We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Impact of using the friction velocity filter on annual carbon estimates on natural pasture ecosystems.
- Authors
Acosta, Ricardo; Veeck, Gustavo; Bremm, Tiago; Roberti, Debora; Moraes, Osvaldo
- Abstract
Annual carbon estimation of the most diverse ecosystems is a recurring theme in meetings that address climate change mitigation, as it is essential to have a realistic inventory of carbon stock in the biosphere and the ability to assimilate atmospheric carbon. Measurements of CO2 flux over ecosystems after being taken undergo rigorous post-processing to remove spurious and unrealistic data. In addition, a correction for low turbulence situations, where the eddy-covariance technique may be underestimated, is to take the friction velocity (u *) as a threshold to establish valid measurements, especially at night. This method, although widely used by the scientific community, is not unanimous. Especially since u * is itself a flow and consequently its value correlates with the time scale used for the analysis. This paper presents the annual carbon estimate of a natural pasture ecosystem, Pampa biome, in an experimental site established in Santa Maria - RS. We evaluated three distinct situations in the annual carbon estimate (NEP): i) without au * filter; ii) with a fixed filter u * for all evaluated years and; iii) with the filter u * varying seasonally. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. Pampa biome, in an experimental site established in Santa Maria - RS. We evaluated three distinct situations in the annual carbon estimate (NEP): i) without au * filter; ii) with a fixed filter u * for all evaluated years and; iii) with the filter u * varying seasonally. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. Pampa biome, in an experimental site established in Santa Maria - RS. We evaluated three distinct situations in the annual carbon estimate (NEP): i) without au * filter; ii) with a fixed filter u * for all evaluated years and; iii) with the filter u * varying seasonally. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. We evaluated three distinct situations in the annual carbon estimate (NEP): i) without au * filter; ii) with a fixed filter u * for all evaluated years and; iii) with the filter u * varying seasonally. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. We evaluated three distinct situations in the annual carbon estimate (NEP): i) without au * filter; ii) with a fixed filter u * for all evaluated years and; iii) with the filter u * varying seasonally. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance. The methodology used to estimate u * is the same as that used by Papale et al. (2006). The results show a total annual carbon sequestration variability of up to 10% depending on the methodology employed. The ecosystem in question, regardless of the method used, proved to be a carbon sink. However, the use of one methodology or another in ecosystem situations that are close to carbon assimaltion neutral should be closely scrutinized for an accurate annual balance.
- Subjects
PAMPAS (Argentina); SANTA Maria (Calif.); FRICTION velocity; CARBON cycle; CLIMATE change mitigation; CARBON sequestration; CARBON offsetting; ECOSYSTEMS
- Publication
Revista Ciência e Natura, 2020, Vol 42, p1
- ISSN
0100-8307
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.5902/2179460X45315