Paper · 2013 · Journal of Forest Science

Foliage and fine roots in terms of growth efficiency - a comparison between European beech and Norway spruce at early growth stages

B. Konôpka; J. Pajtík

4
claims
5
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

The quantification of stems (under- and overbark), foliage and fine roots in 14-year-old stands of European beech and Norway spruce grown on the same site were evaluated. Therefore, 60 trees of each species were sampled, dry masses of stems and foliage were established and expressed by allometric equations with stem diameter as an independent variable. The spruce allocated a much larger portion of biomass into the foliage than beech. The equations on a tree level were constructed also for specific leaf area and one-sided projected leaf area. Moreover, the quantity and morphological characteristics of fine roots in both stands were surveyed through soil coring. While standing stocks of fine roots were similar in the stands of both tree species, significant interspecies differences occurred in morphological properties of roots. Growth efficiency, expressing annual stem production on a variety of foliage and fine root parameters was calculated. The largest differences, specifically fivefold in favour of spruce, were found in growth efficiency based on a number of root tips.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spruce allocated a much larger fraction of biomass to foliage than beech.

Taxon
sprucePiceae0
Outcome
portion of biomass into the foliagee0
Direction
largere0
Comparator
beeche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Picea
Picea · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)The original uploader was MPF at English Wikipedia . · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The spruce allocated a much larger portion of biomass into the foliage than beech”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–436 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fine root standing stocks were similar in beech and spruce stands.

Taxon
tree speciese0
Outcome
standing stocks of fine rootse0
Direction
similare0

Verbatim

e0

“standing stocks of fine roots were similar in the stands of both tree species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 675–752 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fine root morphological properties differed significantly between beech and spruce.

Taxon
tree speciese1
Outcome
morphological properties of rootse0
Direction
differencese0

Verbatim

e0

“significant interspecies differences occurred in morphological properties of roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 754–836 · show in text ↑
e1

“standing stocks of fine roots were similar in the stands of both tree species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 675–752 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root-tip-based growth efficiency was fivefold higher in spruce than beech.

Taxon
sprucePiceae0
Outcome
growth efficiency based on a number of root tipse0
Direction
in favour ofe0
Value
fivefolde0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Picea
Picea · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)The original uploader was MPF at English Wikipedia . · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest differences, specifically fivefold in favour of spruce, were found in growth efficiency based on a number of root tips”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 956–1086 · show in text ↑