Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 335

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

Biological Responses of a Tundra River to Fertilization

Peterson, Bruce J., Deegan, Linda, Helfrich, John, Hobbie, John E., Hullar, Meredith, Moller, Bernie, Ford, Tim E., Hershey, Anne, Hiltner, Allison, Kipphut, George, Lock, Maurice A., Fiebig, Douglas M., McKinley, Vicky, Miller, Michael C., Vestal, J. Robie, Ventullo, Roy, Volk, Gregg·1993·Ecology

Abstract

Phosphorous fertilization of a pristine tundra river for four consecutive summers dramatically changed biological processes and populations at all trophic levels. At the primary producer level, both algal biomass and productivity increased and cholorophyll accumulated on the river bottom in the first two summers. Diatom community composition changed little in spite of large chorophyll changes. However, an increase in grazing insects prevented chlorophyll buildup in the third and fourth summers. Some microbial processes were also stimulated by the increased photosynthesis caused by fertilization. Total respiration of the epilithon, acetate uptake, and decomposition of lignin monomers were all stimulated but only in light—grown epilithon. When epilithon was grown in the dark in the fertilized region of the river, there was no increased respiration. Also, phosphorous did not stimulate the decompostition of Carex litter. Although insects grew more rapidly in the fertilized section of the river, there were community interactions that kept total insect production from appreciable change. The four most abundant large insects did increase their growth rates in response to phosphorus addition and there were increases in populations of Baetis lapponicus and Brachycentrus americanus. These increases were offset by the decline in abundance of the dominant species, the black fly Prosimulium martini, perhaps caused by competition for space from Brachycentrus. Growth of both young—of—the—year and adult grayling (Thymallus arcticus) was strongly stimulated by phosphorus addition in years 3 and 4 (not tested in years 1 and 2). Carbon and nitrogen stable isotope tracers indicated that the measured increases in insect and fish growth were largely attributable to increases in the production of epilithic algae. Overall, the results indicate a strong "bottom—up" response of the riverine food web to additions of the limiting nutrient, phosphorus. The response was modified in later years, however, by a strong "top—down" feedback of insects grazing on epilithic algae and by competitive exclusion of black flies caddisflies.

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 · 10.2307/1940794

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

Cited by

See all 335

Metadata

Authors
Peterson, B. J., Deegan, L., Helfrich, J., Hobbie, J. E., Hullar, M., Moller, B., Ford, T. E., Hershey, A., Hiltner, A., Kipphut, G., Lock, M. A., Fiebig, D. M., McKinley, V., Miller, M. C., Vestal, J. R., Ventullo, R., & Volk, G.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-04
Volume
74
Issue
3
Pages
653-672
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W1981705851
Cited by
335
References
1
FWCI
19.11
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: Biological Responses of a Tundra River to Fertilization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1940794
The paper
Peterson, B. J., Deegan, L., Helfrich, J., Hobbie, J. E., Hullar, M., Moller, B., Ford, T. E., Hershey, A., Hiltner, A., Kipphut, G., Lock, M. A., Fiebig, D. M., McKinley, V., Miller, M. C., Vestal, J. R., Ventullo, R., & Volk, G. (1993). Biological Responses of a Tundra River to Fertilization. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1940794

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.