Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 952

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long‐term dynamics of pine and hardwood litter in contrasting environments: toward a global model of decomposition

Gholz, Henry L., Wedin, David A., Smitherman, Stephen M., Harmon, Mark E., Parton, William J.·2000·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Summary: We analysed data on mass loss after five years of decomposition in the field from both fine root and leaf litters from two highly contrasting trees, Drypetes glauca, a tropical hardwood tree from Puerto Rico, and pine species from North America as part of the Long‐Term Intersite Decomposition Experiment (LIDET). LIDET is a reciprocal litterbag study involving the transplanting of litter from 27 species across 28 sites in North and Central America reflecting a wide variety of natural and managed ecosystems and climates, from Arctic tundra to tropical rainforest. After 5 years, estimated k‐values ranged from 0.032 to 3.734, lengths of Phase I (to 20% mass remaining) from 0.49 to 47.92 years, and fractional mass remaining from 0 to 0.81. Pine litter decomposed more slowly than Drypetes litter, supporting the notion of strong control of substrate quality over decomposition rates. Climate exerted strong and consistent effects on decomposition. Neither mean annual temperature or precipitation alone explained the global pattern of decomposition; variables including both moisture availability and temperature (i.e. actual evapotranspiration and DEFAC from the CENTURY model) were generally more robust than single variables. Across the LIDET range, decomposition of fine roots exhibited a Q10 of 2 and was more predictable than that of leaves, which had a higher Q10 and greater variability. Roots generally decomposed more slowly than leaves, regardless of genus, but the ratio of above‐ to belowground decomposition rates differed sharply across ecosystem types. Finally, Drypetes litter decomposed much more rapidly than pine litter in ‘broadleaved habitats’ than in ‘conifer habitats’, evidence for a ‘home‐field advantage’ for this litter. These results collectively suggest that relatively simple models can predict decomposition based on litter quality and regional climate, but that ecosystem‐specific problems may add complications.

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.1365-2486.2000.00349.x

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 952

Metadata

Authors
Gholz, H. L., Wedin, D. A., Smitherman, S. M., Harmon, M. E., & Parton, W. J.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-10
Volume
6
Issue
7
Pages
751-765
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2026428945
Cited by
952
References
3
FWCI
14.04
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: Long‐term dynamics of pine and hardwood litter in contrasting environments: toward a global model of decomposition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00349.x
The paper
Gholz, H. L., Wedin, D. A., Smitherman, S. M., Harmon, M. E., & Parton, W. J. (2000). Long‐term dynamics of pine and hardwood litter in contrasting environments: toward a global model of decomposition. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00349.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.