Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 472

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The propagation of errors in long‐term measurements of land‐atmosphere fluxes of carbon and water

MONCRIEFF, J.B., MALHI, Y., LEUNING, R.·1996·Global Change Biology

Abstract

For surface fluxes of carbon dioxide, the net daily flux is the sum of daytime and nighttime fluxes of approximately the same magnitude and opposite direction. The net flux is therefore significantly smaller than the individual flux measurements and error assessment is critical in determining whether a surface is a net source or sink of carbon dioxide. For carbon dioxide flux measurements, it is an occasional misconception that the net flux is measured as the difference between the net upward and downward fluxes (i.e. a small difference between large terms). This is not the case. The net flux is the sum of individual (half‐hourly or hourly) flux measurements, each with an associated error term. The question of errors and uncertainties in long‐term flux measurements of carbon and water is addressed by first considering the potential for errors in flux measuring systems in general and thus errors which are relevant to a wide range of timescales of measurement. We also focus exclusively on flux measurements made by the micrometeorological method of eddy covariance. Errors can loosely be divided into random errors and systematic errors, although in reality any particular error may be a combination of both types. Systematic errors can be fully systematic errors (errors that apply on all of the daily cycle) or selectively systematic errors (errors that apply to only part of the daily cycle), which have very different effects. Random errors may also be full or selective, but these do not differ substantially in their properties. We describe an error analysis in which these three different types of error are applied to a long‐term dataset to discover how errors may propagate through long‐term data and which can be used to estimate the range of uncertainty in the reported sink strength of the particular ecosystem studied.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00075.x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 472

Metadata

Authors
MONCRIEFF, J. B., MALHI, Y., & LEUNING, R.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1996-06
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
231-240
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2150897594
Cited by
472
References
0
FWCI
14.73
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: The propagation of errors in long‐term measurements of land‐atmosphere fluxes of carbon and water. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00075.x
The paper
MONCRIEFF, J. B., MALHI, Y., & LEUNING, R. (1996). The propagation of errors in long‐term measurements of land‐atmosphere fluxes of carbon and water. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.1996.tb00075.x

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.