Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 451

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A meta‐analysis of leaf gas exchange and nitrogen in trees grown under elevated carbon dioxide

CURTIS, P. S.·1996·Plant, Cell & Environment

Abstract

The response of trees to rising atmospheric CO 2 concentration ([CO 2]) is of concern to forest ecologists and global carbon modellers and is the focus of an increasing body of research work. I review studies published up to May 1994, and several unpublished works, which reported at least one of the following: net CO 2 assimilation (A), stomatal conductance (gs), leaf dark respiration (Rd) leaf nitrogen or specific leaf area (SLA) in woody plants grown at <400 μmol mol−1 CO 2 or at 600–800 μmol mol−1 CO 2. The resulting data from 41 species were categorized according to growth conditions (unstressed versus stressed), length of CO 2 exposure, pot size and exposure facility [growth chamber (GC), greenhouse (GH), or open‐top chamber (OTC)] and interpreted using meta‐analytic methods. Overall, A showed a large and significant increase at elevated [CO 2] but length of CO 2 exposure and the exposure facility were important modifiers of this response. Plants exposed for < 50 d had a significantly greater response, and those from GCs had a significantly lower response than plants from longer exposures or from OTC studies. Negative acclimation of A was significant and general among stressed plants, but in unstressed plants was influenced by length of CO 2 exposure, the exposure facility and/or pot size. Growth at elevated [CO 2] resulted in moderate reductions in gs in unstressed plants, but there was no significant effect of CO 2 on gs in stressed plants. Leaf dark respiration (mass or area basis) was reduced strongly by growth at high [CO 2] > while leaf N was reduced only when expressed on a mass basis. This review is the first meta‐analysis of elevated CO 2 studies and provides statistical confirmation of several general responses of trees to elevated [CO 2]. It also highlights important areas of continued uncertainty in our understanding of these responses.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00234.x

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 47 references

Cited by

See all 451

Metadata

Authors
CURTIS, P. S.
Venue
Plant, Cell & Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1996-02
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
127-137
ISSN
  • 0140-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3040
OpenAlex
W2117112707
Cited by
451
References
47
FWCI
40.15
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 meta‐analysis of leaf gas exchange and nitrogen in trees grown under elevated carbon dioxide. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00234.x
The paper
CURTIS, P. S. (1996). A meta‐analysis of leaf gas exchange and nitrogen in trees grown under elevated carbon dioxide. Plant, Cell & Environment. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1996.tb00234.x

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.