MétaCan
Menu
← all works

The balanced‐growth hypothesis and the allometry of leaf and root biomass allocation

2002· article· en· 590 citations· W2128620848 on OpenAlex· 10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00626.x

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.
Canadian funderA Canadian agency funded it. The work may carry no Canadian affiliation at all.

Full frame distilled prediction

Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

Candidate categories
none
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
Genre
Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score
0.018
Threshold uncertainty score
0.456
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread
0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Summary 1. Many ecological models of plant growth assume balanced growth: that biomass is allocated preferentially to leaves or roots to increase capture of the limiting external resource. An alternative explanation is based on nonlinear (allometric) allocation as a function of plant size. The objective of this study was to test between these two alternative explanations. 2. A total of 1150 plants from 22 different herbaceous species were grown in hydroponic sand culture in factorial combinations of high (1100 µmol m −2 s −1 ) and low (200 µmol m −2 s −1 PAR) irradiance crossed with a full‐strength and a 1/6 dilution of Hoagland’s hydroponic solution. Plants were harvested at 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 days postgermination, and dry mass was determined for leaf and root components. These data were used to test the hypotheses of balanced growth and of allometric allocation. 3. Both irradiance and nutrient supply affected the slope and intercept of the root : shoot allometry, contrary to the allometric hypothesis but in agreement with the hypothesis of balanced growth; decreased nutrient supply increased allocation to roots; and decreased irradiance increased allocation to leaves. 4. Plants allocated relatively more biomass to roots than to leaves as plants grew larger. In order for the balanced‐growth hypothesis to be correct, the net rate of nutrient uptake per unit root mass must have been decreasing relative to the net rate of carbon gain per unit leaf mass. 5. We suggest two reasons why this might be the case: (i) older roots decreased their efficiency of nutrient uptake; and (ii) larger root systems more rapidly decreased the available nutrients between flushes of hydroponic solution. 6. These results support the notion of balanced growth that is found in many ecological models of plant growth.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Functional Ecology
Topic
Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Field
Environmental Science
Canadian institutions
Université de Sherbrooke
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Keywords
AllometryBiologyBiomass (ecology)NutrientShootBiomass partitioningHerbaceous plantBotanyGrowth rateIrradianceDry weightUnit rootHorticultureAgronomyEcologyMathematicsStatistics
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes