The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Carbon balance of different aged Scots pine forests in Southern Finland
Abstract
We estimated annual net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of a chronosequence of four Scots pine stands in southern Finland during years 2000–2002 using eddy covariance (EC). Net ecosystem productivity (NEP) was estimated using growth measurements and modelled mass losses of woody debris. The stands were 4, 12, 40 and 75 years old. The 4‐year‐old clearcut was a source of carbon throughout the year combining a low gross primary productivity (GPP) with a total ecosystem respiration (TER) similar to the forest stands. The annual NEE of the clearcut, measured by EC, was 386 g C m−2. Tree growth was negligible and the estimated NEP was −262 g C m−2 a−1. The annual GPPs at the other sites were close to each other (928−1072 g C m−2 a−1), but TER differed markedly, being greatest at the 12‐year‐old site (905 g C m−2 a−1) and smallest in the 75‐year‐old stand (616 g C m−2 a−1). Measurements of soil CO 2 efflux showed that different rates of soil respiration largely explained the differences in TER. The NEE and NEP of the 12‐year‐old stand were close to zero. The forested stands were sinks of carbon. They had similar annual patterns of carbon exchange and half‐hourly eddy fluxes were highly correlated, indicating similar responses to the environment. The NEE in the 40‐year‐old stand varied between −179 and –192 g C m−2 a−1, while NEP was between 214 and 242 g C m−2 a−1. The annual NEE of the 75‐year‐old stand was 323 g C m−2 and NEP was 252 g C m−2. This indicates that there was no reduction in carbon sink strength with stand age.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Baldocchi, D. (2008) · Australian Journal of Botany · doi:10.1071/bt07151 · Cited by 1,123
CO 2 balance of boreal, temperate, and tropical forests derived from a global database
LUYSSAERT, S., INGLIMA, I., JUNG, M., RICHARDSON, A. D., REICHSTEIN, M., PAPALE, D., PIAO, S. L., SCHULZE, E. ‐., WINGATE, L., MATTEUCCI, G., et al. (2007) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01439.x · Cited by 1,010
Self-citationHyvönen, R., Ågren, G. I., Linder, S., Persson, T., Cotrufo, M. F., Ekblad, A., Freeman, M., Grelle, A., Janssens, I. A., Jarvis, P. G., et al. (2007) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.01967.x · Cited by 688
Zaehle, S., & Friend, A. D. (2010) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2009gb003521 · Cited by 554
Ecosystem carbon budgeting and soil carbon sequestration in reclaimed mine soil
Shrestha, R. K., & Lal, R. (2006) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2006.05.001 · Cited by 228
Metadata
- Authors
- Kolari, P., Pumpanen, J., Rannik, Ü., Ilvesniemi, H., Hari, P., & Berninger, F.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-05-17
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1106-1119
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2004816750
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.48
- 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: Carbon balance of different aged Scots pine forests in Southern Finland. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00797.x
- The paper
- Kolari, P., Pumpanen, J., Rannik, Ü., Ilvesniemi, H., Hari, P., & Berninger, F. (2004). Carbon balance of different aged Scots pine forests in Southern Finland. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00797.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.