The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Theories and methods on plant nutrition and growth
Abstract
A theory comprising two basic concepts relating nutrition and growth is presented. The first concept is a nutrient flux model and is based upon studies of plants at constant internal nutrient concentrations, where a formal mathematical derivation shows that the relative uptake rate (RU) and the relative growth rate (RG) are equal. Deviations from equality are results of experimental insufficiencies and errors. The second concept is based on the observation that RG is linearly related to the internal nutrient concentration. The slope represents nutrient productivity (Pn), an important parameter expressing growth rate per unit of nutrient. Light and the plant genome, for example, influence the value of the proportionality factor, Pn, but not the formal relationship between the internal nutrient concentration and RG Not only the theory itself but many results and conclusions are very different from those obtained with traditional methods. In experiments where RU was controlled during the exponential period of growth, the relationships between treatment (the relative addition rate, RA), nutrient uptake (RU) and growth (RG) were reproduced with extremely low variability. In agreement with theory, internal nutrient concentration and RG remained stable over time (steady‐state). An extension of the theory is based upon the empirical assumption that after exponential growth, self‐shading and ageing reduce Pn in proportion to biomass. This assumption has been successfully applied in predicting growth of forest stands, but the nature of the growth reduction is little understood. The generalized model has few parameters and can easily be rewritten to suit different experimental aims, for example to establish reference values and to model changes in soil fertility. Further extension and understanding of the model and different interpretations of the parameters are discussed.
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
Cited by
Review of root dynamics in forest ecosystems grouped by climate, climatic forest type and species
Vogt, K. A., Vogt, D. J., Palmiotto, P. A., Boon, P., O'Hara, J., & Asbjornsen, H. (1995) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/bf00017088 · Cited by 684
Growth and shoot: root ratio of seedlings in relation to nutrient availability
Ericsson, T. (1995) · Nutrient Uptake and Cycling in Forest Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-0455-5_23 · Cited by 434
Vogt, K. A., Vogt, D. J., & Bloomfield, J. (1998) · Root Demographics and Their Efficiencies in Sustainable Agriculture, Grasslands and Forest Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-5270-9_61 · Cited by 414
Vogt, K. A., Vogt, D. J., & Bloomfield, J. (1998) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1023/a:1004313515294 · Cited by 371
Noguera, D., Rondón, M., Laossi, K.-R., Hoyos, V., Lavelle, P., Cruz de Carvalho, M. H., & Barot, S. (2010) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.03.001 · Cited by 185
Metadata
- Authors
- Ingestad, T., & Agren, G. I.
- Venue
- Physiologia Plantarum
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-01
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 177-184
- ISSN
- 0031-9317 (ISSN-L)
- 1399-3054
- OpenAlex
- W2039194173
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.10
- 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: Theories and methods on plant nutrition and growth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1399-3054.1992.840126.x
- The paper
- Ingestad, T., & Agren, G. I. (1992). Theories and methods on plant nutrition and growth. Physiologia Plantarum. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.1992.840126.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.