Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 330

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing nocturnal eddy covariance measurements to estimates of ecosystem respiration made by scaling chamber measurements at six coniferous boreal sites

Open access
Lavigne, M. B., Ryan, M. G., Anderson, D. E., Baldocchi, D. D., Crill, P. M., Fitzjarrald, D. R., Goulden, M. L., Gower, S. T., Massheder, J. M., McCaughey, J. H., Rayment, M., Striegl, R. G.·1997·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

During the growing season, nighttime ecosystem respiration emits 30–100% of the daytime net photosynthetic uptake of carbon, and therefore measurements of rates and understanding of its control by the environment are important for understanding net ecosystem exchange. Ecosystem respiration can be measured at night by eddy covariance methods, but the data may not be reliable because of low turbulence or other methodological problems. We used relationships between woody tissue, foliage, and soil respiration rates and temperature, with temperature records collected on site to estimate ecosystem respiration rates at six coniferous BOREAS sites at half‐hour or 1‐hour intervals, and then compared these estimates to nocturnal measurements of CO 2 exchange by eddy covariance. Soil surface respiration was the largest source of CO 2 at all sites (48–71%), and foliar respiration made a large contribution to ecosystem respiration at all sites (25–43%). Woody tissue respiration contributed only 5–15% to ecosystem respiration. We estimated error for the scaled chamber predictions of ecosystem respiration by using the uncertainty associated with each respiration parameter and respiring biomass value. There was substantial uncertainty in estimates of foliar and soil respiration because of the spatial variability of specific respiration rates. In addition, more attention needs to be paid to estimating foliar respiration during the early part of the growing season, when new foliage is growing, and to determining seasonal trends of soil surface respiration. Nocturnal eddy covariance measurements were poorly correlated to scaled chamber estimates of ecosystem respiration (r2=0.06–0.27) and were consistently lower than scaled chamber predictions (by 27% on average for the six sites). The bias in eddy covariance estimates of ecosystem respiration will alter estimates of gross assimilation in the light and of net ecosystem exchange rates over extended periods.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/97jd01173

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 330

Metadata

Authors
Lavigne, M. B., Ryan, M. G., Anderson, D. E., Baldocchi, D. D., Crill, P. M., Fitzjarrald, D. R., Goulden, M. L., Gower, S. T., Massheder, J. M., McCaughey, J. H., Rayment, M., & Striegl, R. G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
1997-12
Volume
102
Issue
D24
Pages
28977-28985
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061619823
Cited by
330
References
1
FWCI
13.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing nocturnal eddy covariance measurements to estimates of ecosystem respiration made by scaling chamber measurements at six coniferous boreal sites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97jd01173
The paper
Lavigne, M. B., Ryan, M. G., Anderson, D. E., Baldocchi, D. D., Crill, P. M., Fitzjarrald, D. R., Goulden, M. L., Gower, S. T., Massheder, J. M., McCaughey, J. H., Rayment, M., & Striegl, R. G. (1997). Comparing nocturnal eddy covariance measurements to estimates of ecosystem respiration made by scaling chamber measurements at six coniferous boreal sites. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jd01173

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.