@article{ChorusSpijkerman2020,
  author    = {Chorus, Ingrid and Spijkerman, Elly},
  title     = {What Colin Reynolds could tell us about nutrient limitation, N:P ratios and eutrophication control},
  series = {Hydrobiologia : acta hydrobiologica, hydrographica, limnologica et protistologica},
  volume    = {848},
  journal   = {Hydrobiologia : acta hydrobiologica, hydrographica, limnologica et protistologica},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer Nature},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0018-8158},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10750-020-04377-w},
  pages     = {95 -- 111},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Colin Reynolds exquisitely consolidated our understanding of driving forces shaping phytoplankton communities and those setting the upper limit to biomass yield, with limitation typically shifting from light in winter to phosphorus in spring. Nonetheless, co-limitation is frequently postulated from enhanced growth responses to enrichments with both N and P or from N:P ranging around the Redfield ratio, concluding a need to reduce both N and P in order to mitigate eutrophication. Here, we review the current understanding of limitation through N and P and of co-limitation. We conclude that Reynolds is still correct: (i) Liebig's law of the minimum holds and reducing P is sufficient, provided concentrations achieved are low enough; (ii) analyses of nutrient limitation need to exclude evidently non-limiting situations, i.e. where soluble P exceeds 3-10 mu g/l, dissolved N exceeds 100-130 mu g/l and total P and N support high biomass levels with self-shading causing light limitation; (iii) additionally decreasing N to limiting concentrations may be useful in specific situations (e.g. shallow waterbodies with high internal P and pronounced denitrification); (iv) management decisions require local, situation-specific assessments. The value of research on stoichiometry and co-limitation lies in promoting our understanding of phytoplankton ecophysiology and community ecology.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BalazadehSchildhauerAraujoetal.2014,
  author    = {Balazadeh, Salma and Schildhauer, Joerg and Araujo, Wagner L. and Munne-Bosch, Sergi and Fernie, Alisdair R. and Proost, Sebastian and Humbeck, Klaus and M{\"u}ller-R{\"o}ber, Bernd},
  title     = {Reversal of senescence by N resupply to N-starved Arabidopsis thaliana: transcriptomic and metabolomic consequences},
  series = {Journal of experimental botany},
  volume    = {65},
  journal   = {Journal of experimental botany},
  number    = {14},
  publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0022-0957},
  doi       = {10.1093/jxb/eru119},
  pages     = {3975 -- 3992},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Leaf senescence is a developmentally controlled process, which is additionally modulated by a number of adverse environmental conditions. Nitrogen shortage is a well-known trigger of precocious senescence in many plant species including crops, generally limiting biomass and seed yield. However, leaf senescence induced by nitrogen starvation may be reversed when nitrogen is resupplied at the onset of senescence. Here, the transcriptomic, hormonal, and global metabolic rearrangements occurring during nitrogen resupply-induced reversal of senescence in Arabidopsis thaliana were analysed. The changes induced by senescence were essentially in keeping with those previously described; however, these could, by and large, be reversed. The data thus indicate that plants undergoing senescence retain the capacity to sense and respond to the availability of nitrogen nutrition. The combined data are discussed in the context of the reversibility of the senescence programme and the evolutionary benefit afforded thereby. Future prospects for understanding and manipulating this process in both Arabidopsis and crop plants are postulated.},
  language  = {en}
}