A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Why does leaf nitrogen decline within tree canopies less rapidly than light? An explanation from optimization subject to a lower bound on leaf mass per area. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

A long-established theoretical result states that, for a given total canopy nitrogen (N) content, canopy photosynthesis is maximized when the within-canopy gradient in leaf N per unit area (N(a)) is equal to the light gradient. However, it is widely observed that N(a) declines less rapidly than light in real plant canopies. Here we show that this general observation can be explained by optimal leaf acclimation to light subject to a lower-bound constraint on the leaf mass per area (m(a)). Using a simple model of the carbon-nitrogen (C-N) balance of trees with a steady-state canopy, we implement this constraint within the framework of the MAXX optimization hypothesis that maximizes net canopy C export. Virtually all canopy traits predicted by MAXX (leaf N gradient, leaf N concentration, leaf photosynthetic capacity, canopy N content, leaf-area index) are in close agreement with the values observed in a mature stand of Norway spruce trees (Picea abies L. Karst.). An alternative upper-bound constraint on leaf photosynthetic capacity (A(sat)) does not reproduce the canopy traits of this stand. MAXX subject to a lower bound on m(a) is also qualitatively consistent with co-variations in leaf N gradient, m(a) and A(sat) observed across a range of temperate and tropical tree species. Our study highlights the key role of constraints in optimization models of plant function.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tps044DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

leaf
10
subject lower
8
lower bound
8
leaf mass
8
mass area
8
gradient leaf
8
constraint leaf
8
canopy traits
8
leaf gradient
8
leaf photosynthetic
8

Similar Publications