The costs of reproduction in plants.
By J. Obeso. New Phytologist, 2002
1,326 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Molecular Biology, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/23e0bfcb4019876f18781a1d5b8f5b9cf6a5fc06
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
In Molecular Biology
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
Citations in the corpus
- The allometry of reproductive biomass in response to land use in Tibetan alpine grasslands. (2009, background): “For example, increased allocation to stem and leaves at the expense of RB is a typical response to intense light competition (Obeso 2002; Niu et al. 2008).”
- Trait correlation network analysis identifies biomass allocation traits and stem specific length as hub traits in herbaceous perennial plants (2018, background): “The covariation of size and reproduction is well known (Hodgson et al., 2017; Moles & Leishman, 2008; Obeso, 2002; Pierce, Bottinelli, Bassani, Ceriani, & Cerabolini, 2014).”
- Size‐dependent flowering and costs of reproduction affect population dynamics in a tuberous perennial woodland orchid (2010, background): “In polycarpic plants, on the other hand, the situation becomes more complicated because vital rates in one year may depend on the vital rates in the previous year (Obeso 2002; Horvitz et al. 2010).”
- Sexual Reproduction of Seagrasses: Pollination in the Marine Context (2007, background): “escape in numbers); and (4) it removes the real costs of reproduction ( Obeso, 2002 ).”
- Causes and implications of the correlation between forest productivity and tree mortality rates (2011, background): “The latter may result from an additional diversion of resources, from defenses toward reproduction (Loehle 2000, Obeso 2002).”
- Some Evolutionary Consequences of Being a Tree (2006, background): “Reproduction is costly and trade-offs with vegetative growth are well-known (e.g., Obeso 2002).”
- When mutualism goes bad: density‐dependent impacts of introduced bees on plant reproduction (2014, background): “…and production vs sugar production, respectively, in the case of a nectar-rewarding plant interacting with nectar-foraging pollinators), costs ultimately involve expended resources that can compromise present and future reproductive success via reduced growth and/or survivorship (Obeso, 2002).”
- Recovery following defoliation involves shifts in allocation that favour storage and reproduction over radial growth in black oak (2017, background): “Large reproductive events are expected to rely on stored resources, causing reduced storage following masting (Newell 1991; Koenig & Knops 1998; Obeso 2002), and the positive correlation between May stemwood starch and subsequent acorn production suggests that NSC stores did help support…”
- Differential tree mortality in response to severe drought: evidence for long‐term vegetation shifts (2005, background): “The cost of reproduction in plants is often manifested in other life-history traits, including growth and mortality (Obeso 2002), and the cost of reproduction is likely to be manifested under conditions of stress (Reznick 1985).”
- The optimal balance between sexual and asexual reproduction in variable environments: a systematic review (2016, background): “Changes in partitioning to sexual and asexual reproduction depend on the detection of environmental cues by the plant, and the plant should adjust to partitioning to match with the changes in the estimated success of the two reproductive modes (Obeso 2002).”