Cited by 1,229Photosynthetic Processes and MechanismsLight effects on plantsLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement

Photosynthetic acclimation of plants to growth irradiance: the relative importance of specific leaf area and nitrogen partitioning in maximizing carbon gain.

Open access
Evans, J. R., Poorter, H.·2001·Plant, Cell & Environment

Abstract

Changes in specific leaf area (SLA, projected leaf area per unit leaf dry mass) and nitrogen partitioning between proteins within leaves occur during the acclimation of plants to their growth irradiance. In this paper, the relative importance of both of these changes in maximizing carbon gain is quantified. Photosynthesis, SLA and nitrogen partitioning within leaves was determined from 10 dicotyledonous C 3 species grown in photon irradiances of 200 and 1000 µ mol m −2 s −1 . Photosynthetic rate per unit leaf area measured under the growth irradiance was, on average, three times higher for high‐light‐grown plants than for those grown under low light, and two times higher when measured near light saturation. However, light‐saturated photosynthetic rate per unit leaf dry mass was unaltered by growth irradiance because low‐light plants had double the SLA. Nitrogen concentrations per unit leaf mass were constant between the two light treatments, but plants grown in low light partitioned a larger fraction of leaf nitrogen into light harvesting. Leaf absorptance was curvilinearly related to chlorophyll content and independent of SLA. Daily photosynthesis per unit leaf dry mass under low‐light conditions was much more responsive to changes in SLA than to nitrogen partitioning. Under high light, sensitivity to nitrogen partitioning increased, but changes in SLA were still more important.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-3040.2001.00724.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • A study by Evans and Poorter (2001) showed that 12.9% of leaf organic nitrogen was associated with pigment-protein complexes and 21.6% was associated with Rubisco in plants grown at high light.

    “For example, a study by Evans and Poorter (2001) showed that 12.9% of leaf organic nitrogen was associated with pigment-protein complexes and 21.6% was associated with Rubisco in plants grown at high light.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Evans, J. R., & Poorter, H.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Evans, J. R.
Venue
Plant, Cell & Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-08
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
755-767
ISSN
  • 0140-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3040
OpenAlex
W2151968140
Cited by
1,229
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 75 · 2015: 59 · 2014: 67 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 49
FWCI
5.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Plant Cell & Environment (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Photosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Light effects on plants
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Leaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Keywords
photosynthetic acclimation, specific leaf area, nitrogen partitioning, growth irradiance, carbon gain, light harvesting, chlorophyll content, leaf absorptance, low-light conditions, high light

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