2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.12.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Growth and physiology of deciduous shade trees in response to controlled-release fertilizer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
1
6

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
24
1
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Nutrient availability affects plant biomass allocation, and an increased amount of nutrients often decreases root biomass allocation (Poorter and Nagel 2000). However, in this study and similar to Klooster et al (2012) in Quercus rubra L., there were no changes in growth, biomass allocation or specific leaf area when increasing the fertilizer dose. As we did not measure tissue nutrient concentration we speculate that N. leonii appears to take up available nutrient beyond their current needs and store it in stems and roots (i.e.…”
Section: Treatmentcontrasting
confidence: 46%
“…Nutrient availability affects plant biomass allocation, and an increased amount of nutrients often decreases root biomass allocation (Poorter and Nagel 2000). However, in this study and similar to Klooster et al (2012) in Quercus rubra L., there were no changes in growth, biomass allocation or specific leaf area when increasing the fertilizer dose. As we did not measure tissue nutrient concentration we speculate that N. leonii appears to take up available nutrient beyond their current needs and store it in stems and roots (i.e.…”
Section: Treatmentcontrasting
confidence: 46%
“…With the aim to control nutrient loss through leaching, fertilization using controlled release fertilizer (CRF) is an available method (Alva, 1992;Murray et al, 1996;Hangs et al, 2003;Klooster et al, 2012). Additionally, production of large tree stock using large-volume containers has been proven to be highly efficient with CRF (Murray et al, 1996;South et al, 2005;Dumroese et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, production of large tree stock using large-volume containers has been proven to be highly efficient with CRF (Murray et al, 1996;South et al, 2005;Dumroese et al, 2011). However, effects of CRF on seedling performance seemed to be derived mainly from nutrient availability, hence response of seedling growth replies on the interaction of tree species and CRF but not on single impact from CRF (Oliet et al, 2004;Klooster et al, 2012). Therefore, the question remains: how growth of slowly growing seedlings can be promoted with controlled nutrient leaching with CRF used in a large container.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chlorophyll concentrations in leaves from the grassland were correlated with leaf Fe and Mg content (r = 0.88; p \ 0.0001 and r = 90; p \ 0.0001, respectively) but not with leaf N content (r = 0.27; p [ 0.05). Mg and Fe play crucial roles in the chlorophyll molecule and photosynthesis, and SPAD readings were closely related to levels of these foliar elements (Klooster et al 2012;Lombard et al 2010). The unreliable relationship between leaf chlorophyll and N concentrations on the grassland may be a consequence of the impact of N Agroforest Syst (2017) 91:307-324 315 concentration and distribution within the leaf and also other factors on SPAD readings (Klooster et al 2012;Lombard et al 2010).…”
Section: Morphophysiological Characteristics Of Leaves and Fine Rootsmentioning
confidence: 99%