The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Climatic versus biotic constraints on carbon and water fluxes in seasonally drought‐affected ponderosa pine ecosystems
Open accessAbstract
We investigated the relative importance of climatic versus biotic controls on gross primary production (GPP) and water vapor fluxes in seasonally drought‐affected ponderosa pine forests. The study was conducted in young (YS), mature (MS), and old stands (OS) over 4 years at the AmeriFlux Metolius sites. Model simulations showed that interannual variation of GPP did not follow the same trends as precipitation, and effects of climatic variation were smallest at the OS (<10%), largest at the MS (>50%), and intermediate at the YS (<20%). In the young, developing stand, interannual variation in leaf area has larger effects on fluxes than climate, although leaf area is a function of climate in that climate can interact with age‐related shifts in carbon allocation and affect whole‐tree hydraulic conductance. Older forests, with well‐established root systems, appear to be better buffered from effects of seasonal drought and interannual climatic variation. Interannual variation of net ecosystem exchange (NEE) was also lowest at the OS, where NEE is controlled more by interannual variation of ecosystem respiration, 70% of which is from soil, than by the variation of GPP, whereas variation in GPP is the primary reason for interannual changes in NEE at the YS and MS. Across spatially heterogeneous landscapes with high frequency of younger stands resulting from natural and anthropogenic disturbances, interannual climatic variation and change in leaf area are likely to result in large interannual variation in GPP and NEE.
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
Recent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems
Schimel, D. S., House, J. I., Hibbard, K. A., Bousquet, P., Ciais, P., Peylin, P., Braswell, B. H., Apps, M. J., Baker, D., Bondeau, A., et al. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35102500 · Cited by 1,379
Cited by
Estimated carbon dioxide emissions from tropical deforestation improved by carbon-density maps
Baccini, A., Goetz, S. J., Walker, W. S., Laporte, N. T., Sun, M., Sulla-Menashe, D., Hackler, J., Beck, P. S. A., Dubayah, R., Friedl, M. A., et al. (2012) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1354 · Cited by 1,788
Metadata
- Authors
- Schwarz, P. A., Law, B. E., Williams, M., Irvine, J., Kurpius, M., & Moore, D.
- Venue
- Global Biogeochemical Cycles
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2004-10-15
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-9224
- OpenAlex
- W2118171762
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.41
- 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: Climatic versus biotic constraints on carbon and water fluxes in seasonally drought‐affected ponderosa pine ecosystems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2004gb002234
- The paper
- Schwarz, P. A., Law, B. E., Williams, M., Irvine, J., Kurpius, M., & Moore, D. (2004). Climatic versus biotic constraints on carbon and water fluxes in seasonally drought‐affected ponderosa pine ecosystems. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004gb002234
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.