Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

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

Chamber Measurements of Soil Nitrous Oxide Flux: Are Absolute Values Reliable?

Rochette, Philippe, Eriksen-Hamel, Nikita S.·2008·Soil Science Society of America Journal

Abstract

The vast majority of soil N 2 O flux data reported in the literature was obtained using non‐flow‐through non‐steady‐state (NFT‐NSS) chambers. Considerable variation in chamber methodology may influence N 2 O flux measurements, however, raising concerns about the reliability and accuracy of these measurements. The objectives of this study were to determine criteria for assessing the quality of soil N 2 O flux measurements made using NFT‐NSS chambers, to evaluate NFT‐NSS chamber methodologies used in the scientific literature, and to propose a minimum set of criteria for NFT‐NSS chamber design and deployment methodology. We identified 16 characteristics of chamber methodology and developed four factors contributing to the quality of N 2 O flux measurements made using NFT‐NSS chambers. We compiled a data set of 356 studies and evaluated the quality of each study against the set of characteristics and factors to determine the confidence in the reported N 2 O flux. Confidence in the absolute flux values reported in about 60% of the studies was estimated to be very low or low due to poor methodologies or incomplete reporting. The confidence in flux measurements improved with time; however, there were still about 50% of recent studies (2005–2007) with low or very low confidence levels. This study has shown that the quality of soil N 2 O flux measurements reported in the literature is often poor. While the flux data obtained may be valid for comparisons between situations (e.g., treatments) within a given study, they are often biased estimates of actual fluxes. We propose a minimum set of criteria for reliable soil N 2 O flux measurements using NFT‐NSS chambers.

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 · 10.2136/sssaj2007.0215

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 304

Metadata

Authors
Rochette, P., & Eriksen-Hamel, N. S.
Venue
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-03
Volume
72
Issue
2
Pages
331-342
ISSN
  • 0361-5995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-0661
OpenAlex
W2037695967
Cited by
304
References
1
FWCI
22.41
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: Chamber Measurements of Soil Nitrous Oxide Flux: Are Absolute Values Reliable? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2136/sssaj2007.0215
The paper
Rochette, P., & Eriksen-Hamel, N. S. (2008). Chamber Measurements of Soil Nitrous Oxide Flux: Are Absolute Values Reliable? Soil Science Society of America Journal. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2007.0215

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.