Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Journal of Vegetatio...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Journal of Vegetation Science
Article . 2026 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC ND
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
DIGITAL.CSIC
Article . 2026 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: DIGITAL.CSIC
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Different Measurement Protocols Impact Specific Leaf Area ( SLA ) Estimation in Simple Versus Compound Leaves

Authors: Miguel Blázquez; Manuel J. Macía; Juliana Cruz Montilla; Celina Ben Saadi; Julia G. de Aledo; Guillermo Bañares‐de‐Dios; Rubén Milla; +1 Authors

Different Measurement Protocols Impact Specific Leaf Area ( SLA ) Estimation in Simple Versus Compound Leaves

Abstract

ABSTRACT Aims Specific leaf area (SLA), the ratio of leaf surface area to dry mass, is a key functional trait widely used to characterize resource allocation to light interception in plants. However, inconsistencies in SLA measurement—particularly whether petiolar tissues (such as petioles and rachises) are included—could lead to discrepancies in SLA estimates, especially in woody plants with compound leaves. This study investigates how two SLA measurement protocols (including vs. excluding the petiolar component) affect SLA estimates in both simple and compound leaves, with the goal of clarifying their implications for ecological studies. Location Tropical forests of the Peruvian Amazon. Methods Leaf area and dry mass were measured in 2758 individuals representing 1054 woody plant species from three sampling areas. We evaluated differences in the relationship between leaf area and dry mass across leaf types and measurement protocols while controlling for species‐level variation and phylogenetic structure. Additionally, a literature review was conducted to evaluate prevailing SLA measurement practices. Results Compound leaves exhibited consistently higher SLA than simple leaves of similar size, regardless of the protocol, with differences increasing with leaf size. Excluding the petiolar component amplified the disparity between leaf types, while SLA estimates for simple leaves remained relatively consistent across protocols. SLA declined with increasing leaf area in all cases. The literature review revealed that 46.8% of studies did not specify SLA measurement protocols, and among those that did, 76.2% included the petiolar component. Conclusions SLA measurement protocol substantially influences trait estimates, particularly for compound leaves. While the protocol choice should be guided by the specific goals of each study, we argue that a default approach incorporating both laminar and petiolar components is optimal, as it is cost‐effective and easy to implement. Clear methodological reporting is essential for ensuring comparability across studies and advancing the use of SLA in plant ecological research.

Country
Spain
Keywords

Leaf area, Support tissue, Leaf resource allocation, Leaf type, Photosynthetic surface, Functional ecology

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green
hybrid