The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Characterizing Dissolved Organic Matter Using PARAFAC Modeling of Fluorescence Spectroscopy: A Comparison of Two Models
Abstract
We evaluated whether fitting fluorescence excitation-emission matrices (EEMs) to a previously validated PARAFAC model is an acceptable alternative to building an original model. To do this, we built a 10-component model using 307 EEMs collected from southeast Alaskan soil and streamwater. All 307 EEMs were then fit to the existing model (CM) presented in Cory and McKnight (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 8142-8149). The first approach for evaluating whether the EEMs were fit well to the CM model was an evaluation of the residual EEMs, and we found 22 EEMs were fit poorly by the CM model. Our second measure for verifying whether EEMs were fit well to the CM model was a comparison of correlations between the percent contribution of PARAFAC components and DOM measurements (e.g., dissolved nutrient concentrations), and we found no significant difference Ip > 0.05) between the two models. These results support the approach of fitting EEMs to an existing model when DOM is collected from similar environments, which can potentially reduce some of the problems when building an original PARAFAC model. However, it is important to recognize that some of the sensitivity or ecological interpretative power may be lost when fitting EEMs to an existing model.
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
OpenFluor– an online spectral library of auto-fluorescence by organic compounds in the environment
Murphy, K. R., Stedmon, C. A., Wenig, P., & Bro, R. (2014) · Anal. Methods · doi:10.1039/c3ay41935e · Cited by 1,110
Enhanced technology based for sewage sludge deep dewatering: A critical review
Cao, B., Zhang, T., Zhang, W., & Wang, D. (2021) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2020.116650 · Cited by 486
Effect of instrument-specific response on the analysis of fulvic acid fluorescence spectra
Cory, R. M., Miller, M. P., McKnight, D. M., Guerard, J. J., & Miller, P. L. (2010) · Limnology and Oceanography: Methods · doi:10.4319/lom.2010.8.0067 · Cited by 381
Self-citationBiochar affects carbon composition and stability in soil: a combined spectroscopy-microscopy study
Hernandez-Soriano, M. C., Kerré, B., Kopittke, P. M., Horemans, B., & Smolders, E. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep25127 · Cited by 123
Metadata
- Authors
- Fellman, J. B., Miller, M. P., Cory, R. M., D’Amore, D. V., & White, D.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2009-07-17
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 6228-6234
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2020219886
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.58
- 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: Characterizing Dissolved Organic Matter Using PARAFAC Modeling of Fluorescence Spectroscopy: A Comparison of Two Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es900143g
- The paper
- Fellman, J. B., Miller, M. P., Cory, R. M., D’Amore, D. V., & White, D. (2009). Characterizing Dissolved Organic Matter Using PARAFAC Modeling of Fluorescence Spectroscopy: A Comparison of Two Models. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es900143g
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.