The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Growth and Canopy Architecture of Shade‐Tolerant Trees: Response to Canopy Gaps
Abstract
Patterns of aboveground growth, branching, and leaf display were examined in saplings of Acer saccharum Marsh. (sugar maple) and Fagus grandifola Ehrh. (beech) to determine (1) the responses of aboveground growth rates to variation in forest light regimes and (2) the importance of branching and leaf display patterns to the ability of saplings of these two species to respond to changes in forest light regimes produced by canopy gaps. For both species, rate of height growth, lateral growth, and the production of new shoots in even the low gap light levels created by small canopy gaps (15—75 m 2) were as much as an order of magnitude greater than growth rates of saplings beneath closed canopies. However, saplings of both species showed little response to further increases in gap light levels. The strong response of maple saplings to low gap light levels was correlated with an increased in sapling leaf area index and the efficiency of leaf display (measured as leaf area per unit length or surface area of branches). In beech, the more modest response to low light levels in small gaps and the higher growth rates than maple beneath a closed canopy were paralleled by a lack of significant increase in beech leaf area indices in small gaps and a higher efficiency of leaf display beneath a closed canopy than in small gaps. Thus, the magnitude of the response of these two species to small canopy gaps is correlated with their degree of plasticity in patterns of branching and leaf display. Both species can be considered small—gap specialists in the sense that their combinations of shade tolerance, growth responses, and canopy architecture make them particularly successful at exploiting small canopy gaps. However, the two species differ in their placement on a gradient in the degree to which woody plants respond to canopy disturbances.
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
Functional ecology of advance regeneration in relation to light in boreal forests
Messier, C., Doucet, R., Ruel, J., Claveau, Y., Kelly, C., & Lechowicz, M. J. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1139/cjfr-29-6-812 · Cited by 377
Forest Gap Dynamics and Tree Regeneration
Yamamoto, S.-I. (2000) · Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1007/bf02767114 · Cited by 331
THE FERN UNDERSTORY AS AN ECOLOGICAL FILTER: EMERGENCE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CANOPY-TREE SEEDLINGS
George, L. O., & Bazzaz, F. A. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[0833:tfuaae]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 329
An individual-based process model to simulate landscape-scale forest ecosystem dynamics
Seidl, R., Rammer, W., Scheller, R. M., & Spies, T. A. (2012) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.015 · Cited by 309
Natural disturbance, vegetation patterns and ecological dynamics in tropical montane forests
Crausbay, S. D., & Martin, P. H. (2016) · Journal of Tropical Ecology · doi:10.1017/s0266467416000328 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Canham, C. D.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-06
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 786-795
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2081999515
- Cited by
- 605
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.13
- 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: Growth and Canopy Architecture of Shade‐Tolerant Trees: Response to Canopy Gaps. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1941027
- The paper
- Canham, C. D. (1988). Growth and Canopy Architecture of Shade‐Tolerant Trees: Response to Canopy Gaps. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941027
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.