HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pedersen, A. R. Articles by Vinther, F. P. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Pedersen, A. R. Articles by Vinther, F. P. Agricola Articles by Pedersen, A. R. Articles by Vinther, F. P.

DIVISION S-1-SOIL PHYSICS

Stochastic Diffusion Model for Estimating Trace Gas Emissions with Static Chambers

^a Department of Biostatistics, University of Aarhus, Vennelyst Boulevard 6, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
^b Department of Crop Physiology and Soil Science, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Research Centre Foulum, P. O. Box 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark

Corresponding author (asger{at}biostat.au.dk)

Trace gas emission measurements are frequently based on static chamber methods, where the trace gas accumulation within an enclosed headspace is followed over time. This study addressed the statistical part of trace gas measurements by comparing the typical approach, linear regression analysis, with a new method proposed by A.R. Pedersen, which is based on a stochastic extension of the diffusion model described by G.L. Hutchinson and A.R. Mosier. The new method provides an estimate of the emission rate, the standard error, P values, confidence intervals, estimates of model parameters, and a set of methods for validation of the assumed model. It was applied to data of N₂O emissions from a peat meadow with the groundwater level at 20- and 40-cm depths, respectively. Furthermore, the three models mentioned above were compared in a simulation study using parameter values representative for the observed data. The simulations demonstrated that the assumptions underlying linear regression were violated, that the standard t test for significance did not have the expected properties, and that R² was a poor diagnostic for detecting deviations from these assumptions. The Hutchinson and Mosier estimator was not as biased as the linear regression estimator, but the method often failed because a necessary condition was not satisfied by the data, a large standard error was indicated, and the method did not provide a test of significance for the estimated emission rate. The new method provided a good description of the data and useful diagnostics for testing it, and due to its ability to use more observations (longer time series), it had a negligible failure rate and bias.

Abbreviations: High GWL, high groundwater level (15 cm below the surface) treatment • Low GWL, low groundwater level (40 cm below the soil surface) treatment • WFPS, water-filled pore space

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. Rochette and N. S. Eriksen-Hamel Chamber Measurements of Soil Nitrous Oxide Flux: Are Absolute Values Reliable? Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., March 1, 2008; 72(2): 331 - 342. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. K. Powelson, J. Chanton, T. Abichou, and J. Morales Methane oxidation in water-spreading and compost biofilters. Waste Management Research, December 1, 2006; 24(6): 528 - 536. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. P. Livingston, G. L. Hutchinson, and K. Spartalian Trace Gas Emission in Chambers: A Non-Steady-State Diffusion Model Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., August 3, 2006; 70(5): 1459 - 1469. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Widen and A. Lindroth A Calibration System for Soil Carbon Dioxide-Efflux Measurement Chambers: Description and Application Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., January 1, 2003; 67(1): 327 - 334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]