The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Estimating fine-root production and turnover from biomass and decomposition data: a compartment–flow model
Abstract
Production and replacement of fine roots (diam. < 1 mm) takes 8–67% of net primary production in forests. Most of this production is lost through mortality; little appears as an increment. Traditional biomass methods underestimate fine-root production because estimating production or mortality from changes in standing crop alone does not adequately account for simultaneous and compensating processes of growth, death, and replacement which occur continuously. We propose a compartment–flow model to solve this problem and estimate fine-root production and mortality at a monthly resolution for a pine plantation in New Zealand. The main component of the model is fine-root decomposition, an exponential decay function driven by soil temperature. The model "produces" and "turns over" enough fine roots to maintain observed standing crops of live and dead fine roots given losses through decomposition each month. We have formulated the model as differential and difference equations. Monthly estimates from the model indicated smooth modal patterns. Production and mortality peaked in early spring (September) at about 600 kg•ha−1•month−1 and fell to near zero in summer (January–February). The periodicity of these two processes was out of phase with soil temperature at 10 cm. Decomposition occurred continuously; it peaked in early summer (December) and declined to low levels during winter and was in phase with soil temperature. In a validation of the decomposition portion of the model with an independent set of decomposition data, measured standing crops of dead fine root were not statistically different from predicted values.
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
Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems
GILL, R. A., & JACKSON, R. B. (2000) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00681.x · Cited by 1,300
Review of root dynamics in forest ecosystems grouped by climate, climatic forest type and species
Vogt, K. A., Vogt, D. J., Palmiotto, P. A., Boon, P., O'Hara, J., & Asbjornsen, H. (1995) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/bf00017088 · Cited by 684
NET PRIMARY PRODUCTION IN TROPICAL FORESTS: AN EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS OF EXISTING FIELD DATA
Clark, D. A., Brown, S., Kicklighter, D. W., Chambers, J. Q., Thomlinson, J. R., Ni, J., & Holland, E. A. (2001) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0371:nppitf]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 675
Freschet, G. T., Pagès, L., Iversen, C. M., Comas, L. H., Rewald, B., Roumet, C., Klimešová, J., Zadworny, M., Poorter, H., Postma, J. A., et al. (2021) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.17572 · Cited by 668
Ryan, M. G., Hubbard, R. M., Pongracic, S., Raison, R. J., & McMurtrie, R. E. (1996) · Tree Physiology · doi:10.1093/treephys/16.3.333 · Cited by 544
Metadata
- Authors
- Santantonio, D., & Grace, J. C.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Forest Research
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1987-08-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 900-908
- ISSN
- 0045-5067 (ISSN-L)
- 1208-6037
- OpenAlex
- W2013137137
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.67
- 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: Estimating fine-root production and turnover from biomass and decomposition data: a compartment–flow model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/x87-141
- The paper
- Santantonio, D., & Grace, J. C. (1987). Estimating fine-root production and turnover from biomass and decomposition data: a compartment–flow model. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. https://doi.org/10.1139/x87-141
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.