The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A comparison of six methods for measuring soil‐surface carbon dioxide fluxes
Abstract
Measurements of soil‐surface CO 2 fluxes are important for characterizing the carbon budget of boreal forests because these fluxes can be the second largest component of the budget. Several methods for measuring soil‐surface CO 2 fluxes are available: (1) closed‐dynamic‐chamber systems, (2) closed‐static‐chamber systems, (3) open‐chamber systems, and (4) eddy covariance systems. This paper presents a field comparison of six individual systems for measuring soil‐surface CO 2 fluxes with each of the four basic system types represented. A single system is used as a reference and compared to each of the other systems individually in black spruce (Picea mariana), jack pine (Pinus banksiana), or aspen (Populus tremuloides) forests. Fluxes vary from 1 to 10 μmol CO 2 m−2 s−1. Adjustment factors to bring all of the systems into agreement vary from 0.93 to 1.45 with an uncertainty of about 10–15%.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Interannual variability in global soil respiration, 1980–94
Raich, J. W., Potter, C. S., & Bhagawati, D. (2002) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00511.x · Cited by 784
Kucharik, C. J., Foley, J. A., Delire, C., Fisher, V. A., Coe, M. T., Lenters, J. D., Young‐Molling, C., Ramankutty, N., Norman, J. M., & Gower, S. T. (2000) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/1999gb001138 · Cited by 730
Self-citationBOREAS in 1997: Experiment overview, scientific results, and future directions
Sellers, P. J., Hall, F. G., Kelly, R. D., Black, A., Baldocchi, D., Berry, J., Ryan, M., Ranson, K. J., Crill, P. M., Lettenmaier, D. P., et al. (1997) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/97jd03300 · Cited by 489
Self-citationAN EXPERIMENTAL TEST OF THE CAUSES OF FOREST GROWTH DECLINE WITH STAND AGE
Ryan, M. G., Binkley, D., Fownes, J. H., Giardina, C. P., & Senock, R. S. (2004) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1890/03-4037 · Cited by 396
Quick measurement of CH4, CO2 and N2O emissions from a short-plant ecosystem
Yuesi, W., & Yinghong, W. (2003) · Advances in Atmospheric Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf02915410 · Cited by 391
Metadata
- Authors
- Norman, J. M., Kucharik, C. J., Gower, S. T., Baldocchi, D. D., Crill, P. M., Rayment, M., Savage, K., & Striegl, R. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- D24
- Pages
- 28771-28777
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017935290
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: A comparison of six methods for measuring soil‐surface carbon dioxide fluxes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97jd01440
- The paper
- Norman, J. M., Kucharik, C. J., Gower, S. T., Baldocchi, D. D., Crill, P. M., Rayment, M., Savage, K., & Striegl, R. G. (1997). A comparison of six methods for measuring soil‐surface carbon dioxide fluxes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jd01440
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.
