Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 928

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

Changes in the Carbon Content of Terrestrial Biota and Soils between 1860 and 1980: A Net Release of CO"2 to the Atmosphere

Houghton, R. A., Hobbie, J. E., Melillo, J. M., Moore, B., Peterson, B. J., Shaver, G. R., Woodwell, G. M.·1983·Ecological Monographs

Abstract

Changes in land use over the past two centuries have caused a significant release of CO 2 to the atmosphere from the terrestrial biota and soils. An analysis of this release is based on amounts of organic carbon within an ecosystem following changes such as harvest of forests; it is also based on rates of changes, such as conversion of forest to agriculture, deduced from agricultural and forestry statistics. A model is used to calculate the net amount of carbon stored or released each year by the biota and soils of 69 regional ecosystems. Some of the changes, such as afforestation, the growth of harvested forests, and buildup of soil organic matter, result in a storage of carbon; others, such as harvest of forests and increase in pasture and agricultural areas, result in a loss of carbon to the atmosphere. According to this analysis, there has been a net release of carbon from terrestrial ecosystems worldwide since at least 1860. Until °1960, the annual release was greater than release of carbon from fossil fuels. The total net release of carbon from terrestrial ecosystems since 1860 is estimated to have been 180 x 10 15 g (a range of estimates is 135—228 x 10 15 g). The estimated net release of carbon in 1980 was 1.8—4.7 x 10 15 g; for the 22 yr since 1958 the release of C was 38—76 x 10 15 g. The ranges reflect the differences among various estimates of forest biomass, soil carbon, and agricultural clearing. Improvements in the data on the clearing of tropical forests alone would reduce the range of estimates for 1980 by almost 60%. Estimates of the other major terms in the global carbon budget, the atmospheric increase in CO 2, the fossil fuel release of CO 2, and the oceanic uptake of CO 2, are all subject to uncertainties. The combined errors in these estimates are large enough that the global carbon budget appears balanced if the low estimate for the biotic release of carbon given above is used (1.8 x 10 15 g released in 1980) with the higher estimates of oceanic uptake. If higher estimates for biotic release are used, then the carbon budget does not balance, and the estimates of oceanic uptake or of other factors require revision.

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 · 10.2307/1942531

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 928

Metadata

Authors
Houghton, R. A., Hobbie, J. E., Melillo, J. M., Moore, B., Peterson, B. J., Shaver, G. R., & Woodwell, G. M.
Venue
Ecological Monographs
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1983-09
Volume
53
Issue
3
Pages
235-262
ISSN
  • 0012-9615 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7015
OpenAlex
W2084211992
Cited by
928
References
1
FWCI
56.90
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: Changes in the Carbon Content of Terrestrial Biota and Soils between 1860 and 1980: A Net Release of CO"2 to the Atmosphere. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1942531
The paper
Houghton, R. A., Hobbie, J. E., Melillo, J. M., Moore, B., Peterson, B. J., Shaver, G. R., & Woodwell, G. M. (1983). Changes in the Carbon Content of Terrestrial Biota and Soils between 1860 and 1980: A Net Release of CO"2 to the Atmosphere. Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942531

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.