Does extreme defoliation reduce tree growth but not C and N storage in a winter-deciduous species?
The significant reduction in growth following defoliation was not caused by insufficient C or N availability, as frequently assumed; instead, it was probably due to growth limitations due to factors other than C or N, or to preventative C allocation to storage. This study shows an integrative approach to evaluating plant growth limitations in response to disturbance, by examining major resources other than C (e.g. N), and other C sinks besides storage and growth (e.g. defences and re-foliation).
The widely held view that mixtures of dissimilarly acting chemicals are "safe" at levels below NOAELs is not supported by empirical evidence. We show that this view is also based on the erroneous assumption that NOAELs can be equated with zero-effect levels. Thus, on the basis of published evidence, it is difficult to rule out the possibility of mixture effects from low-dose multiple exposures.