Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 288

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Correlation between the Carbon Isotope Discrimination in Leaf Starch and Sugars of C3 Plants and the Ratio of Intercellular and Atmospheric Partial Pressures of Carbon Dioxide

Open access
Brugnoli, Enrico, Hubick, Kerry T., von Caemmerer, Susanne, Wong, Suan Chin, Farquhar, Graham D.·1988·Plant Physiology

Abstract

Carbon isotope discrimination (Delta) was analyzed in leaf starch and soluble sugars, which represent most of the recently fixed carbon. Plants of three C(3) species (Populus nigra L. x P. deltoides Marsh., Gossypium hirsutum L. and Phaseolus vulgaris L.) were kept in the dark for 24 hours to decrease contents of starch and sugar in leaves. Then gas exchange measurements were made with constant conditions for 8 hours, and subsequently starch and soluble sugars were extracted for analysis of carbon isotope composition. The ratio of intercellular, p(i), and atmospheric, p(a), partial pressures of CO(2), was calculated from gas exchange measurements, integrated over time and weighted by assimilation rate, for comparison with the carbon isotope ratios in soluble sugars and starch. Carbon isotope discrimination in soluble sugars correlated strongly (r = 0.93) with p(i)/p(a) in all species, as did Delta in leaf starch (r = 0.84). Starch was found to contain significantly more (13)C than soluble sugar, and possible explanations are discussed. The strong correlation found between Delta and p(i)/p(a) suggests that carbon isotope analysis in leaf starch and soluble sugars may be used for monitoring, indirectly, the average of p(i)/p(a) weighted by CO(2) assimilation rate, over a day. Because p(i)/p(a) has a negative correlation with transpiration efficiency (mol CO(2)/mol H(2)O) of isolated plants, Delta in starch and sugars may be used to predict differences in this efficiency. This new method may be useful in ecophysiological studies and in selection for improved transpiration efficiency in breeding programs for C(3) species.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1104/pp.88.4.1418

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 288

Metadata

Authors
Brugnoli, E., Hubick, K. T., von Caemmerer, S., Wong, S. C., & Farquhar, G. D.
Venue
Plant Physiology
Published
1988-12-01
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
1418-1424
ISSN
  • 0032-0889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2548
OpenAlex
W2092508721
Cited by
288
References
0
FWCI
10.18
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: Correlation between the Carbon Isotope Discrimination in Leaf Starch and Sugars of C3 Plants and the Ratio of Intercellular and Atmospheric Partial Pressures of Carbon Dioxide. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1104/pp.88.4.1418
The paper
Brugnoli, E., Hubick, K. T., von Caemmerer, S., Wong, S. C., & Farquhar, G. D. (1988). Correlation between the Carbon Isotope Discrimination in Leaf Starch and Sugars of C3 Plants and the Ratio of Intercellular and Atmospheric Partial Pressures of Carbon Dioxide. Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.88.4.1418

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.