The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DECOMPOSITION OF WHEAT STRAW AND STABILIZATION OF MICROBIAL PRODUCTS
Open accessAbstract
This research examined the effects of soil environment on the decomposition of cereal crop residues and stabilization of microbial products in the field. Microplots at semi-arid and subhumid field sites were amended with 14 C-, 15 N-labelled wheat straw and with 14 C-labelled glucose plus 15 N-labelled NH 4 NO 3 and the fate of the residual C and N was monitored over 10 yr. Mineralization of C and N derived from wheat straw was greater at the site in the more moist environment in the short term (2 yr). In the long term (up to 10 yr), however, the residual C and N at this site decayed at a slightly slower rate, providing evidence of stabilization of organic material in chemically resistant forms, as compared to possible physical protection in the semi-arid clay-textured soil. The total recovery of labelled N was 22.5–24% in the harvested crops with 13.4–16% remaining in the surface soil by the end of the study. Mineralized labelled organic N was used with an efficiency ranging from 32 to 51%. However, after summer fallow the crop apparently used mineralized labelled N with an efficiency of only 7%. This study showed that moistness of the soil environment has a considerable effect on residue decomposition. Stabilization of humic material derived from residues relates more to the recalcitrance of microbial products and their interactions with soil mineral colloids than to the nature of the original residue. Key words: Mineralization rates, crop residues, microbial turnover, chemical recalcitrance, physical protection, plant N use-efficiency
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
Sorensen, L. H. (1981) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0038-0717(81)90068-7 · Cited by 221
Cited by
Cotrufo, M. F., Wallenstein, M. D., Boot, C. M., Denef, K., & Paul, E. (2013) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.12113 · Cited by 3,552
Self-citationFormation of soil organic matter via biochemical and physical pathways of litter mass loss
Cotrufo, M. F., Soong, J. L., Horton, A. J., Campbell, E. E., Haddix, M. L., Wall, D. H., & Parton, W. J. (2015) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/ngeo2520 · Cited by 1,874
Physical Fractionation of Soil and Organic Matter in Primary Particle Size and Density Separates
Christensen, B. T. (1992) · Advances in Soil Science · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2930-8_1 · Cited by 1,118
Model estimates of CO2 emissions from soil in response to global warming
Jenkinson, D. S., Adams, D. E., & Wild, A. (1991) · Nature · doi:10.1038/351304a0 · Cited by 1,116
Sparling, G. (1992) · Australian Journal of Soil Research · doi:10.1071/sr9920195 · Cited by 874
Metadata
- Authors
- VORONEY, R. P., PAUL, E. A., & ANDERSON, D. W.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Soil Science
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1989-02-01
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 63-77
- ISSN
- 0008-4271 (ISSN-L)
- 1918-1841
- OpenAlex
- W2124530061
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: DECOMPOSITION OF WHEAT STRAW AND STABILIZATION OF MICROBIAL PRODUCTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4141/cjss89-007
- The paper
- VORONEY, R. P., PAUL, E. A., & ANDERSON, D. W. (1989). DECOMPOSITION OF WHEAT STRAW AND STABILIZATION OF MICROBIAL PRODUCTS. Canadian Journal of Soil Science. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss89-007
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.