...
首页> 外文期刊>Global change biology >Forest ecosystem respiration estimated from eddy covariance and chamber measurements under high turbulence and substantial tree mortality from bark beetles
【24h】

Forest ecosystem respiration estimated from eddy covariance and chamber measurements under high turbulence and substantial tree mortality from bark beetles

机译:在湍流和树皮甲虫大量树木死亡的情况下,通过涡度协方差和腔室测量值估算森林生态系统的呼吸

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Eddy covariance nighttime fluxes are uncertain due to potential measurement biases. Many studies report eddy covariance nighttime flux lower than flux from extrapolated chamber measurements, despite corrections for low turbulence. We compared eddy covariance and chamber estimates of ecosystem respiration at the GLEES Ameriflux site over seven growing seasons under high turbulence [summer night mean friction velocity (u*)=0.7ms(-1)], during which bark beetles killed or infested 85% of the aboveground respiring biomass. Chamber-based estimates of ecosystem respiration during the growth season, developed from foliage, wood, and soil CO2 efflux measurements, declined 35% after 85% of the forest basal area had been killed or impaired by bark beetles (from 7.1 +/- 0.22molm(-2)s(-1) in 2005 to 4.6 +/- 0.16molm(-2)s(-1) in 2011). Soil efflux remained at 3.3molm(-2)s(-1) throughout the mortality, while the loss of live wood and foliage and their respiration drove the decline of the chamber estimate. Eddy covariance estimates of fluxes at night remained constant over the same period, 3.0molm(-2)s(-1) for both 2005 (intact forest) and 2011 (85% basal area killed or impaired). Eddy covariance fluxes were lower than chamber estimates of ecosystem respiration (60% lower in 2005, and 32% in 2011), but the mean night estimates from the two techniques were correlated within a year (r(2) from 0.18 to 0.60). The difference between the two techniques was not the result of inadequate turbulence, because the results were robust to a u* filter of >0.7ms(-1). The decline in the average seasonal difference between the two techniques was strongly correlated with overstory leaf area (r(2)=0.92). The discrepancy between methods of respiration estimation should be resolved to have confidence in ecosystem carbon flux estimates.
机译:由于潜在的测量偏差,涡度协方差夜间通量不确定。许多研究报告,尽管对低湍流进行了校正,但涡流协方差夜间通量仍低于外推室测量的通量。我们比较了在高湍流[夏夜平均摩擦速度(u *)= 0.7ms(-1)]下七个生长季节在GLEES Ameriflux站点上涡流的协方差和对生态系统呼吸的室估计,在此期间树皮甲虫被杀死或受感染率为85%地上呼吸的生物量。根据叶,木材和土壤CO2排放量的测量,基于生长室的生态系统呼吸的估计值在85%的森林基础面积被树皮甲虫杀死或破坏后下降了35%(从7.1 +/- 0.22开始) 2005年的molm(-2)s(-1)到2011年的4.6 +/- 0.16molm(-2)s(-1))。在整个死亡过程中,土壤外流一直保持在3.3molm(-2)s(-1),而活木和叶子的损失以及它们的呼吸作用导致分庭估算的下降。夜间通量的涡流协方差估计在同期保持不变,2005年(完整森林)和2011年(85%的基础面积被杀死或受损)均为3.0molm(-2)s(-1)。涡度协方差通量低于生态系统呼吸的室估计值(2005年降低60%,2011年降低32%),但是两种技术的平均夜间估计值在一年内相关(r(2)从0.18到0.60)。两种技术之间的差异不是湍流不足的结果,因为结果对于> 0.7ms(-1)的u *滤波器具有鲁棒性。两种技术之间的平均季节性差异的下降与叶的过度生长期密切相关(r(2)= 0.92)。应该解决呼吸估计方法之间的差异,以对生态系统碳通量估计有信心。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号