The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Nitrogen Use Efficiency of C3 and C4 Plants: I. Leaf Nitrogen, Growth, and Biomass Partitioning in Chenopodium album (L.) and Amaranthus retroflexus (L.)
Open accessAbstract
The effect of applied nitrogen (N) on the growth, leaf expansion rate, biomass partitioning and leaf N levels of Chenopodium album (C(3)) and Amaranthus retroflexus (C(4)) were investigated. At a given applied N level, C. album had 50% greater leaf N per unit area (N(a)) than A. retroflexus. Nitrate accumulated at lower N(a) in A. retroflexus than C. album. A. retroflexus was more productive than C. album at high N, but C. album was more productive at low N. At high applied N, nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), expressed either as net assimilation rate (NAR) per unit N or relative growth rate per unit N, was greater in A. retroflexus than C. album. However, at low applied N, C. album had a greater NUE on both an NAR and growth basis than A. retroflexus. The leaf area partitioning coefficient was similar in the species at high N, but was greater in A. retroflexus than C. album at low N. At low N, greater leaf area partitioning apparently lowered leaf N in A. retroflexus to levels at which necrosis occurred. In C. album by contrast, leaf area partitioning declined to a greater degree with declining N than it did in A. retroflexus, so that leaf N did not decline as much. Consequently, low N C. album plants did not lose leaf area to necrosis and had a greater NAR and NUE at low applied N than A. retroflexus.
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
Evolutionary and Ecological Aspects of Photosynthetic Pathway Variation
Ehleringer, J. R., & Monson, R. K. (1993) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.24.1.411 · Cited by 836
REICH, P. B., WALTERS, M. B., & ELLSWORTH, D. S. (1991) · Plant, Cell & Environment · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.1991.tb01499.x · Cited by 294
Quick, W. P., Fichtner, K., Schulze, E.-D., Wendler, R., Leegood, R. C., Mooney, H., Rodermel, S. R., Bogorad, L., & Stitt, M. (1992) · Planta · doi:10.1007/bf00197044 · Cited by 263
Nitrogen supply affects root:shoot ratio in corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti)
Bonifas, K. D., Walters, D. T., Cassman, K. G., & Lindquist, J. L. (2005) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-05-002r.1 · Cited by 128
Metadata
- Authors
- Sage, R. F., & Pearcy, R. W.
- Venue
- Plant Physiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1987-07-01
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 954-958
- ISSN
- 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2548
- OpenAlex
- W1999010761
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: The Nitrogen Use Efficiency of C3 and C4 Plants: I. Leaf Nitrogen, Growth, and Biomass Partitioning in Chenopodium album (L.) and Amaranthus retroflexus (L.). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1104/pp.84.3.954
- The paper
- Sage, R. F., & Pearcy, R. W. (1987). The Nitrogen Use Efficiency of C3 and C4 Plants: I. Leaf Nitrogen, Growth, and Biomass Partitioning in Chenopodium album (L.) and Amaranthus retroflexus (L.). Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.84.3.954
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.