Cited by 53Plant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsIsotope Analysis in EcologyEcology and biodiversity studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Carbon and water relations of Salix monticola in response to winter browsing and changes in surface water hydrology: an isotopic study using δ 13 C and δ 18 O

Abstract

To ascertain whether browsing or hydrologic conditions influence the physiological performance of Salix and whether Salix and graminoids (Carex) use and possibly compete for similar water resources, we quantified the in situ seasonal patterns of plant water and carbon relations over three growing seasons. Our studies were designed to address the physiological factors which may be responsible for poor woody plant regeneration in montane riparian habitats of Rocky Mountain National Park, Colo. As these systems act to insure the delivery of fresh water to downstream users, the maintenance of their integrity is critical. We quantified plant water potentials, instantaneous rates of carbon fixation, leaf carbon isotope discrimination (Δ), leaf nitrogen content and water sources using stable isotopes of water (δ 18 O). The carbon and water relations of Salix were significantly affected by winter browsing by elk and in some cases by landscape position with regard to proximity to active streams. Winter browsing of Salix by elk significantly increased summer plant water potentials and integrative measures of gas exchange (Δ), though browsing did not consistently affect instantaneous rates of photosynthesis, leaf nitrogen or the sources of water used by Salix. No effect of experimental manipulations of surface water conditions on Salix physiology was observed, likely due to the mesic nature of our study period. Using a two-member linear mixing model, from δ 18 O values we calculated tha…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s004420050870

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 57 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 53

Metadata

Authors
Alstad, K. P., Welker, J. M., Williams, S. A., & Trlica, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Northern Arizona University (US)
  • University of Wyoming (US)
  • Colorado State University (US)
Venue
Oecologia
Published
1999-08-20
Volume
120
Issue
3
Pages
375-385
ISSN
  • 0029-8549 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1939
OpenAlex
W2022162021
Cited by
51
References
57
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oecologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Geological Survey
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Isotope Analysis in Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Ecology and biodiversity studies
Keywords
surface hydrology, plant water relations, carbon isotope discrimination, leaf water potential, Carex, Rocky Mountain National Park

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review