Progress in Botany
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-27998-9_17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structural determinants of leaf light-harvesting capacity and photosynthetic potentials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

19
164
1
14

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 160 publications
(198 citation statements)
references
References 140 publications
19
164
1
14
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, erect bryophytes growing in the forest understory must invest a greater proportion of their nitrogen into their chloroplast pigments to improve their light-harvesting abilities and thus offset the effect of self-shading. In contrast, the prostrate species creep along the substrate and their shoot structures are more efficient at collecting the weak light in the forest understory and utilising temporal heterogeneity in light levels (such as sunflecks) (Bates 1998;Kubásek et al 2014;Niinemets and Sack 2006). In summary, the growth form of a bryophyte has a strong effect on its light interception pattern and nutrient distribution, thereby affecting its functional trait relationships.…”
Section: Comparing the Functional Trait Scaling Relationships Betweenmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, erect bryophytes growing in the forest understory must invest a greater proportion of their nitrogen into their chloroplast pigments to improve their light-harvesting abilities and thus offset the effect of self-shading. In contrast, the prostrate species creep along the substrate and their shoot structures are more efficient at collecting the weak light in the forest understory and utilising temporal heterogeneity in light levels (such as sunflecks) (Bates 1998;Kubásek et al 2014;Niinemets and Sack 2006). In summary, the growth form of a bryophyte has a strong effect on its light interception pattern and nutrient distribution, thereby affecting its functional trait relationships.…”
Section: Comparing the Functional Trait Scaling Relationships Betweenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1) For the same projected area, the thickness (the height) and/or density of an erect bryophyte shoot should be higher than that of a prostrate species (Niinemets and Sack 2006;Rice et al 2008). Thus, the former will possess a higher SMA.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The LES shows that relationships exist among several key traits across a broad range of species and different climates (Reich et al 1997, Wright et al 2004). For example, leaf photosynthetic rate scales negatively with leaf mass per area (LMA) because a high leaf area displayed per unit mass invested leads to more efficient light capture and a shorter distance of CO 2 transport to sites of carboxylation (Parkhurst 1994, Niinemets andSack 2006). On the other hand, higher LMA allows for a longer leaf life span (LLS), which allows for a leaf's carbon gain to extend over a longer period of time.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Wright et al (2004) found that the slope of the LLS-LMA relationship declines with increased temperature or irradiance, meaning that the duration of carbon assimilation per unit of tissue invested is shorter in hot or high-light environments. Additionally, the strength of LES relationships within communities is driven by sample size and the range of trait variation: relationships will be weaker if there is no variation present (Niinemets and Sack 2006). Lastly, phylogenetic and biogeographic processes such as physical barriers to dispersal and climatic or geological events can lead to different selective pressures within communities that may result in different trait values and trait scaling relationships.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chlorophyll a (Chl-a), chlorophyll b (Chl-b) and carotenoids (Car) play an important role in the photosynthetic reaction process by light capture and transfer [22,28]. Specific leaf area (SLA; cm 2¨g´1 ) is an important leaf structural property positively related to potential relative growth rate (RGR), and it tends to scale positively with the mass-based light-saturated photosynthetic rate [34]. Leaf water is a vital indicator of vegetation moisture stress [35].…”
Section: Field Biochemical and Spectral Datamentioning
confidence: 99%