The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DIFFERING SELECTION ON PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL TRAITS IN RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL WATER AVAILABILITY: A TEST OF ADAPTIVE HYPOTHESES
Abstract
I used phenotypic selection analysis to test the prediction from functional and comparative studies of plants that smaller leaves and more efficient water use are adaptive in drier environments. I measured selection gradients on leaf size and instantaneous water-use efficiency (a measure of carbon gain per unit water loss) in experimental populations of Cakile edentula var. lacustris placed into wet and dry environments in the field. Linear and nonlinear selection differed significantly between the two environments as predicted. Water-use efficiency was selected to be higher, and leaf area was selected toward a small intermediate optimum, in the dry environment. There was also significant positive correlational selection on water-use efficiency and leaf size, suggesting that the optimum leaf size in the dry environment is greater for plants with higher water-use efficiency. In contrast, neither leaf size nor water-use efficiency were selected in the wet environment, though larger leaves resulted in greater vegetative biomass. Path analysis of the linear selection gradients found that water-use efficiency affected plant fitness primarily because it increased vegetative biomass, as suggested by the hypotheses about the function of physiological traits. These results were not only consistent with the functional hypotheses but also with the observed genetic differentiation in water-use efficiency and leaf size between wet and dry site populations.
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
Cites
The measurement of selection on correlated characters
Lande, R., & Arnold, S. J. (1983) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1983.tb00236.x · Cited by 5,437
Cited by
Community Assembly, Niche Conservatism, and Adaptive Evolution in Changing Environments
Ackerly, D. D. (2003) · International Journal of Plant Sciences · doi:10.1086/368401 · Cited by 893
Eckert, A. J., van Heerwaarden, J., Wegrzyn, J. L., Nelson, C. D., Ross-Ibarra, J., González-Martínez, S. C., & Neale, D. B. (2010) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.110.115543 · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Dudley, S. A.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-02
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 92-102
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2333844746
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.10
- 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: DIFFERING SELECTION ON PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL TRAITS IN RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL WATER AVAILABILITY: A TEST OF ADAPTIVE HYPOTHESES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1996.tb04475.x
- The paper
- Dudley, S. A. (1996). DIFFERING SELECTION ON PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL TRAITS IN RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL WATER AVAILABILITY: A TEST OF ADAPTIVE HYPOTHESES. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1996.tb04475.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.