Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 177

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Trends in North American net primary productivity derived from satellite observations, 1982–1998

Open access
Hicke, Jeffrey A., Asner, Gregory P., Randerson, James T., Tucker, Compton, Los, Sietse, Birdsey, Richard, Jenkins, Jennifer C., Field, Christopher·2002·Global Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract

Net primary productivity (NPP) in North America was computed for the years 1982–1998 using the Carnegie‐Ames‐Stanford approach (CASA) carbon cycle model. CASA was driven by a new, corrected satellite record of the normalized difference vegetation index at 8‐km spatial resolution. Regional trends in the 17‐year NPP record varied substantially across the continent. Croplands and grasslands of the Central Plains and eastern Canadian forests experienced summer increases in NPP. Peak NPP trends in Alaska and western Canada occurred in late spring or early summer, suggesting an earlier onset of the growing season in these regions. Forests and woodlands of the southeastern United States showed NPP increases in spring and fall, also suggesting an increase in the length of the growing season. An analysis of climate variables showed that summer precipitation increased in the Central Plains, indicating that climate changes probably play some role in increasing NPP in this region, though intensive management of agricultural ecosystems has also increased productivity. Similarly, increased summer precipitation possibly increased NPP in eastern Canada, but another possible explanation is forest recovery after insect damage. NPP in the southeastern United States increased in the absence of climate variation. Much of this region consists of aggressively managed forests, with young stand ages and intensive silviculture resulting in increased NPP. The high latitudes of western Canada and Alaska experienced spring warming that could have increased NPP in late spring or early summer.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2001gb001550

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

  • Climate and the efficiency of crop production in Britain

    Monteith, J. L. (1977) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1977.0140 · Cited by 3,484 · cited 1×

    “Production efficiency models calculate NPP from the amount of light absorbed by plants together with a plant light-use efficiency that converts the absorbed energy to carbon uptake [e.g., Monteith , 1977; Ruimy et al. , 1994].”
    Background

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 177

Metadata

Authors
Hicke, J. A., Asner, G. P., Randerson, J. T., Tucker, C., Los, S., Birdsey, R., Jenkins, J. C., & Field, C.
Venue
Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Published
2002-05-14
Volume
16
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9224
OpenAlex
W1555156827
Cited by
177
References
1
FWCI
6.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Trends in North American net primary productivity derived from satellite observations, 1982–1998. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2001gb001550
The paper
Hicke, J. A., Asner, G. P., Randerson, J. T., Tucker, C., Los, S., Birdsey, R., Jenkins, J. C., & Field, C. (2002). Trends in North American net primary productivity derived from satellite observations, 1982–1998. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001gb001550

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.