The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Partitioning the Components of Relative Growth Rate: How Important Is Plant Size Variation?
Open accessAbstract
Plant growth plays a key role in the functioning of the terrestrial biosphere, and there have been substantial efforts to understand why growth varies among species. To this end, a large number of experimental analyses have been undertaken; however, the emergent patterns between growth rate and its components are often contradictory. We believe that these conflicting results are a consequence of the way growth is measured. Growth is typically characterized by relative growth rate (RGR); however, RGR often declines as organisms get larger, making it difficult to compare species of different sizes. To overcome this problem, we advocate using nonlinear mixed-effects models so that RGR can be calculated at a standard size, and we present easily implemented methods for doing this. We then present new methods for analyzing the traditional components of RGR that explicitly allow for the fact that (log)(RGR) is the sum of its components. These methods provide an exact decomposition of the variance in (log)(RGR). Finally, we use simple analytical and simulation approaches to explore the effect of size variation on growth and its components and show that the relative importance of the components of RGR is influenced by the extent to which analyses standardize for plant size.
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
Corrigendum to : New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide
Pérez-Harguindeguy, N., Díaz, S., Garnier, E., Lavorel, S., Poorter, H., Jaureguiberry, P., Bret-Harte, M. S., Cornwell, W. K., Craine, J. M., Gurvich, D. E., et al. (2016) · Australian Journal of Botany · doi:10.1071/bt12225_co · Cited by 759
Züst, T., & Agrawal, A. A. (2017) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042916-040856 · Cited by 624
Freschet, G. T., Swart, E. M., & Cornelissen, J. H. C. (2015) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.13352 · Cited by 384
Jakovac, A. C. C., Bentos, T. V., Mesquita, R. C. G., & Williamson, G. B. (2014) · Plant Ecology & Diversity · doi:10.1080/17550874.2012.716088 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Rees, M., Osborne, C. P., Woodward, F. I., Hulme, S. P., Turnbull, L. A., & Taylor, S. H.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 176
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- E152-E161
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2051604731
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Partitioning the Components of Relative Growth Rate: How Important Is Plant Size Variation? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/657037
- The paper
- Rees, M., Osborne, C. P., Woodward, F. I., Hulme, S. P., Turnbull, L. A., & Taylor, S. H. (2010). Partitioning the Components of Relative Growth Rate: How Important Is Plant Size Variation? The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/657037
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.