The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of corn leaf nitrogen concentration and chlorophyll meter readings
Abstract
Tissue testing of com leaves for nitrogen (N) concentration is not widely used because it is easier and perhaps more economical to apply sufficient fertilizer than to risk a yield reduction because of an N deficiency. Environmental concerns related to N fertilizer will require producers to improve N management practices to reduce the potential for nitrate leaching. Applying fertilizer N on an “As Needed”; basis rather than using a “Lump Sum”; approach has both environmental and economic advantages. Corn leaf disk N concentrations and SPAD 502 chlorophyll meter readings from N rate studies were compared at silking for a variety of hybrids at several locations. Data indicated that chlorophyll meter readings correlated well with leaf N concentrations for a given hybrid and location. Calibration of chlorophyll meters to determine crop N status may not be practical because of the unique “greenness”; characteristics of different hybrids. However, normalization procedures can be used to standardize the tissue testing approach across hybrids, locations, and growth stages. This can be achieved by comparing chlorophyll meter readings from well fertilized rows to those from the test area. Application of this technology by consultants and producers may require an adequately fertilized area of the field that can be used as a reference for local growing conditions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Hanway, J. J. (1966) · Iowa State University Digital Repository (Iowa State University) · Cited by 1,925
Automated Total Nitrogen Analysis of Soil and Plant Samples
Schuman, G. E., Stanley, M. A., & Knudsen, D. (1973) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1973.03615995003700030045x · Cited by 378
The Close Relationship between Net Photosynthesis and Crop Yield
Zelitch, I. (1982) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1308973 · Cited by 336
A nondestructive method to monitor leaf greenness in corn
Dwyer, L. M., Tollenaar, M., & Houwing, L. (1991) · Canadian Journal of Plant Science · doi:10.4141/cjps91-070 · Cited by 202
Sánchez, R. A., Hall, A. J., Trápani, N., et al. (1983) · Photosynthesis Research · doi:10.1007/bf00041799 · Cited by 86
Cited by
Use of a Chlorophyll Meter to Monitor Nitrogen Status and Schedule Fertigation for Corn
Blackmer, T. M., & Schepers, J. S. (1995) · Journal of Production Agriculture · doi:10.2134/jpa1995.0056 · Cited by 403
Self-citationStrategies to Make Use of Plant Sensors‐Based Diagnostic Information for Nitrogen Recommendations
Samborski, S. M., Tremblay, N., & Fallon, E. (2009) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2008.0162rx · Cited by 344
Responsive in-season nitrogen management for cereals
Shanahan, J. F., Kitchen, N. R., Raun, W. R., & Schepers, J. S. (2008) · Computers and Electronics in Agriculture · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2007.06.006 · Cited by 300
Self-citationO'Brien, A. M., Lins, T. F., Yang, Y., Frederickson, M. E., Sinton, D., & Rochman, C. M. (2022) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.111727 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Schepers, J. S., Francis, D. D., Vigil, M., & Below, F. E.
- Venue
- Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-11
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 17-20
- Pages
- 2173-2187
- ISSN
- 0010-3624 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2416
- OpenAlex
- W2019823556
- Cited by
- 441
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 16.30
- 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: Comparison of corn leaf nitrogen concentration and chlorophyll meter readings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00103629209368733
- The paper
- Schepers, J. S., Francis, D. D., Vigil, M., & Below, F. E. (1992). Comparison of corn leaf nitrogen concentration and chlorophyll meter readings. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629209368733
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.