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?
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.
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
Cites
Jungkunst, H. F., Freibauer, A., Neufeldt, H., & Bareth, G. (2006) · Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science · doi:10.1002/jpln.200521954 · Cited by 143
Cited by
A comprehensive approach to soil‐atmosphere trace‐gas flux estimation with static chambers
Pedersen, A. R., Petersen, S. O., & Schelde, K. (2010) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01291.x · Cited by 340
Environmental costs and benefits of growing Miscanthus for bioenergy in the UK
McCalmont, J. P., Hastings, A., McNamara, N. P., Richter, G. M., Robson, P., Donnison, I. S., & Clifton‐Brown, J. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12294 · Cited by 244
(2010) · Library and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · Cited by 1
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.