Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 360

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spectroscopic determination of leaf morphological and biochemical traits for northern temperate and boreal tree species

Serbin, Shawn P., Singh, Aditya, McNeil, Brenden E., Kingdon, Clayton C., Townsend, Philip A.·2014·Ecological Applications

Abstract

The morphological and biochemical properties of plant canopies are strong predictors of photosynthetic capacity and nutrient cycling. Remote sensing research at the leaf and canopy scales has demonstrated the ability to characterize the biochemical status of vegetation canopies using reflectance spectroscopy, including at the leaf level and canopy level from air‐ and spaceborne imaging spectrometers. We developed a set of accurate and precise spectroscopic calibrations for the determination of leaf chemistry (contents of nitrogen, carbon, and fiber constituents), morphology (leaf mass per area, Marea), and isotopic composition (δ 15 N) of temperate and boreal tree species using spectra of dried and ground leaf material. The data set consisted of leaves from both broadleaf and needle‐leaf conifer species and displayed a wide range in values, determined with standard analytical approaches: 0.7–4.4% for nitrogen (Nmass), 42–54% for carbon (Cmass), 17–58% for fiber (acid‐digestible fiber, ADF), 7–44% for lignin (acid‐digestible lignin, ADL), 3–31% for cellulose, 17–265 g/m 2 for Marea, and −9.4‰ to 0.8‰ for δ 15 N. The calibrations were developed using a partial least‐squares regression (PLSR) modeling approach combined with a novel uncertainty analysis. Our PLSR models yielded model calibration (independent validation shown in parentheses) R2 and the root mean square error (RMSE) values, respectively, of 0.98 (0.97) and 0.10% (0.13%) for Nmass, R2 = 0.77 (0.73) and RMSE = 0.88% (0.95%) for Cmass, R2 = 0.89 (0.84) and RMSE = 2.8% (3.4%) for ADF, R2 = 0.77 (0.69) and RMSE = 2.4% (3.9%) for ADL, R2 = 0.77 (0.72) and RMSE = 1.4% (1.9%) for leaf cellulose, R2 = 0.62 (0.60) and RMSE = 0.91‰ (1.5‰) for δ 15 N, and R2 = 0.88 (0.87) with RMSE = 17.2 g/m 2 (22.8 g/m 2) for Marea. This study demonstrates the potential for rapid and accurate estimation of key foliar traits of forest canopies that are important for ecological research and modeling activities, with a single calibration equation valid over a wide range of northern temperate and boreal species and leaf physiognomies. The results provide the basis to characterize important variability between and within species, and across ecological gradients using a rapid, cost‐effective, easily replicated method.

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 · 10.1890/13-2110.1

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 360

Metadata

Authors
Serbin, S. P., Singh, A., McNeil, B. E., Kingdon, C. C., & Townsend, P. A.
Venue
Ecological Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-10
Volume
24
Issue
7
Pages
1651-1669
ISSN
  • 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-5582
OpenAlex
W2141974358
Cited by
360
References
4
FWCI
14.54
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: Spectroscopic determination of leaf morphological and biochemical traits for northern temperate and boreal tree species. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/13-2110.1
The paper
Serbin, S. P., Singh, A., McNeil, B. E., Kingdon, C. C., & Townsend, P. A. (2014). Spectroscopic determination of leaf morphological and biochemical traits for northern temperate and boreal tree species. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-2110.1

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.