Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,455

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions

Open access
Michalak, Anna M., Anderson, Eric J., Beletsky, Dmitry, Boland, Steven, Bosch, Nathan S., Bridgeman, Thomas B., Chaffin, Justin D., Cho, Kyunghwa, Confesor, Rem, Daloğlu, Irem, DePinto, Joseph V., Evans, Mary Anne, Fahnenstiel, Gary L., He, Lingli, Ho, Jeff C., Jenkins, Liza, Johengen, Thomas H., Kuo, Kevin C., LaPorte, Elizabeth, Liu, Xiaojian, McWilliams, Michael R., Moore, Michael R., Posselt, Derek J., Richards, R. Peter, Scavia, Donald, Steiner, Allison L., Verhamme, Ed, Wright, David M., Zagorski, Melissa A.·2013·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1216006110
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In 2011, Lake Erie experienced the largest harmful algal bloom in its recorded history, with a peak intensity over three times greater than any previously observed bloom. Here we show that long-term trends in agricultural practices are consistent with increasing phosphorus loading to the western basin of the lake, and that these trends, coupled with meteorological conditions in spring 2011, produced record-breaking nutrient loads. An extended period of weak lake circulation then led to abnormally long residence times that incubated the bloom, and warm and quiescent conditions after bloom onset allowed algae to remain near the top of the water column and prevented flushing of nutrients from the system. We further find that all of these factors are consistent with expected future conditions. If a scientifically guided management plan to mitigate these impacts is not implemented, we can therefore expect this bloom to be a harbinger of future blooms in Lake Erie.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1216006110

Cites

31 of 31 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 31 references

Cited by

See all 1,455

Metadata

Authors
Michalak, A. M., Anderson, E. J., Beletsky, D., Boland, S., Bosch, N. S., Bridgeman, T. B., Chaffin, J. D., Cho, K., Confesor, R., Daloğlu, I., DePinto, J. V., Evans, M. A., Fahnenstiel, G. L., He, L., Ho, J. C., Jenkins, L., Johengen, T. H., Kuo, K. C., LaPorte, E., Liu, X., McWilliams, M. R., Moore, M. R., Posselt, D. J., Richards, R. P., Scavia, D., Steiner, A. L., Verhamme, E., Wright, D. M., & Zagorski, M. A.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2013-04
Volume
110
Issue
16
Pages
6448-6452
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.1216006110
OpenAlex
W1978424046
Cited by
1,455
References
31
FWCI
69.95
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: Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1216006110
The paper
Michalak, A. M., Anderson, E. J., Beletsky, D., Boland, S., Bosch, N. S., Bridgeman, T. B., Chaffin, J. D., Cho, K., Confesor, R., Daloğlu, I., DePinto, J. V., Evans, M. A., Fahnenstiel, G. L., He, L., Ho, J. C., Jenkins, L., Johengen, T. H., Kuo, K. C., LaPorte, E., . . . Zagorski, M. A. (2013). Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1216006110

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.