Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 186

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Nitrogen and carbon solution chemistry of an old growth coniferous forest watershed before and after cutting

Sollins, P., McCorison, F. M.·1981·Water Resources Research

Abstract

Dissolved Kjeldahl N and nitrate concentrations were monitored for 1 to 2 years before and for 3 years after clearcutting of a 10.2‐ha, Douglas‐fir dominated watershed in the Oregon Cascade Mountains. Dissolved organic C (DOC) and ammonium concentrations were monitored after cutting. We sampled throughfall, litter leachate, and soil solution (at four depths in and below the rooting zone) at four locations along a transect up and down the slope. We also sampled precipitation, streamwater, and seepage water. A site just off of the watershed served as the control for all positions in the water profile except for streamwater, for which a similar, nearby watershed was the control. Objectives were (1) to document effects of clearcutting on solution chemistry and (2) to provide data from which to calculate ecosystem nutrient cycling budgets before and after cutting. Beginning 7–18 months after clearcutting, nitrate concentrations increased 3–100 times on the cut watershed but remained nearly unchanged on an adjacent, uncut, control area. Increases were greater at 2.0‐m depth than at other positions along the water profile and least in seepage and streamwater. Greatest nitrate levels were detected near the bottom of the slope. At the uppermost site, about 50 m below the ridgetop, nitrate values remained the same as at the control site. Concentrations of Kjeldahl N (organic N plus ammonium) increased much less than those of nitrate (only 50–100% over precut levels) but were greater than nitrate concentrations at most profile positions both before and after cutting. Even after cutting, nitrate dominated only at 2.0‐m depth and in seepage water. DOC concentrations were slightly greater on the cutover area than on the control. However, they increased as much as 3 times from year 2 to year 3 after cutting at both treated and control sites, whereas nitrate decreased from year 2 to 3, and Kjeldahl N increased little or remained the same. DOC concentrations decreased consistently with depth in the soil profile. The study showed (1) that dissolved organic N must be measured if total N transfers are to be calculated at most sites, (2) that patterns of nitrate appearance can be explained in part on the basis of decreased availability of oxidizable C, (3) that patterns of nitrate appearance after devegetation vary greatly with depth in the soil and with slope position, and (4) that loss of dissolved N after cutting was small (<2.0 kg ha−1 yr−1) compared with nearly 400 kg N ha−1 removed in tree boles.

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/wr017i005p01409

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.

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 186

Metadata

Authors
Sollins, P., & McCorison, F. M.
Venue
Water Resources Research
Published
1981-10
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
1409-1418
ISSN
  • 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-7973
OpenAlex
W2007362001
Cited by
186
References
0
FWCI
2.45
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: Nitrogen and carbon solution chemistry of an old growth coniferous forest watershed before and after cutting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/wr017i005p01409
The paper
Sollins, P., & McCorison, F. M. (1981). Nitrogen and carbon solution chemistry of an old growth coniferous forest watershed before and after cutting. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/wr017i005p01409

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.