The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: Forest Biomass and Production
Abstract
A small watershed in the White Mountains of New Hampshire bearing mesophytic, cool—temperate, broadleaf—deciduous forests was studied. Acer saccharum, Betula lutea, and Fagus grandifolia are dominant, but toward higher elevations Picea rubens and Abies balsamea also occur and indicate the transition toward subalpine climate. The stands are young (following cutting in 1909—17) but contain older trees; stand composition is thought reasonably representative of the climax. For application of the Brookhaven system of forest dimension analysis, 93 sample trees of major species were cut and roots excavated. Mean dimensions of sample trees, and the constants for the system of logarithmic regressions relating volume, surface, mass, and growth to diameter at breast height and other independent variables, show decrease in tree sizes and height/diameter ratios toward higher elevations. Stand characteristics, based on application of the regressions to forest samples, show trends of decrease for the elevation belts from low to high: stem basal area 26.3, 23.7, and 22.0 m 2/ha, weighted mean tree height 16.9, 16.7, and 10.8 m, weighted mean age 124, 95, and 83 yr, stem wood volume 176, 155, and 103 m 3/ha, aboveground biomass (dry matter) 162, 152, and 102 t/ha, estimated volume increment 379, 365, and 223 cm 3/m 2/yr, aboveground net primary productivity (1956—60) 1127, 1041, and 790 g/m 2/yr, and leaf area ratio 6.2, 5.7, and 5.5 m 2/m 2. Biomass (and, presumably, production) of root systems is 18%—21% of that aboveground. Different estimations suggest that a mean climax biomass for the watershed may be around 350 t/ha, aboveground. Net ecosystem production (i.e., addition to the pool of woody biomass in the community) is estimated as 350 g/m 2/yr aboveground and 85 belowground for 1956—60, 238 and 52 g/m 2/yr for 1961—65. Analysis of stem wood volume increments reveals an abrupt and striking (18%) decrease in volume growth and productivity from 1956—60 to 1961—65. The net primary productivity of the former period, with a weighted mean for the watershed of 1110 g/m 2/yr above and below the ground, is thought more nearly normal for the forest. Both drought and effects of increasing air pollution (notably increasing acidity of rainfall) may be responsible for the recent decrease in productivity.
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
A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes
Jackson, R. B., Canadell, J., Ehleringer, J. R., Mooney, H. A., Sala, O. E., & Schulze, E. D. (1996) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/bf00333714 · Cited by 3,071
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
Sartori, F., Lal, R., Ebinger, M. H., & Eaton, J. A. (2007) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2007.01.026 · Cited by 190
Methods of Assessing Terrestrial Productivty
Whittaker, R. H., & Marks, P. L. (1975) · Ecological Studies · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-80913-2_4 · Cited by 153
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Whittaker, R. H., Bormann, F. H., Likens, G. E., & Siccama, T. G.
- Venue
- Ecological Monographs
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1974-03
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 233-254
- ISSN
- 0012-9615 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7015
- OpenAlex
- W2071738546
- Cited by
- 554
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 34.94
- 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: The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: Forest Biomass and Production. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1942313
- The paper
- Whittaker, R. H., Bormann, F. H., Likens, G. E., & Siccama, T. G. (1974). The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study: Forest Biomass and Production. Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942313
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.