U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Soil and Water Management Research: St. Paul, MN
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area St. Paul, Minnesota Soil and Water Management Research Research Publications at this Location





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Title:   Author  item
                                            Venterea, Rodney

                                                         - *Rod*
  Submitted to: Soil Science Society of America Journal
                                    Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
                                    Publication Acceptance Date: 3/1/2013
                                    Publication  Date: 5/1/2013
                                    Citation: Venterea, R.T. 2013. Theoretical comparison of advanced methods for calculating nitrous oxide fluxes using non-steady state chambers. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 77(3):709-720.Interpretive Summary: Several flux-calculation (FC) schemes are available for determining soil-to-atmosphere emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O) and other trace gases using data from non-steady-state flux chambers. Recently developed methods claim to provide more accuracy in estimating the true pre-deployment flux (f0) compared with previous methods. This study used numerical modeling to evaluate performance of the NDFE, CBC, and HMR methods for estimating soil N2O efflux. A diffusion-reaction model having fewer restrictions than previous models was used to simulate a range of biophysical conditions affecting chamber data.  Two FC methods having similar theoretical foundations but differing in their implementation procedures responded with dramatically different sensitivities to violation of their underlying assumptions. The NDFE method tended to substantially over-estimate f0 as lateral gas diffusion and soil N2O uptake increased. The CBC method was nearly insensitive to these processes except when their magnitude increased above certain levels. The HMR method was also less sensitive than NDFE and entirely insensitive to chamber leakage. Thus, the CBC and HMR methods performed more reliably overall compared with NDFE, but each has their drawbacks. The CBC method utilizes correction factors calculated from measured soil parameters which introduce additional sources of error.  Sensitivity analysis showed that soil bulk density was the most critical parameter and that errors increased with longer chamber deployment periods (DP). The HMR method consistently under-estimated f0, and to an increasing extent as DP increased. The results are used to highlight the unique advantages and limitations of each method which need to be considered in selecting among methods and in designing measurement protocols. These findings will be useful to researchers studying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agricultural production systems by promoting the development and implementation of more accurate measurement protocols, and will help scientists and policy-makers in developing more accurate GHG assessments at the field, national, and global scales.
                                Technical Abstract: Several flux-calculation (FC) schemes are available for determining soil-to-atmosphere emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O) and other trace gases using data from non-steady-state flux chambers. Recently developed methods claim to provide more accuracy in estimating the true pre-deployment flux (f0) compared with previous methods. This study used numerical modeling to evaluate performance of the NDFE, CBC, and HMR methods for estimating soil N2O efflux. A diffusion-reaction model having fewer restrictions than previous models was used to simulate a range of biophysical conditions affecting chamber data. Two FC methods having similar theoretical foundations but differing in their implementation procedures responded with dramatically different sensitivities to violation of their underlying assumptions. The NDFE method tended to substantially over-estimate f0 as lateral gas diffusion and soil N2O uptake increased. The CBC method was nearly insensitive to these processes except when their magnitude increased above certain levels. The HMR method was also less sensitive than NDFE and entirely insensitive to chamber leakage. Thus, the CBC and HMR methods performed more reliably overall compared with NDFE, but each has their drawbacks. The CBC method utilizes correction factors calculated from measured soil parameters which introduce additional sources of error.  Sensitivity analysis showed that soil bulk density was the most critical parameter and that errors increased with longer chamber deployment periods (DP). The HMR method consistently under-estimated f0, and to an increasing extent as DP increased. The results are used to highlight the unique advantages and limitations of each method which need to be considered in selecting among methods and in designing measurement protocols.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov