The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pollen Source Area and Pollen Productivity: Evidence from Forest Hollows
Abstract
1 Although fossil pollen from forest hollows (~ 5 m in diameter) is often interpreted as a record of stand-scale forest changes, this assumption has not previously been tested by comparing pollen percentages in modern sediment to vegetation from a range of sampling radii. I compared pollen in surface sediment with distance-weighted basal area of trees in radii from 10 to l00 m, to test a model (Sugita 1994) that predicts the 'relevant pollen source area' for forest hollows is 50-100 m, and that about 40 % of the pollen comes from trees growing within this radius. 2 Maximum likelihood estimates of pollen productivity, based on the relevant source area, are used to test for differences in species pollen productivity between a pinedominated region in north-western Wisconsin, and a hemlock-northern-hardwoodsdominated region of upper peninsula Michigan. 3 Likelihood function scores, which measure the goodness-of-fit of the pollen-vegetation relationship based on the maximum likelihood method, show that estimates of pollen productivity (ac) and relative background pollen loading (co) improve as radius of distance-weighted vegetation sampling increases from 10 to 50 m. There is little further improvement from 50 to lOOm. Linear regression analysis of pollen percentages on distance-weighted basal area also shows little improvement in pollenvegetation correlation when vegetation samples from beyond 50 m are included. Predictions of pollen percentages therefore are not improved by increasing the vegetation sampling radius beyond 50-100 m. These results support Sugita's (1994) model prediction and confirm that fossil pollen in hollows records stand-scale vegetation heterogeneity at a scale of 50-lOOm. 4 Estimates of background pollen (co) indicate that on average, only 40-50% of the pollen in forest hollows comes from trees growing within 50-lOOm of the hollow. However, this is sufficient to record the stand scale vegetation heterogeneity because larger areas of vegetation are recorded as homogeneous regional background, even in patchy vegetation. 5 Relative pollen productivity of three monospecific pollen taxa (red maple, sugar maple, basswood) is similar for two regions, supporting the implicit assumption in palynology that pollen productivity is a species-specific constant. Productivity estimates of birch are similar between regions, although yellow birch dominates in one region and paper birch in the other.
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
Cites
Long‐Term Vegetation Dynamics and Disturbance History of a Tsuga‐Dominated Forest in New England
Foster, D. R., & Zebryk, T. M. (1993) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940468 · Cited by 146
Cited by
Pollen dispersal models in Quaternary plant ecology: Assumptions, parameters, and prescriptions
Jackson, S. T., & Lyford, M. E. (1999) · The Botanical Review · doi:10.1007/bf02856557 · Cited by 314
Metadata
- Authors
- Calcote, R.
- Venue
- The Journal of Ecology
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1995-08
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 591
- ISSN
- 0022-0477 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2065514850
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.48
- 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: Pollen Source Area and Pollen Productivity: Evidence from Forest Hollows. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2261627
- The paper
- Calcote, R. (1995). Pollen Source Area and Pollen Productivity: Evidence from Forest Hollows. The Journal of Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/2261627
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.