Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 451

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of cyanobacterial and green algal growth rates at different temperatures

Open access
LÜRLING, MIQUEL, ESHETU, FASSIL, FAASSEN, ELISABETH J., KOSTEN, SARIAN, HUSZAR, VERA L. M.·2013·Freshwater Biology

Abstract

Summary: 1. The hypothesis that cyanobacteria have higher optimum growth temperatures and higher growth rates at the optimum as compared to chlorophytes was tested by running a controlled experiment with eight cyanobacteria species and eight chlorophyte species at six different temperatures (20–35 °C) and by performing a literature survey. 2. In the experiment, all organisms except the chlorophyte Monoraphidium minutum grew well up to 35 °C. The chlorophyte Chlamydomonas reinhardtii was the fastest‐growing organism over the entire temperature range (20–35 °C). 3. Mean optimum growth temperatures were similar for cyanobacteria (29.2 °C) and chlorophytes (29.2 °C). These results are concordant with published data, yielding slightly higher mean optimum growth temperatures for cyanobacteria (27.2 °C) than for chlorophytes (26.3 °C). 4. Mean growth rates of cyanobacteria at 20 °C (0.42 day−1) were significantly lower than those of chlorophytes at 20 °C (0.62 day−1). However, at all other temperatures, there were no differences between mean growth rates of cyanobacteria and chlorophytes. 5. Mean growth rates at the optimum temperature were similar for cyanobacteria (0.92 day−1) and chlorophytes (0.96 day−1). However, analysis of published data revealed that growth rates of cyanobacteria (0.65 day−1) were significantly lower than those of chlorophytes (0.93 day−1) at their optimum temperatures. 6. Although climate warming will probably lead to an intensification of cyanobacterial blooms, our results indicate that this might not be as a result of higher growth rates of cyanobacteria compared with their chlorophyte competitors. The competitive advantage of cyanobacteria can more likely be attributed to their ability to migrate vertically and prevent sedimentation in warmer and more strongly stratified waters and to their resistance to grazing, especially when warming reduces zooplankton body size.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02866.x

Cites

51 of 51 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 51 references

Cited by

See all 451

Metadata

Authors
LÜRLING, M., ESHETU, F., FAASSEN, E. J., KOSTEN, S., & HUSZAR, V. L. M.
Venue
Freshwater Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-10-15
Volume
58
Issue
3
Pages
552-559
ISSN
  • 0046-5070 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2427
OpenAlex
W2165036418
Cited by
451
References
51
FWCI
13.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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 cyanobacterial and green algal growth rates at different temperatures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02866.x
The paper
LÜRLING, M., ESHETU, F., FAASSEN, E. J., KOSTEN, S., & HUSZAR, V. L. M. (2013). Comparison of cyanobacterial and green algal growth rates at different temperatures. Freshwater Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02866.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.