Does anybody have experience with daily N2O and/or CO2 emission flux measurements using a closed chamber method? I will be thankful for any information supplied or papers suggested.
Dear Elena,
Search for papers from Per Weslien and Leif Klemedtsson from University of Gothenburg in Sweden. They have a long experience of N2O chamber measurements and quite a few papers out on the topic.
Good luck!
Patrik
Dear Elena,
Search for papers from Per Weslien and Leif Klemedtsson from University of Gothenburg in Sweden. They have a long experience of N2O chamber measurements and quite a few papers out on the topic.
Good luck!
Patrik
Hi Elena,
A new paper by Mari Pihlatie and coworkers is under review in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology (a revised version has been submitted, so hopefully it will get accepted soon now). We used the system described in Pumpanen et al 2004 to also test chamber measurements of CH4 and N2O (and CO2). The results for N2O were not really good, and therefore omitted from the paper (which focusses on CH4 mainly actually).
This is the abstract of the paper:
The static chamber method (non-flow-through-non-steady-state chambers) is the most common method to measure fluxes of methane (CH4) from soils. Laboratory comparisons to quantify errors resulting from chamber design, operation and flux calculation methods are rare. We tested 15 chambers against 5 flux levels (FL) ranging from 90 to 2300 μg CH4 m-2 h-153 . The measurements were conducted on a calibration tank using three quartz sand types with soil porosities of 53% (dry fine sand, S1), 47% (dry coarse sand, S2), and 33% (wetted fine sand, S3). The chambers tested ranged from 0.06 to 1.8 m in height, and 0.02 to 0.195 m3 56 in volume, 7 of them were equipped with a fan, and 1 with a vent-tube. We applied linear and exponential flux calculation methods to the chamber data and compared these chamber fluxes to the reference fluxes from the calibration tank. The chambers underestimated the reference fluxes by on average 33% by the linear flux calculation method (Rlin), whereas the chamber fluxes calculated by the exponential flux calculation method (Rexp) did not significantly differ from the reference fluxes (p
Dear Elena,
I suggest that you check Eric Davidson's (Woods Hole Research Center) papers.
Gook luck!
Steel Vasconcelos
Dear Elena,
This is a good article explaining the calculation of gaseous emissions using static chambers.
Good luck!
Adviento-Borbe, M.A.A., Wheeler, E.F., Brown, N.E., Topper, P.A., Graves, R.E., Ishler, V.A. & Varga, G.A. (2010) Ammonia and Greenhouse Gas Flux from Manure in Freestall Barn with Dairy Cows on Precision Fed Rations. Transactions of the Asabe, 53, 1251-1266.
Helllo Elena,
The document listed below by the USDA covers the theory and practice of field gas sampling and even has a detailed description on how to go about making chambers. It assimilates material from a number of authors and is one of the most useful I have come accross;
Chapter 3. Chamber-Based Trace Gas Flux Measurements4 November 2010 (replaces original version of April 2003)
USDA-ARS GRACEnet Project Protocols
Dear Elena,
I forgot two things:
I can recommend a paper by Eric Davidson in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology that discusses potential problems with chamber measurements in general (Davidson et al (2002) - Minimizing artifacts and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration).
I have experience of chamber measurements (manual and automated) of CO2 (including 14CO2), CH4 and N2O and if you have any specific questions regarding measurements etc, please feel free to conatct me.
Best regards
Patrik
I would look towards marine science I have some experience with marine chambers both at the sediment/water interface and the water/atmosphere interface. I know that the techniques wont be directly applicable but you should be able to take a lot away from this because there is a huge amount of literature on this subject in the marine science context
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Agricultural Science