The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effect of N deposition on decomposition of plant litter and soil organic matter in forest systems
Abstract
The effects of nitrogen (N) deposition on plant litter and soil organic matter decomposition differ depending on the stage of decomposition (early, late, and final stages). The effects can be divided further into direct and indirect ones. Direct effects: additions of ammonium and nitrate to fresh, newly shed litter stimulate the initial decomposition of celluloses and solubles. By contrast, addition of the same compounds to humus (final stages) clearly suppresses activity. This was seen in all studies reviewed and for several types of humus. Indirect effects: long-term deposition leads to increases in litter concentrations of N and other nutrients. This N in litter forms "natural" organic compounds and the resulting effects are similar to those resulting from natural variation among litter types. Thus, initial decomposition is generally higher for N (nutrient) rich plant litters than for litters with a lower N (nutrient) content. In later stages, at which lignin-degradation rates regulate litter decomposition, N has a retarding effect on decomposition. Significant negative correlations have also been found between N concentrations in humus and respiration rate. There probably is a sink for deposited N in the humus. We may conclude that N storage in humus is regulated by a positive feedback mechanism. Raised levels of N resulting from N deposition cause more humus to be left in the system, and the resulting lower levels of Mn further retards humus decomposition, thus leading to an increased storage of N in humus. Thus, when calculating critical loads it would be incorrect to assume that N pools in the humus remain at a steady state.
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
Soil enzymes in a changing environment: Current knowledge and future directions
Burns, R. G., DeForest, J. L., Marxsen, J., Sinsabaugh, R. L., Stromberger, M. E., Wallenstein, M. D., Weintraub, M. N., & Zoppini, A. (2013) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.11.009 · Cited by 2,552
How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration?
Jandl, R., Lindner, M., Vesterdal, L., Bauwens, B., Baritz, R., Hagedorn, F., Johnson, D. W., Minkkinen, K., & Byrne, K. A. (2007) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.09.003 · Cited by 1,458
Ecosystem carbon storage in arctic tundra reduced by long-term nutrient fertilization
Mack, M. C., Schuur, E. A. G., Bret-Harte, M. S., Shaver, G. R., & Chapin, F. S. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02887 · Cited by 1,030
Litter decomposition and organic matter turnover in northern forest soils
Berg, B. (2000) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(99)00294-7 · Cited by 992
Self-citationMayer, M., Prescott, C. E., Abaker, W. E. A., Augusto, L., Cécillon, L., Ferreira, G. W. D., James, J., Jandl, R., Katzensteiner, K., Laclau, J.-P., et al. (2020) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118127 · Cited by 748
Metadata
- Authors
- Berg, B., & Matzner, E.
- Venue
- Environmental Reviews
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1997-03-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-25
- ISSN
- 1181-8700 (ISSN-L)
- 1208-6053
- OpenAlex
- W2147556625
- Cited by
- 690
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.24
- 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: Effect of N deposition on decomposition of plant litter and soil organic matter in forest systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/a96-017
- The paper
- Berg, B., & Matzner, E. (1997). Effect of N deposition on decomposition of plant litter and soil organic matter in forest systems. Environmental Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1139/a96-017
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.