% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Poorter:203223,
author = {Poorter, Hendrik and Jagodzinski, Andrzej M. and
Ruiz-Peinado, Ricardo and Kuyah, Shem and Luo, Yunjian and
Oleksyn, Jacek and Usoltsev, Vladimir A. and Buckley, Thomas
N. and Reich, Peter B. and Sack, Lawren},
title = {{H}ow does biomass distribution change with size and differ
among species? {A}n analysis for 1200 plant species from
five continents},
journal = {The new phytologist},
volume = {208},
number = {3},
issn = {0028-646X},
address = {Oxford [u.a.]},
publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
reportid = {FZJ-2015-05212},
pages = {736–749},
year = {2015},
abstract = {We compiled a global database for leaf, stem and root
biomass representing c. 11 000 records for c. 1200
herbaceous and woody species grown under either controlled
or field conditions. We used this data set to analyse
allometric relationships and fractional biomass distribution
to leaves, stems and roots. We tested whether allometric
scaling exponents are generally constant across plant sizes
as predicted by metabolic scaling theory, or whether instead
they change dynamically with plant size. We also quantified
interspecific variation in biomass distribution among plant
families and functional groups. Across all species combined,
leaf vs stem and leaf vs root scaling exponents decreased
from c. 1.00 for small plants to c. 0.60 for the largest
trees considered. Evergreens had substantially higher leaf
mass fractions (LMFs) than deciduous species, whereas
graminoids maintained higher root mass fractions (RMFs) than
eudicotyledonous herbs. These patterns do not support the
hypothesis of fixed allometric exponents. Rather, continuous
shifts in allometric exponents with plant size during
ontogeny and evolution are the norm. Across seed plants,
variation in biomass distribution among species is related
more to function than phylogeny. We propose that the higher
LMF of evergreens at least partly compensates for their
relatively low leaf area : leaf mass ratio.},
cin = {IBG-2},
ddc = {580},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-2-20101118},
pnm = {582 - Plant Science (POF3-582)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-582},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000365392100013},
pubmed = {pmid:26197869},
doi = {10.1111/nph.13571},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/203223},
}