Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tree root and soil heterotrophic respiration as revealed by girdling of boreal Scots pine forest: extending observations beyond the first year

Open access
BHUPINDERPAL‐SINGH, NORDGREN, A., OTTOSSON LÖFVENIUS, M., HÖGBERG, M. N., MELLANDER, P. ‐E., HÖGBERG, P.·2003·Plant, Cell & Environment

Abstract

Limitations in available techniques to separate autotrophic (root) and soil heterotrophic respiration have hampered the understanding of forest C cycling. The former is here defined as respiration by roots, their associated mycorrhizal fungi and other micro‐organisms in the rhizosphere directly dependent on labile C compounds leaked from roots. In order to separate the autotrophic and heterotrophic components of soil respiration, all Scots pine trees in 900 m 2 plots were girdled to instantaneously terminate the supply of current photosynthates from the tree canopy to roots. Högberg et al. (Nature 411, 789–792, 2001) reported that autotrophic activity contributed up to 56% of total soil respiration during the first summer of this experiment. They also found that mobilization of stored starch (and likely also sugars) in roots after girdling caused an increased apparent heterotrophic respiration on girdled plots. Herein a transient increase in the δ13 C of soil CO 2 efflux after girdling, thought to be due to decomposition of 13 C‐enriched ectomycorrhizal mycelium and root starch and sugar reserves, is reported. In the second year after girdling, when starch reserves of girdled tree roots were exhausted, calculated root respiration increased up to 65% of total soil CO 2 efflux. It is suggested that this estimate of its contribution to soil respiration is more precise than the previous based on one year of observation. Heterotrophic respiration declined in response to a 20‐day‐long 6 °C decline in soil temperature during the second summer, whereas root respiration did not decline. This did not support the idea that root respiration should be more sensitive to variations in soil temperature. It is suggested that above‐ground photosynthetic activity and allocation patterns of recent photosynthates to roots should be considered in models of responses of forest C balances to global climate change.

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.1365-3040.2003.01053.x

Cites

30 of 30 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 30 references

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
BHUPINDERPAL‐SINGH, NORDGREN, A., OTTOSSON LÖFVENIUS, M., HÖGBERG, M. N., MELLANDER, P. ‐., & HÖGBERG, P.
Venue
Plant, Cell & Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-07
Volume
26
Issue
8
Pages
1287-1296
ISSN
  • 0140-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3040
OpenAlex
W1999308616
Cited by
332
References
30
FWCI
38.21
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: Tree root and soil heterotrophic respiration as revealed by girdling of boreal Scots pine forest: extending observations beyond the first year. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2003.01053.x
The paper
BHUPINDERPAL‐SINGH, NORDGREN, A., OTTOSSON LÖFVENIUS, M., HÖGBERG, M. N., MELLANDER, P. ‐., & HÖGBERG, P. (2003). Tree root and soil heterotrophic respiration as revealed by girdling of boreal Scots pine forest: extending observations beyond the first year. Plant, Cell & Environment. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2003.01053.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.