Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-swqlm Total loading time: 0.456 Render date: 2021-12-01T11:06:51.160Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

2 - Field measurements of soil respiration: principles and constraints, potentials and limitations of different methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2010

Werner L. Kutsch
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Biogeochemie, Jena
Michael Bahn
Affiliation:
Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, Austria
Andreas Heinemeyer
Affiliation:
Stockholm Environmental Institute, University of York
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Soil respiration is a major component in the carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems and has been measured in the field for more than eight decades. In this chapter, we will describe the measurement of soil CO2 efflux at the soil surface that can be considered as equivalent to soil CO2 production when integrated over long time periods (week, month or season). At shorter time scales the transport of CO2 may uncouple the soil CO2 efflux from its production inside the soil. Different methods have been developed to measure this efflux. These methods can affect the object being measured by disturbing the biochemical processes involved in CO2 production, the physical properties influencing CO2 movement towards the soil surface, or by changing the environmental conditions in the soil. Therefore, soil respiration measurements in the field are one of the most difficult among the ecosystem flux measurements. So far, no single method has been established as the standard but comparisons, which give important indications on their accuracy, have been performed. The choice of the measurement methodology is not limited to that of a measurement system. The experimenter has to elaborate a protocol depending on the temporal and spatial scales studied. In this chapter, we will describe the most commonly used methodologies for measuring soil CO2 efflux and present their history, principles and constraints (Section 2.2).

Type
Chapter
Information
Soil Carbon Dynamics
An Integrated Methodology
, pp. 16 - 33
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albertsen, M. (1979) Carbon dioxide balance in the gas-filled part of the unsaturated zone, demonstrated at a Podzol. Z Pflanzen Bodenk, 142, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubinet, M., Grelle, A., Ibrom, A.et al. (2000) Estimates of the annual net carbon and water exchange of forests: the EUROFLUX methodology. Advances in Ecological Research, 30, 113–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bain, W. G., Hutyra, L., Patterson, D. C.et al. (2005) Wind-induced error in the measurement of soil respiration using closed dynamic chambers. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 131, 225–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldocchi, D. D. and Vogel, C. A. (1996) Energy and CO2 flux densities above and below a temperate broad-leaved forest and boreal pine forest. Tree Physiology, 16, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, T. A., Hartog, G., Neumann, H. H.et al. (1996) Annual cycles of water vapour and carbon dioxide fluxes in and above a boreal aspen forest. Global Change Biology, 2, 219–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butnor, J. R., Johnsen, K. H. and Maier, C. A. (2005) Soil properties differently influence estimates of soil CO2 efflux from three chamber-based measurement systems. Biogeochemistry, 73, 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conen, F. and Smith, K. A. (1998) A re-examination of closed flux chamber methods for the measurement of trace gas emissions from soils to the atmosphere. European Journal of Soil Science, 49, 701–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crill, P. M. (1991) Seasonal pattern cycles of methane uptake and carbon dioxide release by a temperate woodland soil. Global Biogeochemistry, 5, 319–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, E. A., Savage, K., Verchot, L. V. and Navarro, R. (2002) Minimizing artifacts and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 113, 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jong, E., Redmann, R. E. and Ripley, E. A. (1979) A comparison of methods to measure soil respiration. Soil Science, 127, 300–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, N. T. (1974) A moving chamber design for measuring soil respiration rates. Oikos, 25, 97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, N. T. (1982) The use of soda-lime for measuring respiration rates in terrestrial ecosystems. Pedobiologia, 23, 321–30.Google Scholar
Edwards, N. T. and Sollins, P. (1973) Continuous measurements of carbon dioxide evolution from partitioned forest floor components. Ecology, 54, 406–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, C. and Moncrieff, J. B. (1996) An improved dynamic chamber technique for measuring CO2 efflux from the surface of soil. Functional Ecology, 10, 297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, C. and Moncrieff, J. B. (1998) An open-top chamber for measuring soil respiration and the influence of pressure difference on CO2 efflux measurement. Functional Ecology, 12, 319–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, C. and Moncrieff, J. B. (1999) A model for soil CO2 production and transport 1: Model development. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 95, 225–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez, I. J. and Kosian, P. A. (1987) Soil air carbon dioxide concentrations in a New England spruce-fir forest. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 51, 261–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freijer, J. I. and Leffelaar, P. A. (1996) Adapted Fick's law applied to soil respiration. Water Resources Research, 32, 791–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, F. and Yates, S. R. (1998) Laboratory study of closed and dynamic flux chambers: experimental results and implications for field application. Journal of Geophysical Research, 103, 26115–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goulden, M. L. and Crill, P. M. (1997) Automated measurements of CO2 exchange at the moss surface of a black spruce forest. Tree Physiology, 17, 537–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grogan, P. (1998) CO2 flux measurement using soda lime: correction for water formed during CO2 adsorption. Ecology, 79, 1467–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haber, W. (1958) Ökologische Untersuchung der Bodenatmung. Mit einer Übersicht über frühere Bearbeitungen, insbesondere deren Methoden. Flora, 146, 109–57.Google Scholar
Hanson, P. J., Edwards, N. T., Garten, C. T. and Andrews, J. A. (2000) Separating root and soil microbial contributions to soil respiration: a review of methods and observations. Biogeochemistry, 48, 115–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, R. W., Striegl, R. G., Russell, T. F., Hutchinson, G. L. and Livingston, G. P. (1996) Numerical evaluation of static-chamber measurements of soil-atmosphere gas exchange: identification of physical processes. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 60, 740–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iritz, Z., Lindroth, A. and Gärdenäs, A. (1997) Open ventilated chamber system for measurements of H2O and CO2 fluxes from the soil surface. Soil Technology, 10, 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssens, I. A. and Ceulemans, R. (1998) Spatial variability in forest soil CO2 efflux assessed with a calibrated soda lime technique. Ecology Letters, 1, 95–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssens, I. A., Kowalski, A. S., Longdoz, B. and Ceulemans, R. (2000) Assessing forest soil CO2 efflux: an in situ comparison of four techniques. Tree Physiology, 20, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssens, I. A., Kowalski, A. S. and Ceulemans, R. (2001) Forest floor CO2 fluxes estimated by eddy covariance and chamber-based model. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 106, 61–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jassal, R. S., Black, T. A., Drewitt, G. B.et al. (2004) A model of the production and transport of CO2 in soil: predicting soil CO2 concentrations and CO2 efflux from a forest floor. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 124, 219–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanemasu, E. T., Powers, W. L. and Sij, J. W. (1974) Field chamber measurements of CO2 efflux from soil surface. Soil Science, 118, 233–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelliher, F. M., Lloyd, J., Arneth, A.et al. (1999) Carbon dioxide efflux density from the floor of a central Siberian pine forest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 94, 217–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koepf, H. (1953a) Die Verwendung eines Ultrarotabsorptionsschreibers (URAS) für die kontinuierliche Registrierung der Bodenatmung im Freiland. Landwirtschaftliche Forschung, 5, 54–62.Google Scholar
Koepf, H. (1953b) Die Temperatur/Zeit – Abhängigkeit der Bodenatmung. Experimentelle Untersuchung unter Verwendung des Ultrarotabsorptionsschreibers (URAS). Zeitung für Pflanzenernährung, Düngung, Bodenkunde, 61, 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koepf, H. (1954) Die biologische Aktivität des Bodens und ihre experimentelle Kennzeichnung. Zeitung für Pflanzenernährung, Düngung, Bodenkunde, 64, 138–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutsch, W. L. (1996) Untersuchung zur Bodenatmung zweier Ackerstandorte im Bereich der Bornhöveder Seenkette. EcoSys. Beiträge zur Ökosystemforschung, Vol. Suppl. 16. Kiel: Verein zur Förderung der Ökosystemforschung.Google Scholar
Kutsch, W. L. and Kappen, L. (1997) Aspects of carbon and nitrogen cycling in soils of the Bornhoved lake district. 2. Modelling the influence of temperature increase on soil respiration and organic carbon content in arable soils under different managements. Biogeochemistry, 39, 207–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kutsch, W. L., Staack, A., Wötzel, J., Middelhoff, U. and Kappen, L. (2001) Field measurements of root respiration and total soil respiration in an alder forest. New Phytologist, 150, 157–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, B. E., Baldocchi, D. D. and Anthoni, P. M. (1999) Below-canopy and soil CO2 fluxes in a ponderosa pine forest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 94, 171–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingston, G. P. and Hutchinson, G. L. (1995) Enclosure-based measurement of trace gas exchange: applications and sources of error. In Methods in Ecology, Biogenic Trace Gases: Measuring Emissions from Soil and Water, ed. Matson, P. A. and Harris, R. C.. Cambridge: Blackwell Science, pp. 14–50.Google Scholar
Longdoz, B., Yernaux, M. and Aubinet, M. (2000) Soil CO2 efflux measurements in a mixed forest: impact of chamber disturbances, spatial variability and seasonal evolution. Global Change Biology, 6, 907–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lund, C. P., Riley, W. J., Pierce, L. L. and Field, C. B. (1999) The effects of chamber pressurization on soil-surface CO2 flux and the implications for NEE measurements under elevated CO2. Global Change Biology, 5, 269–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundegårdh, H. (1922) Neue Apparate zur Analyse des Kohlensäuregehalts der Luft. Biochem Z, 131, 109.Google Scholar
Lundegårdh, H. (1924) Der Kreislauf der Kohlensäure in der Natur. Ein Beitrag zur Pflanzenökologie und zur Landwirtschaftlichen Düngungslehre. Jena: Verlag von Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Lundegårdh, H. (1927) Carbon dioxide evolution of soil and crop growth. Soil Science, 23, 417–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makkonen, K. and Helmisaari, H. S. (1999) Assessing fine-root biomass and production in a Scots pine stand: comparison of soil core and root ingrowth core methods. Plant Soil, 210, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mykeebust, M. C., Hipps, L. E. and Ryel, R. J. (2008) Comparison of eddy covariance, chamber, and gradient methods of measuring soil CO2 efflux in an annual semi-arid grass, Bromus tectorum. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 148, 1894–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nay, M. S., Mattson, K. G. and Bormann, B. T. (1994) Biases of chamber methods for measuring soil CO2 efflux demonstrated with a laboratory apparatus. Ecology, 75, 2460–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ngao, J., Longdoz, B., Perrin, D.et al. (2006) Cross-calibration functions for soil CO2 efflux measurement systems. Annals of Forest Science, 63, 477–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, J. M., Garcia, R. and Verma, S. B. (1992) Soil surface CO2 fluxes and the carbon budget of a grassland. Journal of Geophysical Research, 97, 18845–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, J. M., Kucharik, C. J., Gower, S. T.et al. (1997) A comparison of six methods for measuring soil-surface carbon dioxide fluxes. Journal of Geophysical Research – Atmospheres, 102, 28771–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pihlatie, M., Pumpanen, J., Rinne, J.et al. (2007) Gas concentration driven fluxes of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide in boreal forest soil. Tellus Series B – Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 59, 458–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porkka, O. H. (1931) Über eine neue Methode zur Bestimmung der Bodenatmung. Ann Soc Zool-Bot Fenn Yanamo, 15, 101–18.Google Scholar
Pumpanen, J., Ilvesniemi, H., Keronen, P.et al. (2001) An open chamber system for measuring soil surface CO2 efflux: analysis of error sources related to the chamber system. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106, 7985–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pumpanen, J., Ilvesniemi, H., Peramaki, M. and Hari, P. (2003a) Seasonal patterns of soil CO2 efflux and soil air CO2 concentration in a Scots pine forest: comparison of two chamber techniques. Global Change Biology, 9, 371–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pumpanen, J., Ilvesniemi, H. and Hari, P. (2003b) A process-based model for predicting soil carbon dioxide efflux and concentration. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 67, 402–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pumpanen, J., Kolari, P., Ilvesniemi, H.et al. (2004) Comparison of different chamber techniques for measuring soil CO2 efflux. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 123, 159–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raich, J. W., Bowden, R. D. and Steudler, P. A. (1990) Comparison of two static chamber techniques for determining carbon dioxide efflux from forest soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 54, 1754–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayment, M. B. (2000) Closed chamber systems underestimate soil CO2 efflux. European Journal of Soil Science, 51, 107–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayment, M. B. and Jarvis, P. G. (1997) An improved open chamber system for measuring soil CO2 effluxes in the field. Journal of Geophysical Research, 102, 28779–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochette, P., Gregorich, E. G. and Desjardins, R. L. (1992) Comparison of static and dynamic closed chambers for measurement of soil respiration under field conditions. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 72, 605–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochette, P., Ellert, B., Gregorich, E. G.et al. (1997) Description of a dynamic closed chamber for measuring soil respiration and its comparison with other techniques. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 77, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, K. E. and Davidson, E. A. (2003) A comparison of manual and automated systems for soil CO2 flux measurements: trade-offs between spatial and temporal resolution. Journal of Experimental Botany, 54, 891–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartzkopf, S. H. (1978) An open chamber technique for the measurement of carbon dioxide evolution from soils. Ecology, 59, 1062–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shibistova, O., Lloyd, J., Zrazhevskaya, G.et al. (2002) Annual ecosystem respiration budget for a Pinus sylvestris stand in central Siberia. Tellus Series B, 54, 568–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Striegl, R. G., McConnaughey, T. A., Thorstenson, D. C., Weeks, E. P. and Woodward, J. C. (1992) Consumption of atmospheric methane by desert soils. Nature, 337, 145–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suarez, D. L. and Šimunek, J. (1993) Modeling of carbon dioxide transport and production in soil 2. Parameter selection, sensitivity analysis and comparison of model predictions to field data. Water Resources Research, 29, 499–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takle, E. S., Massman, W. J., Brandle, J. R.et al. (2004) Influence of high-frequency ambient pressure pumping on carbon dioxide efflux from soil. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 124, 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, J., Misson, L., Gershenson, A., Cheng, W. and Goldstein, A. H. (2005) Continuous measurements of soil respiration with and without roots in a ponderosa pine plantation in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 132, 212–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, J. W., Baldocchi, D. D., Qi, Y. and Xu, L. K. (2003) Assessing soil CO2 efflux using continuous measurements of CO2 profiles in soils with small solid-state sensors. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 118, 207–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witkamp, M. (1969) Cycles of temperature and carbon dioxide evolution from litter and soil. Ecology, 50, 922–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witkamp, M. and Frank, M. L. (1969) Evolution of CO2 from litter, humus, and subsoil of a pine stand. Pedobiologia, 9, 358–65.Google Scholar
Xu, L., Furtaw, M. D., Madsen, R. A.et al. (2006) On maintaining pressure equilibrium between a soil CO2 flux chamber and the ambient air. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111, D08S10, doi:10.1029/2005JD006435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9
Cited by

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×