The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why are non-photosynthetic tissues generally 13C enriched compared with leaves in C3 plants? Review and synthesis of current hypotheses
Abstract
Non-photosynthetic, or heterotrophic, tissues in C3 plants tend to be enriched in 13C compared with the leaves that supply them with photosynthate. This isotopic pattern has been observed for woody stems, roots, seeds and fruits, emerging leaves, and parasitic plants incapable of net CO2 fixation. Unlike in C3 plants, roots of herbaceous C4 plants are generally not 13C-enriched compared with leaves. We review six hypotheses aimed at explaining this isotopic pattern in C3 plants: (1) variation in biochemical composition of heterotrophic tissues compared with leaves; (2) seasonal separation of growth of leaves and heterotrophic tissues, with corresponding variation in photosynthetic discrimination against 13C; (3) differential use of day v. night sucrose between leaves and sink tissues, with day sucrose being relatively 13C-depleted and night sucrose 13C-enriched; (4) isotopic fractionation during dark respiration; (5) carbon fixation by PEP carboxylase; and (6) developmental variation in photosynthetic discrimination against 13C during leaf expansion. Although hypotheses (1) and (2) may contribute to the general pattern, they cannot explain all observations. Some evidence exists in support of hypotheses (3) through to (6), although for hypothesis (6) it is largely circumstantial. Hypothesis (3) provides a promising avenue for future research. Direct tests of these hypotheses should be carried out to provide insight into the mechanisms causing within-plant variation in carbon isotope composition.
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
Carbon Isotope Discrimination and Photosynthesis
Farquhar, G. D., Ehleringer, J. R., & Hubick, K. T. (1989) · Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.40.060189.002443 · Cited by 7,063
Self-citationCraig, H. (1957) · Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/0016-7037(57)90024-8 · Cited by 4,170
The geochemistry of the stable carbon isotopes
Craig, H. (1953) · Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/0016-7037(53)90001-5 · Cited by 1,965
Cited by
Macho, G. A., & Lee-Thorp, J. A. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0102794 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Cernusak, L. A., Tcherkez, G., Keitel, C., Cornwell, W. K., Santiago, L. S., Knohl, A., Barbour, M. M., Williams, D. G., Reich, P. B., Ellsworth, D. S., Dawson, T. E., Griffiths, H. G., Farquhar, G. D., & Wright, I. J.
- Venue
- Functional Plant Biology
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2009-03-02
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 199-213
- ISSN
- 1445-4408 (ISSN-L)
- 1445-4416
- OpenAlex
- W1973786358
- Cited by
- 415
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 21.95
- 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: Why are non-photosynthetic tissues generally 13C enriched compared with leaves in C3 plants? Review and synthesis of current hypotheses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/fp08216
- The paper
- Cernusak, L. A., Tcherkez, G., Keitel, C., Cornwell, W. K., Santiago, L. S., Knohl, A., Barbour, M. M., Williams, D. G., Reich, P. B., Ellsworth, D. S., Dawson, T. E., Griffiths, H. G., Farquhar, G. D., & Wright, I. J. (2009). Why are non-photosynthetic tissues generally 13C enriched compared with leaves in C3 plants? Review and synthesis of current hypotheses. Functional Plant Biology. https://doi.org/10.1071/fp08216
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.