Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What happens to allochthonous material that falls into streams? A synthesis of new and published information from Coweeta

Webster, J. R., Benfield, E. F., Ehrman, T. P., Schaeffer, M. A., Tank, J. L., Hutchens, J. J., D’Angelo, D. J.·1999·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

1. ,One of two things can happen to allochthonous material once it enters a stream: it can be broken down or it can be transported downstream. The efficiency with which allochthonous material is used is the result of these two opposing factors: breakdown and transport. 2. ,The present synthesis of new and published studies at Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory compares biological use versus transport for four categories of particulate organic material: (1) large wood (logs); (2) small wood (sticks); (3) leaves; and (4) fine particulate organic matter (FPOM). 3. ,Over 8_years, logs showed no breakdown or movement. 4. ,The breakdown rate of sticks (≤3 _cm diameter) ranged from 0.00017 to 0.00103_day−1, while their rate of transport, although varying considerably with discharge, ranged from 0 to 0.1_m_day−1. 5. ,Based on 40 published measurements, the average rate of leaf breakdown was 0.0098_day−1. The leaf transport rate depended on stream size and discharge. 6. ,The average respiration rate of FPOM was 1.4_mg_O 2 _g_AFDM−1 _day−1 over a temperature range of 6–22_°C, which implies a decomposition rate of 0.00104_day−1. Transport distances of both corn pollen and glass beads, surrogates of natural FPOM, were short (<_10_m) except during high discharge. 7. , Estimates of transport rate were substantially larger than the breakdown rates for sticks, leaves and FPOM. Thus, an organic particle on the stream bottom is more likely to be transported than broken down by biological processes, although estimates of turnover length suggest that sticks and leaves do not travel far. However, once these larger particles are converted to refractory FPOM, either by physical or biological processes, they may be transported long distances before being metabolized.

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00409.x

Cites

47 of 47 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

Show all 47 references

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
Webster, J. R., Benfield, E. F., Ehrman, T. P., Schaeffer, M. A., Tank, J. L., Hutchens, J. J., & D’Angelo, D. J.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-06
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
687-705
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2154969177
Cited by
389
References
47
FWCI
9.94
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: What happens to allochthonous material that falls into streams? A synthesis of new and published information from Coweeta. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00409.x
The paper
Webster, J. R., Benfield, E. F., Ehrman, T. P., Schaeffer, M. A., Tank, J. L., Hutchens, J. J., & D’Angelo, D. J. (1999). What happens to allochthonous material that falls into streams? A synthesis of new and published information from Coweeta. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00409.x

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.