The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Review of Evidence on the Control of Shoot: Root Ratio, in Relation to Models
Abstract
Four basic models exist for the control of shoot: root ratio (S: R): (a) allometric models, proposing a fixed ratio of shoot growth rate to root growth rate; (b) functional equilibrium models, based on the ratio of shoot activity to root activity; (c) the Thornley model, based on carbon and nitrogen uptake and transport, (d) hormone models, generally suggesting the root produces a hormone that controls the shoot and vice versa. Models (a) and (b) are empirical, and therefore provide no test of the processes operating. Ontogenetic changes in S: R for fibrous-rooted herbs could be fitted by a modified Thornley model. Ontogenetic effects must be excluded in judging other effects. Responses of S: R to deficits of water, major inorganic nutrients, light and carbon dioxide, and to defoliation and root pruning, usually conform to Thornley's model. With current knowledge Thornley's model cannot usefully be applied to minor nutrients, nutrient toxicity or temperature differences. S: R changes at reproduction usually conform to Thornley's model if it is assumed that young reproductive structures are a strong sink, but this begs the question of what determines sink strength. There are apparent exceptions to most of these responses, which should be studied further. Phytohormones can influence S: R, but may not be the control operating in the normal, intact plant. Most of the available evidence is compatible with a source-sink model of Thornley's type, and therefore does not demand a hormonal theory of S: R control. There is a need for more critical tests.
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
Biochar effects on soil biota – A review
Lehmann, J., Rillig, M. C., Thies, J., Masiello, C. A., Hockaday, W. C., & Crowley, D. (2011) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.04.022 · Cited by 5,074
Effect of drought stress on sugar metabolism in leaves and roots of soybean seedlings
Du, Y., Zhao, Q., Chen, L., Yao, X., Zhang, W., Zhang, B., & Xie, F. (2020) · Plant Physiology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2019.11.003 · Cited by 521
Modelling biomass production and yield of horticultural crops: a review
Marcelis, L. F. M., Heuvelink, E., & Goudriaan, J. (1998) · Scientia Horticulturae · doi:10.1016/s0304-4238(98)00083-1 · Cited by 503
FARRAR, J. F., & WILLIAMS, M. L. (1991) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.1991.tb01445.x · Cited by 391
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
- WILSON, J. B.
- Venue
- Annals of Botany
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1988-04
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 433-449
- ISSN
- 0305-7364 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-8290
- OpenAlex
- W2185440930
- Cited by
- 650
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.97
- 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 Evidence on the Control of Shoot: Root Ratio, in Relation to Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087575
- The paper
- WILSON, J. B. (1988). A Review of Evidence on the Control of Shoot: Root Ratio, in Relation to Models. Annals of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087575
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.