Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 262

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

THE DIFFERENTIAL ABILITY OF AQUATIC PLANTS TO UTILIZE THE INORGANIC CARBON SUPPLY IN FRESH WATERS

ALLEN, E. D., SPENCE, D. H. N.·1981·New Phytologist

Abstract

SUMMARY: The photosynthetic activity of 15 species of microalgae and macrophytes was measured by continuous recording of oxygen concentration, and/or the change in pH, in bathing solutions of known alkalinity and carbon concentration. The microalgae had considerably greater apparent affinities for HCO 3− and slightly greater apparent affinities for CO 2, than the macrophytes (including several previously established HCO 3‐users), while the macrophytes had larger apparent affinities for CO 2 than for HCO 3− and larger diffusive resistances to CO 2. For species with different affinities for CO 2 and HCO 3−, assimilation rate in a solution of constant alkalinity showed a distinct reduction when the CO 2 concentration decreased to a value typical of each species; a list of such ‘CO 2 compensation points’ is presented. (The same CO 2 compensation point was obtained for Elodea canadensis by extrapolation of rate‐substrate curves in solutions of which the pH was varied at each of three constant total carbon concentrations). At still lower total carbon values, any assimilation was held to be due to HCO 3− uptake, and HCO 3− compensation points for some species are given. Rather than ‘users’ and ‘non‐users’ of HCO 3− it is concluded that a gradation exists, use depending on HCO 3− as affected by alkalinity and pH of the bathing solution, and on the species' HCO 3‐compensation point. Natural rates of photosynthesis of macrophytes and some microalgae are usually functions of exogenous [CO 2] while those of other microalgae are functions of [CO 2] and [HCO 3−], with competitive effects at high pH in solutions of prevailingly low alkalinity. In characterizing the response of aquatic plants to inorganic carbon supply, a knowledge of CO 2 and HCO 3− compensation points is therefore essential.

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.1469-8137.1981.tb03198.x

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

See all 262

Metadata

Authors
ALLEN, E. D., & SPENCE, D. H. N.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1981-02
Volume
87
Issue
2
Pages
269-283
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2129536399
Cited by
262
References
10
FWCI
3.22
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: THE DIFFERENTIAL ABILITY OF AQUATIC PLANTS TO UTILIZE THE INORGANIC CARBON SUPPLY IN FRESH WATERS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1981.tb03198.x
The paper
ALLEN, E. D., & SPENCE, D. H. N. (1981). THE DIFFERENTIAL ABILITY OF AQUATIC PLANTS TO UTILIZE THE INORGANIC CARBON SUPPLY IN FRESH WATERS. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1981.tb03198.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.