Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The deposition of atmospheric ammonia and its effects on plants

PEARSON, JOHN, STEWART, GEORGE R.·1993·New Phytologist

Abstract

SUMMARY: Across Europe, total nitrogen deposition is increasing and, of this total, atmospheric ammonia can contribute up to 50–80%. Average deposition of ammonia in the UK is likely to be around 15–20 kg ha−1 yr−1, while in The Netherlands, which has some of the highest rates of deposition, this value is likely to be between 40 and 50 kg ha−1 yr−1. It is argued that because of the processes of assimilation and nitrification this ammonia is an acidifying pollutant. Ammonia taken up by plants is most likely to be directly assimilated and this uptake can have a strong effect on the nutrient imbalances of the plant. With root uptake in particular, anions are taken up in preference to cations. However, simple soil/plant nutrient measurements are unlikely to be a definitive means of monitoring ammonia pollution. This is because the processes of ammonia metabolism and acidification affect soil ion activity, mycorrhizas, plant uptake, and foliar leaching. These effects interact with acidity per se, and are compounded by the strong correlative co‐deposition of ammonia with sulphur. Evidence for uptake of gaseous and wet deposited ammonia by leaves is presented. The exact mechanism of ammonia toxicity is still not really clear, but could be due to physiological perturbation, rather than to the direct toxicity of the ion. Assimilation of ammonia by leaves releases protons which can cause cellular acidosis, and has important implications for acid‐base regulation in cells. This regulation depends on intrinsic features of the plant's metabolism, that is in turn dependent on the ecology of root versus leaf nitrogen nutrition under normal conditions. Certain species are more acidic in a leaf physiological sense and tend to be prone to damage by pollutants. Likewise, acidic habitats are particularly prone to damage through both eutrophication and the different capacities of plants both to utilize and to buffer against this nitrogen enrichment. The current evidence from The Netherlands suggests that the part this plays in perturbing the ecosystem should not be underestimated. ContentsSummary283I.Introduction284II.Emission and deposition of ammonia284III.Is ammonia toxic?288IV.The eflfects of ammonia deposition289V.Throughfall versus foliar uptake293VI.Physiological effects on ahove‐ground parts296VII.Conclusions301Acknowledgements302References302

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.1469-8137.1993.tb03882.x

Cites

49 of 49 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 49 references

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
PEARSON, J., & STEWART, G. R.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-10
Volume
125
Issue
2
Pages
283-305
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2115274217
Cited by
396
References
49
FWCI
11.61
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 deposition of atmospheric ammonia and its effects on plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1993.tb03882.x
The paper
PEARSON, J., & STEWART, G. R. (1993). The deposition of atmospheric ammonia and its effects on plants. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1993.tb03882.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.