Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 206

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

Relationship between ecosystem productivity and photosynthetically active radiation for northern peatlands

Frolking, S. E., Bubier, J. L., Moore, T. R., Ball, T., Bellisario, L. M., Bhardwaj, A., Carroll, P., Crill, P. M., Lafleur, P. M., McCaughey, J. H., Roulet, N. T., Suyker, A. E., Verma, S. B., Waddington, J. M., Whiting, G. J.·1998·Global Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract

We analyzed the relationship between net ecosystem exchange of carbon dioxide (NEE) and irradiance (as photosynthetic photon flux density or PPFD), using published and unpublished data that have been collected during midgrowing season for carbon balance studies at seven peatlands in North America and Europe. NEE measurements included both eddy‐correlation tower and clear, static chamber methods, which gave very similar results. Data were analyzed by site, as aggregated data sets by peatland type (bog, poor fen, rich fen, and all fens) and as a single aggregated data set for all peatlands. In all cases, a fit with a rectangular hyperbola (NEE = α PPFD Pmax/(α PPFD + Pmax) + R) better described the NEE‐PPFD relationship than did a linear fit (NEE = β PPFD + R). Poor and rich fens generally had similar NEE‐PPFD relationships, while bogs had lower respiration rates (R = −2.0μmol m−2 s−1 for bogs and −2.7 μmol m−2 s−1 for fens) and lower NEE at moderate and high light levels (Pmax = 5.2 μmol m−2 s−1 for bogs and 10.8 μmol m−2 s−1 for fens). As a single class, northern peatlands had much smaller ecosystem respiration (R = −2.4 μmol m−2 s−1) and NEE rates (α = 0.020 and Pmax = 9.2μmol m−2 s−1) than the upland ecosystems (closed canopy forest, grassland, and cropland) summarized by Ruimy et al. [1995]. Despite this low productivity, northern peatland soil carbon pools are generally 5–50 times larger than upland ecosystems because of slow rates of decomposition caused by litter quality and anaerobic, cold soils.

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 · 10.1029/97gb03367

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

Cited by

See all 206

Metadata

Authors
Frolking, S. E., Bubier, J. L., Moore, T. R., Ball, T., Bellisario, L. M., Bhardwaj, A., Carroll, P., Crill, P. M., Lafleur, P. M., McCaughey, J. H., Roulet, N. T., Suyker, A. E., Verma, S. B., Waddington, J. M., & Whiting, G. J.
Venue
Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Published
1998-03
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
115-126
ISSN
  • 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9224
OpenAlex
W1964479363
Cited by
206
References
1
FWCI
11.78
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: Relationship between ecosystem productivity and photosynthetically active radiation for northern peatlands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97gb03367
The paper
Frolking, S. E., Bubier, J. L., Moore, T. R., Ball, T., Bellisario, L. M., Bhardwaj, A., Carroll, P., Crill, P. M., Lafleur, P. M., McCaughey, J. H., Roulet, N. T., Suyker, A. E., Verma, S. B., Waddington, J. M., & Whiting, G. J. (1998). Relationship between ecosystem productivity and photosynthetically active radiation for northern peatlands. Global Biogeochemical Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1029/97gb03367

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.