How should we model plant responses to drought? An analysis of stomatal and non-stomatal responses to water stress

By Shuangxi Zhou, R. Duursma, B. Medlyn, J. Kelly, I. C. Prentice. 2013

358 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/00733f5c513802fc1387e75a31a044ed2a26a2f8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Trevor Keenan
2. U. Niinemets
3. B. Medlyn
4. I. C. Prentice
5. Ying Ping Wang
6. D. Forrester
7. Gordon Bonan
8. P. Grubb

In Plant Science

1. Trevor Keenan
2. U. Niinemets
3. B. Medlyn
4. I. C. Prentice
5. Ying Ping Wang
6. Gordon Bonan

Citations in the corpus

• Reliable, robust and realistic: the three R's of next-generation land-surface modelling (2014, background): “This equality continues to hold even if stomatal conductance is reduced, and/or15 photosynthetic capacity inhibited, in response to soil drying (Tuzet et al., 2003; Zhou et al., 2013).”
• Photosynthetic responses to stress in Mediterranean evergreens: Mechanisms and models (2014, background): “That said, other studies have shown that the aggregate observed drought effect under current conditions can be accurately reproduced through distinct plausible pathways (Egea et al., 2011; Keenan et al., 2010b; Zhou et al., 2013).”