Meng Kong , Farhana Ferdous Mitu , Søren O. Petersen , Poul Erik Lærke , Diego Abalos , Peter Sørensen , Andreas Brændholt , Sander Bruun , Jørgen Eriksen , Christian Dold
{"title":"A comparison of chamber-based methods for measuring N2O emissions from arable soils","authors":"Meng Kong , Farhana Ferdous Mitu , Søren O. Petersen , Poul Erik Lærke , Diego Abalos , Peter Sørensen , Andreas Brændholt , Sander Bruun , Jørgen Eriksen , Christian Dold","doi":"10.1016/j.agrformet.2025.110591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Static chamber-based flux measurements with gas chromatography are commonly used to estimate nitrous oxide (N<sub>2</sub>O) emissions from arable soils. The LI-COR 7820 N<sub>2</sub>O/H<sub>2</sub>O (LI-7820) enables higher-frequency in situ measurements, but side-by-side comparisons with traditional methods are limited. To address this gap, we compared non-steady-state chamber methods including non-flow-through (NFT) and flow-through (FT) chamber methods under field and laboratory conditions with plant cover or bare soil. The LI-7820 was used with the LI-8200S smart chamber (FT-1: ⌀ 20 cm) and a self-built chamber (FT-2: 60 × 60 cm), and compared to differently sized NFTs (1–4: 75 × 75, 27 × 37, 60 × 60, and ⌀ 20 cm) with manual sampling with gas chromatography. Field experiments showed high RMSE for daily N<sub>2</sub>O fluxes within 20 days after fertilizer application between FT-1 and NFTs, particularly for maize and spring barley (183 and 214 μg N<sub>2</sub>O-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>), which dropped sharply after 20 days (47 and 54 μg N<sub>2</sub>O-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>, respectively). FT-2 and NFT-3 for pastures had lower RMSE and MAE, both below 40 μg N<sub>2</sub>O-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>. In the incubation experiment, bare soil showed smaller error values, remaining below 26 μg N<sub>2</sub>O-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>. Significant differences were observed between the cumulative N<sub>2</sub>O emissions measured with NFTs and FT-1, while differences were not significant between NFT-3 and FT-2. Several factors may explain these differences. The smaller chamber dimensions of FT-1 may influence water and nitrogen distribution and constrain the capture of spatial heterogeneity, while NFTs could be affected by prolonged deployment times and in-chamber pressure changes. Furthermore, the lack of water-vapor correction in NFTs, unlike the LI-7820, contributed to discrepancies between methods. Understanding these nuances including the impact of the chamber design, is essential for enhancing the comparability of N<sub>2</sub>O emissions and getting closer to achieving unbiased measurements of the true flux.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50839,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","volume":"370 ","pages":"Article 110591"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192325002114","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Static chamber-based flux measurements with gas chromatography are commonly used to estimate nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from arable soils. The LI-COR 7820 N2O/H2O (LI-7820) enables higher-frequency in situ measurements, but side-by-side comparisons with traditional methods are limited. To address this gap, we compared non-steady-state chamber methods including non-flow-through (NFT) and flow-through (FT) chamber methods under field and laboratory conditions with plant cover or bare soil. The LI-7820 was used with the LI-8200S smart chamber (FT-1: ⌀ 20 cm) and a self-built chamber (FT-2: 60 × 60 cm), and compared to differently sized NFTs (1–4: 75 × 75, 27 × 37, 60 × 60, and ⌀ 20 cm) with manual sampling with gas chromatography. Field experiments showed high RMSE for daily N2O fluxes within 20 days after fertilizer application between FT-1 and NFTs, particularly for maize and spring barley (183 and 214 μg N2O-N m−2 h−1), which dropped sharply after 20 days (47 and 54 μg N2O-N m−2 h−1, respectively). FT-2 and NFT-3 for pastures had lower RMSE and MAE, both below 40 μg N2O-N m−2 h−1. In the incubation experiment, bare soil showed smaller error values, remaining below 26 μg N2O-N m−2 h−1. Significant differences were observed between the cumulative N2O emissions measured with NFTs and FT-1, while differences were not significant between NFT-3 and FT-2. Several factors may explain these differences. The smaller chamber dimensions of FT-1 may influence water and nitrogen distribution and constrain the capture of spatial heterogeneity, while NFTs could be affected by prolonged deployment times and in-chamber pressure changes. Furthermore, the lack of water-vapor correction in NFTs, unlike the LI-7820, contributed to discrepancies between methods. Understanding these nuances including the impact of the chamber design, is essential for enhancing the comparability of N2O emissions and getting closer to achieving unbiased measurements of the true flux.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology is an international journal for the publication of original articles and reviews on the inter-relationship between meteorology, agriculture, forestry, and natural ecosystems. Emphasis is on basic and applied scientific research relevant to practical problems in the field of plant and soil sciences, ecology and biogeochemistry as affected by weather as well as climate variability and change. Theoretical models should be tested against experimental data. Articles must appeal to an international audience. Special issues devoted to single topics are also published.
Typical topics include canopy micrometeorology (e.g. canopy radiation transfer, turbulence near the ground, evapotranspiration, energy balance, fluxes of trace gases), micrometeorological instrumentation (e.g., sensors for trace gases, flux measurement instruments, radiation measurement techniques), aerobiology (e.g. the dispersion of pollen, spores, insects and pesticides), biometeorology (e.g. the effect of weather and climate on plant distribution, crop yield, water-use efficiency, and plant phenology), forest-fire/weather interactions, and feedbacks from vegetation to weather and the climate system.