Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 195

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of a simulation model and ecosystem flux data to examine carbon-water interactions in ponderosa pine

Open access
Williams, M., Law, B. E., Anthoni, P. M., Unsworth, M. H.·2001·Tree Physiology

Abstract

Drought stress plays an important role in determining both the structure and function of forest ecosystems, because of the close association between the carbon (C) and hydrological cycles. We used a detailed model of the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum to investigate the links between carbon uptake and the hydrological cycle in a mature, open stand of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws.) at the Metolius river in eastern Oregon over a 2-year period (1996-1997). The model was parameterized from local measurements of vegetation structure, soil properties and meteorology, and tested against independent measurements of ecosystem latent energy (LE) and carbon fluxes and soil water content. Although the 2 years had very different precipitation regimes, annual uptake of C and total transpiration were similar in both years, according to both direct observation and simulations. There were important differences in ratios of evaporation to transpiration, and in the patterns of water abstraction from the soil profile, depending on the frequency of summer storms. Simulations showed that, during periods of maximum water limitation in late summer, plants maintained a remarkably constant evapotranspirative flux because of deep rooting, whereas changes in rates of C accumulation were determined by interactions between atmospheric vapor pressure deficit and stomatal conductance. Sensitivity analyses with the model suggest a highly conservative allocation strategy in the vegetation, focused belowground on accessing a soil volume large enough to buffer summer droughts, and optimized to account for interannual variability in precipitation. The model suggests that increased allocation to leaf area would greatly increase productivity, but with the associated risk of greater soil water depletion and drought stress in some years. By constructing sparse canopies and deep rooting systems, these stands balance reduced productivity in the short term with risk avoidance over the long term.

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/treephys/21.5.287

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 195

Metadata

Authors
Williams, M., Law, B. E., Anthoni, P. M., & Unsworth, M. H.
Venue
Tree Physiology
Published
2001-03-01
Volume
21
Issue
5
Pages
287-298
ISSN
  • 0829-318X (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-4469
OpenAlex
W2022502823
Cited by
195
References
1
FWCI
11.94
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: Use of a simulation model and ecosystem flux data to examine carbon-water interactions in ponderosa pine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/treephys/21.5.287
The paper
Williams, M., Law, B. E., Anthoni, P. M., & Unsworth, M. H. (2001). Use of a simulation model and ecosystem flux data to examine carbon-water interactions in ponderosa pine. Tree Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/21.5.287

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.