Nitrous oxide emissions from managed grassland: a comparison of eddy covariance and static chamber measurements

被引:81
|
作者
Jones, S. K. [1 ,2 ]
Famulari, D. [1 ]
Di Marco, C. F. [1 ]
Nemitz, E. [1 ]
Skiba, U. M. [1 ]
Rees, R. M. [2 ]
Sutton, M. A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Ecol & Hydrol, Penicuik EH26 QB, Midlothian, Scotland
[2] Scottish Agr Coll, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Midlothian, Scotland
关键词
TUNABLE DIODE-LASER; N2O FLUXES; FERTILIZED GRASSLAND; SPATIAL VARIABILITY; SOIL COMPACTION; N FERTILIZER; EXCHANGE; FIELD; SYSTEMS; PARAMETERS;
D O I
10.5194/amt-4-2179-2011
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
Managed grasslands are known to be an important source of N2O with estimated global losses of 2.5 TgN(2)O-Nyr(-1). Chambers are to date the most widely used method to measure N2O fluxes, but also micrometeorological methods are successfully applied. In this paper we present a comparison of N2O fluxes measured by non-steady state chambers and eddy covariance (EC) (using an ultra-sonic anemometer coupled with a tunable diode laser) from an intensively grazed and fertilised grassland site in South East Scotland. The measurements were taken after fertilisation events in 2003, 2007 and 2008. In four out of six comparison periods, a short-lived increase of N2O emissions was observed after mineral N application, returning to background level within 2-6 days. Highest fluxes were measured by both methods in July 2007 with maximum values of 1438 ng N2O-N m(-2) s(-1) (EC) and 651 ng N2O-N m(-2) s(-1) (chamber method). Negative fluxes above the detection limit were observed in all comparison periods by EC, while with chambers, the recorded negative fluxes were always below detection limit. Median and average fluxes over each period were always positive. Over all 6 comparison periods, 69% of N2O fluxes measured by EC at the time of chamber closure were within the range of the chamber measurements. N2O fluxes measured by EC during the time of chamber closure were not consistently smaller, neither larger, compared to those measured by chambers: this reflects the fact that the different techniques integrate fluxes over different spatial and temporal scales. Large fluxes measured by chambers may be representing local hotspots providing a small contribution to the flux measured by the EC method which integrates over a larger area. The spatial variability from chamber measurements was high, as shown by a coefficient of variation of up to 139 %. No diurnal pattern of N2O fluxes was observed, possibly due to the small diurnal variations of soil temperature. The calculation of cumulative fluxes using different integration methods showed EC data provide generally lower estimates of N2O emissions than chambers.
引用
收藏
页码:2179 / 2194
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Nitrous oxide emission factors from an intensively grazed temperate grassland: A comparison of cumulative emissions determined by eddy covariance and static chamber methods
    Murphy, Rachael M.
    Saunders, Matthew
    Richards, Karl G.
    Krol, Dominika J.
    Gebremichael, Amanuel W.
    Rambaud, James
    Cowan, Nicholas
    Lanigan, Gary J.
    [J]. AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2022, 324
  • [2] Assessing nitrous oxide emissions in time and space with minimal uncertainty using static chambers and eddy covariance from a temperate grassland
    Murphy, R. M.
    Richards, K. G.
    Krol, D. J.
    Gebremichael, A. W.
    Lopez-Sangil, L.
    Rambaud, J.
    Cowan, N.
    Lanigan, G. J.
    Saunders, M.
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2022, 313
  • [3] Multimodel Evaluation of Nitrous Oxide Emissions From an Intensively Managed Grassland
    Fuchs, Kathrin
    Merbold, Lutz
    Buchmann, Nina
    Bretscher, Daniel
    Brilli, Lorenzo
    Fitton, Nuala
    Topp, Cairistiona F. E.
    Klumpp, Katja
    Lieffering, Mark
    Martin, Raphael
    Newton, Paul C. D.
    Rees, Robert M.
    Rolinski, Susanne
    Smith, Pete
    Snow, Val
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-BIOGEOSCIENCES, 2020, 125 (01)
  • [4] A comparison of nitrous oxide and ammonia fluxes from managed grassland
    Di Marco, C
    Anderson, M
    Milford, C
    Skiba, U
    Sutton, MA
    Weston, K
    [J]. CONTROLLING NITROGEN FLOWS AND LOSSES, 2004, : 309 - 310
  • [5] Comparison between static chamber and tunable diode laser-based eddy covariance techniques for measuring nitrous oxide fluxes from a cotton field
    Wang, Kai
    Zheng, Xunhua
    Pihlatie, Mari
    Vesala, Timo
    Liu, Chunyan
    Haapanala, Sami
    Mammarella, Ivan
    Rannik, Ullar
    Liu, Huizhi
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2013, 171 : 9 - 19
  • [6] Earthworms can increase nitrous oxide emissions from managed grassland: A field study
    Lubbers, I. M.
    Gonzalez, E. Lopez
    Hummelink, E. W. J.
    Van Groenigen, J. W.
    [J]. AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2013, 174 : 40 - 48
  • [7] Nitrous oxide emissions from grazed grassland
    Oenema, O
    Velthof, GL
    Yamulki, S
    Jarvis, SC
    [J]. SOIL USE AND MANAGEMENT, 1997, 13 (04) : 288 - 295
  • [8] Methane flux measurements in rice by static flux chamber and eddy covariance
    Reba, Michele L.
    Fong, Bryant N.
    Rijal, Ishara
    Adviento-Borbe, M. Arlene
    Chiu, Yin-Lin
    Massey, Joseph H.
    [J]. AGROSYSTEMS GEOSCIENCES & ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 3 (01)
  • [9] Standardisation of eddy-covariance flux measurements of methane and nitrous oxide
    Nemitz, Eiko
    Mammarella, Ivan
    Ibrom, Andreas
    Aurela, Mika
    Burba, George G.
    Dengel, Sigrid
    Gielen, Bert
    Grelle, Achim
    Heinesch, Bernard
    Herbst, Mathias
    Hortnagl, Lukas
    Klemedtsson, Leif
    Lindroth, Anders
    Lohila, Annalea
    McDermitt, Dayle K.
    Meier, Philip
    Merbold, Lutz
    Nelson, David
    Nicolini, Giacomo
    Nilsson, Mats B.
    Peltola, Olli
    Rinne, Janne
    Zahniser, Mark
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL AGROPHYSICS, 2018, 32 (04) : 517 - +
  • [10] Eddy-covariance measurements of nitrous oxide fluxes above a city
    Famulari, Daniela
    Nemitz, Elko
    Di Marco, Chiara
    Phillips, Gavin J.
    Thomas, Rick
    House, Emily
    Fowler, David
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2010, 150 (06) : 786 - 793