SSSAJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Widén, B.
Right arrow Articles by Lindroth, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Widén, B.
Right arrow Articles by Lindroth, A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Widén, B.
Right arrow Articles by Lindroth, A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soil Methods/Instrumentation
Right arrow Flow
Right arrow Soil Biochemistry

A Calibration System for Soil Carbon Dioxide-Efflux Measurement Chambers

Description and Application

Britta Widéna and Anders Lindroth*,b

a Department for Production Ecology, Faculty of Forestry, P.O. Box 7042, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden
b Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystems Analysis, P.O. Box 118, Lund University, 221 00, Lund, Sweden



View larger version (30K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. The calibration system with parts of the closed-dynamic system (Li-Cor 6200-09), and open-dynamic system.

 


View larger version (22K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. The CO2 flux measured by the closed-dynamic system compared with the reference flux for three different types of soil.

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. The CO2 flux measured by the open system and the flux from the calibration box outside the chamber, relative to the reference flux at increasing pressure difference between the inside and the outside of the chamber. Also included is the relative flux at different pressure differences as measured by Fang and Moncrieff (1998).

 


View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. The CO2 flux measured by the open chamber relative to the expected CO2 flux as the soil air-filled volume changes, using different types of soil.

 


View larger version (22K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. The CO2 efflux from the calibration box at different inside CO2 concentrations. First, when the open chamber, which covered the whole surface, was on top and running and secondly when no chamber was present.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2003 by the Soil Science Society of America.