with greater shade tolerance typically form a more extensive canopy by having lower M A in deciduous species and enhanced leaf longevity in evergreens. In addition, young plants of shade tolerators commonly have less strongly aggregated foliage and flatter canopies, while in adult plants partly exposed to high light, higher shade tolerance of foliage allows the shade tolerators to maintain more leaf layers, resulting in extended crowns. Within a given plant functional type, increases in plant age and size result in increases in M A , reductions in F L and increases in foliage aggregation, thereby reducing plant leaf area index and the efficiency of light harvesting. Such dynamic modifications in plant light harvesting play a key role in stand development and productivity. Overall, the current review analysis demonstrates that a suite of chemical and architectural traits at various scales and their plasticity drive plant light harvesting efficiency. Enhanced light harvesting can be achieved by various combinations of traits, and these suites of traits vary during plant ontogeny.
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
The worldwide leaf economics spectrum
Wright, I. J., Reich, P. B., Westoby, M., Ackerly, D. D., Baruch, Z., Bongers, F., Cavender-Bares, J., Chapin, T., Cornelissen, J. H. C., Diemer, M., et al. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02403 · Cited by 9,021
Self-citationPlant Physiological Ecology: Field methods and instrumentation
(2000) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-9013-1 · Cited by 3,294
Larcher, W. (1980) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-96545-6 · Cited by 3,038
Causes and consequences of variation in leaf mass per area (LMA): a meta‐analysis
Poorter, H., Niinemets, Ü., Poorter, L., Wright, I. J., & Villar, R. (2009) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02830.x · Cited by 2,911
Self-citationAdaptation to Sun and Shade: a Whole-Plant Perspective
Givnish, T. (1988) · Australian Journal of Plant Physiology · doi:10.1071/pp9880063 · Cited by 1,787
The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands
Ross, J. (1981) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-8647-3 · Cited by 1,694
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
Shade Tolerance, a Key Plant Feature of Complex Nature and Consequences
Valladares, F., & Niinemets, Ü. (2008) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173506 · Cited by 1,620
Self-citationEvans, J. R., & Poorter, H. (2001) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00724.x · Cited by 1,229
The Adaptive Geometry of Trees
Wickens, G. E., & Horn, H. S. (1972) · Kew Bulletin · doi:10.2307/4109478 · Cited by 1,012
Cited by
Stirbet, A., Lazár, D., Kromdijk, J., & Govindjee, G. (2018) · Photosynthetica · doi:10.1007/s11099-018-0770-3 · Cited by 490
An integrated framework of plant form and function: the belowground perspective
Weigelt, A., Mommer, L., Andraczek, K., Iversen, C. M., Bergmann, J., Bruelheide, H., Fan, Y., Freschet, G. T., Guerrero‐Ramírez, N. R., Kattge, J., et al. (2021) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.17590 · Cited by 486
Marrou, H., Wery, J., Dufour, L., & Dupraz, C. (2013) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2012.08.003 · Cited by 455
Fisher, R. A., Muszala, S., Verteinstein, M., Lawrence, P., Xu, C., McDowell, N. G., Knox, R. G., Koven, C., Holm, J., Rogers, B. M., et al. (2015) · Geoscientific Model Development · doi:10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015 · Cited by 337
Importance of Fluctuations in Light on Plant Photosynthetic Acclimation
Vialet-Chabrand, S., Matthews, J. S. A., Simkin, A. J., Raines, C. A., & Lawson, T. (2017) · Plant Physiology · doi:10.1104/pp.16.01767 · Cited by 336
Metadata
- Authors
- Niinemets, Ü.
- Venue
- Ecological Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-03-31
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 693-714
- ISSN
- 0912-3814 (ISSN-L)
- 1440-1703
- OpenAlex
- W1972411460
- Cited by
- 676
- References
- 136
- FWCI
- 16.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4
- The paper
- Niinemets, Ü. (2010). A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance. Ecological Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4
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.