Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 175

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Organic Matter and Nutrients Associated with Fine Root Turnover in a White Oak Stand

Joslin, J. D., Henderson, G. S.·1987·Forest Science

Abstract

Organic matter and nutrients cycled by fine root turnover were quantified in a mature white oak (Quercus alba L.) stand and compared to contributions from litterfall. The budget method, a revised version of the traditional repeated sampling method, was used to measure root turnover. The magnitude of the live and dead pools of three size classes of fine (<5 mm diameter) roots were monitored bimonthly for 14 months. Decomposition rates over these intervals were also measured, while production and mortality were calculated. Litterfall was collected simultaneously, and the nutrient concentrations of the various detritus components determined. Root pools fluctuated less, and total root turnover biomass (220 g m -2 yr-1) was also less than previously noted in most other stands studied. Fine root turnover accounted for 30% of the total detritus production and 20-40% of the turnover of the five macron utrients (N, P. K, Ca, Mg) studied. Differences with previous studies suggest that there may be rather large species and/or site-related differences in the amount of energy various stands allocate for fine root maintenance. For. Sci. 33(2):330-346.

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 · 10.1093/forestscience/33.2.330

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Joslin, J. D., & Henderson, G. S.
Venue
Forest Science
Published
1987-06-01
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
330-346
ISSN
  • 0015-749X (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-3738
OpenAlex
W2462044218
Cited by
175
References
0
FWCI
2.74
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

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.