The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advantages of diffuse radiation for terrestrial ecosystem productivity
Open accessAbstract
Clouds and aerosols alter the proportion of diffuse radiation in global solar radiation reaching the Earth's surface. It is known that diffuse and direct beam radiation differ in the way they transfer through plant canopies and affect the summation of nonlinear processes like photosynthesis differently than what would occur at the leaf scale. We compared the relative efficiencies of canopy photosynthesis to diffuse and direct photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) for a Scots pine forest, an aspen forest, a mixed deciduous forest, a tallgrass prairie and a winter wheat crop. The comparison was based on the seasonal patterns of the parameters that define the canopy photosynthetic responses to diffuse PAR and those that define the responses to direct PAR. These parameters were inferred from half‐hourly tower CO 2 flux measurements. We found that: (1) diffuse radiation results in higher light use efficiencies by plant canopies; (2) diffuse radiation has much less tendency to cause canopy photosynthetic saturation; (3) the advantages of diffuse radiation over direct radiation increase with radiation level; (4) temperature as well as vapor pressure deficit can cause different responses in diffuse and direct canopy photosynthesis, indicating that their impacts on terrestrial ecosystem carbon assimilation may depend on radiation regimes and thus sky conditions. These findings call for different treatments of diffuse and direct radiation in models of global primary production, and studies of the roles of clouds and aerosols in global carbon cycle.
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
Cites
A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species
Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., & Berry, J. A. (1980) · Planta · doi:10.1007/bf00386231 · Cited by 8,796
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 2×
“For example, many GPP models use LUE modulated by environmental stress functions to predict primary productivity [Monteith, 1977; Prince, 1991; Law and Waring, 1994; Runyon et al., 1994; Ruimy et al., 1994; Landsberg et al., 1995; Prince and Goward, 1995; Ruimy et al., 1995].”
BackgroundMethod
Cited by
Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: a contribution to resolve a policy dilemma?
Crutzen, P. J. (2006) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y · Cited by 1,541
Gueymard, C. A. (2008) · Solar Energy · doi:10.1016/j.solener.2007.04.008 · Cited by 448
Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering
Robock, A., Marquardt, A., Kravitz, B., & Stenchikov, G. (2009) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2009gl039209 · Cited by 373
Letts, M. G., & Mulligan, M. (2005) · Journal of Tropical Ecology · doi:10.1017/s0266467405002488 · Cited by 97
Stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could enhance the terrestrial photosynthesis rate
Xia, L., Robock, A., Tilmes, S., & Neely III, R. R. (2016) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-16-1479-2016 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Gu, L., Baldocchi, D., Verma, S. B., Black, T. A., Vesala, T., Falge, E. M., & Dowty, P. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2002-03-27
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- D6
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2030147546
- Cited by
- 753
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 15.67
- 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: Advantages of diffuse radiation for terrestrial ecosystem productivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2001jd001242
- The paper
- Gu, L., Baldocchi, D., Verma, S. B., Black, T. A., Vesala, T., Falge, E. M., & Dowty, P. R. (2002). Advantages of diffuse radiation for terrestrial ecosystem productivity. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd001242
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.