Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 260

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Fire and Drought on the Ecophysiology of Andropogon gerardii and Panicum virgatum in a Tallgrass Prairie

Knapp, Alan K.·1985·Ecology

Abstract

The effect of fire and drought on net photosynthesis, stomatal conductance to water vapor diffusion, leaf water potential, leaf osmotic potential, leaf nitrogen content, and growth were evaluated for the dominant tallgrass prairie species, Andropogon gerardii, and a less common (more mesic) grass, Panicum virgatum, at the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area in northeast Kansas. Early in the growing season in a burned plot, leaves of A. gerardii exhibited greater photosynthesis (maximum CO 2 uptake = 41.6 @mmol°m—2@?s—1), leaf conductance, leaf nitrogen content, nitrogen use efficiency, leaf thickness, and shoot biomass compared to shoots from an unburned plot, Postburn differences in P. virgatum were less pronounced, and CO 2 uptake rates (maximum = 46.0 @mmol°m—2@?s—1) were not significantly different between burned and unburned sites for this grass. Both grasses had broad temperature optima for photosynthesis, and neither was light—saturated at 2.2 mmol°m—2@?s—1 quantum flux. The response of A. gerardii to burning reflects the documented positive vigor of this grass, and is indicative of a substantial shift in the water, energy, and nutrient dynamics of tallgrass prairie following fire. Due to a midseason drought in 1983, leaf water potentials at midday decreased to < —6.6 and —5.74 MPa in A. gerardii, and —4.53 and —3.51 MPa in P. virgatum in burned and unburned plots, respectively. Lower leaf water potential in the burned site was a result of greater leaf area and transpiration per unit ground area in burned than in unburned prairie. As water stress increased, the osmotic potential at full turgor and at zero turgor decreased more rapidly in the burned plot for both grasses, but minimum values of each parameter (—2.04 and —2.68 MPa in A. gerardii; —2.04 and —2.56 MPa in P. virgatum) were recorded at the end of the season in the unburned plot. When water stress was most severe, photosynthesis decreased to near zero for both grasses at both sites, yet following substantial late season precipitation, photosynthesis increased from 28 to 48% of the early season rates. Attributes of A. gerardii that may contribute to its dominance in tallgrass prairie were the ability of this grass to maintain high rates of carbon gain over a greater range of leaf temperatures and at lower leaf water potential than P. virgatum.

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 · 10.2307/1939184

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 260

Metadata

Authors
Knapp, A. K.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1985-08
Volume
66
Issue
4
Pages
1309-1320
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W2055714955
Cited by
260
References
1
FWCI
6.47
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 Fire and Drought on the Ecophysiology of Andropogon gerardii and Panicum virgatum in a Tallgrass Prairie. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1939184
The paper
Knapp, A. K. (1985). Effect of Fire and Drought on the Ecophysiology of Andropogon gerardii and Panicum virgatum in a Tallgrass Prairie. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939184

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.