Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 356

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spatial and temporal variability in forest–atmosphere CO2 exchange

Hollinger, D. Y., Aber, J., Dail, B., Davidson, E. A., Goltz, S. M., Hughes, H., Leclerc, M. Y., Lee, J. T., Richardson, A. D., Rodrigues, C., Scott, N.A., Achuatavarier, D., Walsh, J.·2004·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Seven years of carbon dioxide flux measurements indicate that a ∼90‐year‐old spruce dominated forest in Maine, USA, has been sequestering 174±46 g C m−2 yr−1 (mean±1 standard deviation, nocturnal friction velocity (u*) threshold >0.25 m s−1). An analysis of monthly flux anomalies showed that above‐average spring and fall temperatures were significantly correlated with greater monthly C uptake while above‐average summer temperatures were correlated with decreased net C uptake. Summer months with significantly drier or wetter soils than normal were also characterized by lower rates of C uptake. Years with above‐average C storage were thus typically characterized by warmer than average spring and fall temperatures and adequate summer soil moisture. Environmental and forest–atmosphere flux data recorded from a second tower surrounded by similar forest, but sufficiently distant that flux source regions (‘footprints’), did not overlap significantly showed almost identical temperature and solar radiation conditions, but some differences in energy partitioning could be seen. Half‐hourly as well as integrated (annual) C exchange values recorded at the separate towers were very similar, with average annual net C uptake differing between the two towers by <6%. Interannual variability in net C exchange was found to be much greater than between tower variability. Simultaneous measurements from two towers were used to estimate flux data uncertainty from a single tower. Carbon‐flux model parameters derived independently from each flux tower data set were not significantly different, demonstrating that flux towers can provide a robust method for establishing C exchange model parameters.

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.1365-2486.2004.00847.x

Cites

32 of 32 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 32 references

Cited by

See all 356

Metadata

Authors
Hollinger, D. Y., Aber, J., Dail, B., Davidson, E. A., Goltz, S. M., Hughes, H., Leclerc, M. Y., Lee, J. T., Richardson, A. D., Rodrigues, C., Scott, N. A., Achuatavarier, D., & Walsh, J.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-09-16
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
1689-1706
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2069892911
Cited by
356
References
32
FWCI
22.59
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: Spatial and temporal variability in forest–atmosphere CO2 exchange. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00847.x
The paper
Hollinger, D. Y., Aber, J., Dail, B., Davidson, E. A., Goltz, S. M., Hughes, H., Leclerc, M. Y., Lee, J. T., Richardson, A. D., Rodrigues, C., Scott, N. A., Achuatavarier, D., & Walsh, J. (2004). Spatial and temporal variability in forest–atmosphere CO2 exchange. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00847.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.