The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fluorescence Inner-Filtering Correction for Determining the Humification Index of Dissolved Organic Matter
Abstract
The use of fluorescence spectrometry has been suggested as a simple method to determine the extent of natural organic matter humification by quantifying the red-shifting of fluorescence emission that occurs with increasing humification. Humification indices are calculated by dividing fluorescence intensity at longer wavelengths by intensity at shorter wavelengths. These indices calculated without any specific efforts to standardize dissolved organic matter (DOM) concentration will result in index values thatvary with DOM concentration due to fluorescence innerfiltering effects. This study critically evaluated the effect of DOM concentration on humification index determination using organic matter isolated from field corn extract, soil: water extract, and soil fulvic acid. The results show that humification index values are sensitive to DOM concentration of the solution and are linear with respect to transmittance of the solution at the 254 nm used as the excitation wavelength. An approximate correction for DOM is to exploit the linear nature of the regression fit and to determine index values at the extrapolated 100% transmittance value. An exact correction using explicit correction factors for both primary and secondary innerfiltration effects was shown to give humification index values that are concentration invariant when absorbance of the solution at 254 nm was less than approximately 0.3 unit. Defining the humification index as the fluorescence intensity in the 300-345 nm region divided by the sum of intensity in the 300-345 nm and 435-480 nm regions was statistically advantageous. This study suggests that for quantitative results which can be used to compare humification of natural organic matter across different studies, correction of the fluorescence emission spectra for innerfiltration effects is needed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Shutova, Y., Baker, A., Bridgeman, J., & Henderson, R. K. (2014) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.01.053 · Cited by 438
Lee, Y. K., Murphy, K. R., & Hur, J. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c00942 · Cited by 380
Lavonen, E. E., Kothawala, D. N., Tranvik, L. J., Gonsior, M., Schmitt-Kopplin, P., & Köhler, S. J. (2015) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2015.08.024 · Cited by 274
Wickland, K. P., Aiken, G. R., Butler, K., Dornblaser, M. M., Spencer, R. G. M., & Striegl, R. G. (2012) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2012gb004342 · Cited by 272
Drinking water treatment response following a Colorado wildfire
Hohner, A. K., Cawley, K., Oropeza, J., Summers, R. S., & Rosario-Ortiz, F. L. (2016) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2016.08.034 · Cited by 141
Metadata
- Authors
- Ohno, T.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2002-01-03
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 742-746
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2006342326
- Cited by
- 1,619
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fluorescence Inner-Filtering Correction for Determining the Humification Index of Dissolved Organic Matter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es0155276
- The paper
- Ohno, T. (2002). Fluorescence Inner-Filtering Correction for Determining the Humification Index of Dissolved Organic Matter. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0155276
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.