Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 706

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2– do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions?

Open access
Nowak, Robert S., Ellsworth, David S., Smith, Stanley D.·2004·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: Results from 16 free‐air CO 2 enrichment (FACE) sites representing four different global vegetation types indicate that only some early predictions of the effects of increasing CO 2 concentration (elevated [CO 2]) on plant and ecosystem processes are well supported. Predictions for leaf CO 2 assimilation (A net) generally fit our understanding of limitations to photosynthesis, and the FACE experiments indicate concurrent enhancement of photosynthesis and of partial downregulation. In addition, most herbaceous species had reduced leaf nitrogen (N)‐content under elevated [CO 2] and thus only a modest enhancement of A net, whereas most woody species had little change in leaf N with elevated [CO 2] but a larger enhancement of A net. Early predictions for primary production are more mixed. Predictions that enhancement of productivity would be greater in drier ecosystems or in drier years has only limited support. Furthermore, differences in productivity enhancements among six plant functional types were not significant. By contrast, increases in productivity enhancements with increased N availability are well supported by the FACE results. Thus, neither a resource‐based conceptual model nor a plant functional type conceptual model is exclusively supported by FACE results, but rather both species identity and resource availability are important factors influencing the response of ecosystems to elevated [CO 2]. Contents Summary 1 I. Introduction 2 II. Early assessments of [CO 2] responses in natural ecosystems 2 III. Global network of FACE sites 4 IV. Assimilation and leaf N‐content 5 V. Primary productivity 13 VI. Response of plant functional types 20 VII. Conclusions 23 Acknowledgements 24 References 24

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.1469-8137.2004.01033.x

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 706

Metadata

Authors
Nowak, R. S., Ellsworth, D. S., & Smith, S. D.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-03-11
Volume
162
Issue
2
Pages
253-280
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2139223636
Cited by
706
References
3
FWCI
48.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2– do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01033.x
The paper
Nowak, R. S., Ellsworth, D. S., & Smith, S. D. (2004). Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2– do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01033.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.