The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dynamics of Canopy Structure and Light Interception in Pinus Elliottii Stands, North Florida
Abstract
In order to develop a model of the carbon cycle for mature slash pine (Pinus elliottii) stands in north Florida, we studied seasonal variation in leaf area index (LAI, allsided), aboveground biomass increment and litterfall, and light penetration through the forest canopy, over a 3—yr period. The primary approach to establishing monthly LAI included annual destructive analyses and monthly measurements of needle fall and elongation. Imagery from the Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) and pattern of light penetration were also used in attempts to derive less ardouous estimates; the TM imagery was most promising. LAIs ranged from 3.0 to 6.5 on control plots over the 3 yr, with repeated fertilization increasing maximum LAI by >40%. Seasonal variation was high (40%), as was variation from year to year. An average of 31% of the incident photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) penetrated the canopies annually, ranging from 18 to 42% seasonally. Seasonal light penetration could not be described using a simple application of the Beer—Lambert law, perhaps due to the highly aggregated nature of the canopies. Models incorporating more information on canopy structure are necessary to predict light penetration through slash pine stands accurately. A model of needle litterfall was derived that could account for much of the seasonal and annual variation using stand basal area and climate conditions from the spring of the previous year; this model may be useful for developing climate—driven predictions of LAI. Efficiencies of use of incoming and intercepted PAR were low compared to other forest types. Low light interception and high nutrient—use efficiencies (demonstrated in earlier studies) are important adaptive characteristics of slash pine stands to these relatively warm and nutrient—poor sites.
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
Thornton, P. E., Law, B. E., Gholz, H. L., Clark, K. L., Falge, E., Ellsworth, D. S., Goldstein, A. H., Monson, R. K., Hollinger, D., Falk, M., et al. (2002) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/s0168-1923(02)00108-9 · Cited by 893
Self-citationNiinemets, Ü. (2010) · Ecological Research · doi:10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4 · Cited by 676
Exploring the relationship between reflectance red edge and chlorophyll content in slash pine
Curran, P. J., Dungan, J. L., & Gholz, H. L. (1990) · Tree Physiology · doi:10.1093/treephys/7.1-2-3-4.33 · Cited by 579
Self-citationHENDRICKS, J. J., HENDRICK, R. L., WILSON, C. A., MITCHELL, R. J., PECOT, S. D., & GUO, D. (2006) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.01067.x · Cited by 406
Ryan, M. G., Lavigne, M. B., & Gower, S. T. (1997) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/97jd01236 · Cited by 398
Metadata
- Authors
- Gholz, H. L., Vogel, S. A., Cropper, W. P., McKelvey, K., Ewel, K. C., Teskey, R. O., & Curran, P. J.
- Venue
- Ecological Monographs
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-03
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-51
- ISSN
- 0012-9615 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7015
- OpenAlex
- W2118942226
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 22.52
- 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: Dynamics of Canopy Structure and Light Interception in Pinus Elliottii Stands, North Florida. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1942998
- The paper
- Gholz, H. L., Vogel, S. A., Cropper, W. P., McKelvey, K., Ewel, K. C., Teskey, R. O., & Curran, P. J. (1991). Dynamics of Canopy Structure and Light Interception in Pinus Elliottii Stands, North Florida. Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.2307/1942998
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.