Cited by 129Soil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsForest ecology and managementPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics

A Review of Fine Root Dynamics in Populus Plantations

Block, R. M. A., Van Rees, K. C. J., Knight, J. D.·2006·Agroforestry Systems

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10457-005-2002-7

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Block, R. M. A., Van Rees, K. C. J., & Knight, J. D.
Affiliations
University of Saskatchewan (CA)
Venue
Agroforestry Systems
Published
2006-04
Volume
67
Issue
1
Pages
73-84
ISSN
  • 0167-4366 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-9680
OpenAlex
W1969859600
Cited by
129
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Agroforestry Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Keywords
fine roots, poplar, poplar plantations, fine root production, fine root mortality, root longevity, carbon sequestration, soil carbon, seasonal dynamics, soil moisture, soil nitrogen, root turnover

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