Soil properties differently influence estimates of soil CO2 efflux from three chamber-based measurement systems

Abstract.Soil CO2 efflux is a major component of net ecosystem productivity (NEP) of forest systems. Combining data from multiple researchers for larger-scale modeling and assessment will only be valid if their methodologies provide directly comparable results. We conducted a series of laboratory and field tests to assess the presence and magnitude of soil CO2 efflux measurement system × environment interactions. Laboratory comparisons were made with a dynamic, steady-state CO2 flux generation apparatus, wherein gas diffusion drove flux without creating pressure differentials through three artificial soil media of varying air-filled porosity. Under these conditions, two closed systems (Li-6400-09 and SRC-1) exhibited errors that were dependent on physical properties of the artificial media. The open system (ACES) underestimated CO2 flux. However, unlike the two other systems, the ACES results could be corrected with a single calibration equation that was unaffected by physical differences in artificial media. Both scale and rank changes occurred among the measurement systems across four sites. Our work clearly shows that soil CO2 efflux measurement system × environment interactions do occur and can substantially impact estimates of soil CO2 efflux. Until reliable calibration techniques are developed and applied, such interactions make direct comparison of published rates, and C budgets estimated using such rates, difficult.

[1]  Eric A. Davidson,et al.  Minimizing artifacts and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration , 2002 .

[2]  John R. Butnor,et al.  Calibrating soil respiration measures with a dynamic flux apparatus using artificial soil media of varying porosity , 2004 .

[3]  W. Cropper,et al.  The measurement of soil CO2 evolution in situ , 1985, Pedobiologia.

[4]  O. Folorunso,et al.  Spatial Variability of Field‐Measured Denitrification Gas Fluxes , 1984 .

[5]  A. Lindroth,et al.  A Calibration System for Soil Carbon Dioxide‐Efflux Measurement Chambers , 2003 .

[6]  J. Moncrieff,et al.  An improved dynamic chamber technique for measuring CO2 efflux from the surface of soil , 1996 .

[7]  J. Moncrieff,et al.  An open-top chamber for measuring soil respiration and the influence of pressure difference on CO2 efflux measurement , 1998 .

[8]  R. Desjardins,et al.  Comparison of static and dynamic closed chambers for measurement of soil respiration under field conditions , 1992 .

[9]  R. Harrison,et al.  Measuring soil respiration in the field: an automated closed chamber system compared with portable IRGA and alkali absorption methods , 2002 .

[10]  William J. Massman,et al.  High-frequency pressure variations in the vicinity of a surface CO2 flux chamber , 2003 .

[11]  M. Kirschbaum,et al.  Comparison of soda lime and infrared gas analysis techniques for in situ measurement of forest soil respiration , 1997 .

[12]  R. Oren,et al.  Species differences in stomatal control of water loss at the canopy scale in a mature bottomland deciduous forest , 2003 .

[13]  J. Lawrence,et al.  Quantifying CO2 fluxes from soil surfaces to the atmosphere , 2002 .

[14]  M. Kirschbaum,et al.  Discrimination between Betula pendula , Betula pubescens , and their hybrids using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy , 1997 .

[15]  E. Ripley,et al.  A COMPARISON OF METHODS TO MEASURE SOIL RESPIRATION , 1979 .

[16]  Elizabeth Pattey,et al.  Description of a dynamic closed chamber for measuring soil respiration and its comparison with other techniques , 1997 .

[17]  B. Kimball,et al.  Air Turbulence Effects upon Soil Gas Exchange1 , 1971 .

[18]  M. Rayment.  Closed chamber systems underestimate soil CO2 efflux , 2000 .

[19]  Stephanie A. Bohlman,et al.  Seasonal and topographic patterns of forest floor CO(2) efflux from an upland oak forest. , 1993, Tree physiology.

[20]  Paul G. Jarvis,et al.  An improved open chamber system for measuring soil CO2 effluxes in the field , 1997 .

[21]  G. Katul,et al.  WATER BALANCE DELINEATES THE SOIL LAYER IN WHICH MOISTURE AFFECTS CANOPY CONDUCTANCE , 1998 .

[22]  S. Zarnoch,et al.  Effects of temperature and tissue nitrogen on dormant season stem and branch maintenance respiration in a young loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) plantation. , 1998, Tree physiology.

[23]  John M. Norman,et al.  A comparison of six methods for measuring soil‐surface carbon dioxide fluxes , 1997 .

[24]  Bernard T. Bormann,et al.  Biases of Chamber Methods for Measuring Soil CO2 Efflux Demonstrated with a Laboratory Apparatus , 1994 .

[25]  K. Nakane,et al.  Comparison of field methods for measuring soil respiration: a static alkali absorption method and two dynamic closed chamber methods , 2002 .

[26]  Ivan A. Janssens,et al.  Assessing forest soil CO(2) efflux: an in situ comparison of four techniques. , 2000, Tree physiology.

[27]  J. Welles,et al.  Considerations for measuring ground CO2 effluxes with chambers , 2001 .

[28]  J. Magid,et al.  Soil surface CO2 flux as an index of soil respiration in situ: A comparison of two chamber methods , 1996 .

[29]  V. Dantec,et al.  Soil CO2 efflux in a beech forest: comparison of two closed dynamic systems , 1999, Plant and Soil.

[30]  G. Katul,et al.  Reduction of forest floor respiration by fertilization on both carbon dioxide-enriched and reference 17-year-old loblolly pine stands , 2003 .

[31]  Chris A. Maier,et al.  Soil CO 2 evolution and root respiration in 11 year-old Loblolly Pine ( Pinus taeda ) Plantations as Affected by Moisture and Nutrient Availability , 2000 .

[32]  W. Bouten,et al.  A comparison of field methods for measuring soil carbon dioxide evolution: Experiments and simulation , 1991, Plant and Soil.

[33]  F. Conen,et al.  An explanation of linear increases in gas concentration under closed chambers used to measure gas exchange between soil and the atmosphere , 2000 .

[34]  J. Raich,et al.  Comparison of Two Static Chamber Techniques for Determining Carbon Dioxide Efflux from Forest Soils , 1990 .

[35]  P. Hari,et al.  Seasonal patterns of soil CO2 efflux and soil air CO2 concentration in a Scots pine forest: comparison of two chamber techniques , 2003 .

[36]  H. Koizumi,et al.  Examination of four methods for measuring soil respiration , 1997 .