Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A comparison of methods for determining proximate carbon fractions of forest litter

Ryan, Michael G., Melillo, Jerry M., Ricca, Andrea·1990·Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Abstract

Ten forest litters with decomposition state varying from 16.6 to 100% weight remaining were partitioned into sub-samples; each subsample was analyzed for proximate carbon fractions using one of two chemical analysis procedures (forage fiber and forest products analyses). Proximate carbon fractions from the simpler forage fiber techniques accurately estimated extractives, cellulose, lignin, and acid-hydrolyzed carbohydrates (R 2 > 0.83) determined by the more complex forest products analyses. Decomposition state accounted for most of the residual variance and significantly improved predictive equations for lignin and extractives. The relationship between proximate carbon fractions from the different techniques also varied somewhat among wood, hardwood leaves, and conifer leaves; however, variations were minor relative to the overall trend. Equations developed can be used to extend data availability for developing and validating decomposition models.

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 · 10.1139/x90-023

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.

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

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Ryan, M. G., Melillo, J. M., & Ricca, A.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Published
1990-02-01
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
166-171
ISSN
  • 0045-5067 (ISSN-L)
  • 1208-6037
OpenAlex
W2030377988
Cited by
295
References
0
FWCI
2.50
Type
journal article
Language
fr
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: A comparison of methods for determining proximate carbon fractions of forest litter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/x90-023
The paper
Ryan, M. G., Melillo, J. M., & Ricca, A. (1990). A comparison of methods for determining proximate carbon fractions of forest litter. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. https://doi.org/10.1139/x90-023

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.