首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      


Net Ecosystem Exchange of Carbon dioxide in a Temperate Poor Fen: a Comparison of Automated and Manual Chamber Techniques
Authors:Email author" target="_blank">Elizabeth?H?BurrowsEmail author  Jill?L?Bubier  Andrew?Mosedale  George?W?Cobb  Patrick?M?Crill
Institution:(1) Environmental Studies Program, Department of Earth and Environment, Mount Holyoke College, 50 College Street, 01075 South Hadley, MA, USA;(2) Department of Bioresource Engineering, Oregon State University, 116 Gilmore Hall, 97331 Corvallis, OR, USA;(3) Complex Systems Research Center, Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space, University of New Hampshire, 03824 Durham, NH, USA;(4) Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Mount Holyoke College, 50 College Street, 01075 South Hadley, MA, USA;(5) Department of Geology and Geochemistry, University of Stockholm, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
Abstract:We used five analytical approaches to compare net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of carbon dioxide (CO2) from automated and manual static chambers in a peatland, and found the methods comparable. Once per week we sampled manually from 10 collars with a closed chamber system using a LiCor 6200 portable photosynthesis system, and simulated four photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) levels using shrouds. Ten automated chambers sampled CO2 flux every 3 h with a LiCor 6252 infrared gas analyzer. Results of the five comparisons showed (1) NEE measurements made from May to August, 2001 by the manual and automated chambers had similar ranges: −10.8 to 12.7 μmol CO2 m−2 s−1 and −17.2 to 13.1 μmol CO2 m−2 s−1, respectively. (2) When sorted into four PAR regimes and adjusted for temperature (respiration was measured under different temperature regimes), mean NEE did not differ significantly between the chambers (p < 0.05). (3) Chambers were not significantly different in regression of ln( − respiration) on temperature. (4) But differences were found in the PAR vs. NEE relationship with manual chambers providing higher maximum gross photosynthesis estimates (GPmax), and slower uptake of CO2 at low PAR (α) even after temperature adjustment. (5) Due to the high variability in chamber characteristics, we developed an equation that includes foliar biomass, water table, temperature, and PAR, to more directly compare automated and manual NEE. Comparing fitted parameters did not identify new differences between the chambers. These complementary chamber techniques offer a unique opportunity to assess the variability and uncertainty in CO2 flux measurements.
Keywords:Automated chambers  Chamber comparison  CO2 flux  Fen  Net ecosystem CO2 exchange  Wetland
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号