## 3 Results
### Storm Surges on Carbon Fluxes and Meteorological Variables  
The boxplot analysis showed that, during the storm surge, carbon uptake decreased, as indicated by an increase in NEE and a decline in GPP and Reco, and the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn post-hoc tests revealed distinct patterns of storm phase impacts at both sites (Figure 4). The reduction in carbon assimilation was more pronounced at the HK site, where NEE increased significantly from \(-1.39\) to 1.03 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) during the storm surge (\(p<0.01\)), experiencing a stronger storm impact. Methane emissions (CH4) showed relatively minor but significant fluctuations during the storm (\(p<0.01\)), with a slight decrease  
Figure 3: Daily mean variations of NEE (blue bar) and CH4 (yellow bar) flux at restored (PYR site, (**a**)) and natural (HK site, (**b**)) mangrove forests. The red text indicates the number, name, and landfall date of each storm surge.  
from 0.05 to 0.04 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) and from 0.03 to 0.02 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) at the HK and PYR sites, respectively. After the storm, carbon uptake increased, with GPP and Reco showing signs of recovery, although they had not yet returned to pre-storm levels. In contrast, CH\({}_{4}\) emissions increased post-storm, exceeding pre-storm levels, with mean CH\({}_{4}\) fluxes rising to 0.06 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) at the HK site and 0.03 mg umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) at the PYR site. These findings suggest that storm surges significantly disrupt carbon flux dynamics in mangrove ecosystems, with lingering effects on both CO\({}_{2}\) and CH\({}_{4}\) fluxes even after the storm subsides.  
The violin plots illustrate significant differences in environmental responses between the two mangrove sites, HK (natural mangrove forest) and PYR (restored mangrove forest), across different storm surge phases (Figure 5). Notable shifts were observed in light and temperature conditions during the storm period. At both sites, PPFD declined significantly during the storm, with median values dropping from 48.59 to 12.66 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) at the PYR site and from 32.88 to 11.29 umol m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) at the HK site, but the after-storm phase showed a gradual recovery (Figure 5a). Both sites exhibited similar post-storm recovery trends, with gradual stabilization of temperature (TA, TS) in the aftermath of the event (Figure 4b,c). The VPD distributions revealed a marked decrease during the storm, which may be due to increased atmospheric moisture and reduced evaporative demand during extreme weather conditions (Figure 5d). After the storm, VPD values increased, indicating a post-storm drying effect as wind speeds and solar radiation levels recovered. Relative humidity (RH) demonstrated an inverse relationship with VPD, peaking during the storm phase at both sites due to increased atmospheric moisture (Figure 5e). However, RH at the PYR site exhibited great variability, with a minimum value of 40.91% and a maximum value of 97.34%. The post-storm declines in RH at both sites. Wind speed (WS) peaked  
Figure 4: Distribution of (**a**) NEE, (**b**) Reco, (**c**) GPP, and (**d**) CH\({}_{4}\) flux at two mangrove sites—PYR (restored mangrove forest, blue bar) and HK (natural mangrove forest, orange bar)—across three storm surge phases: before, during, and after. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between phases within each site (\(p<0.01\)). Letters for PYR (a–c) and HK (d–f) are assigned independently.  
during the storm, particularly at the HK site, increased sharply during the storm at both sites but gradually decreased after the storm (Figure 5f).