• 제목/요약/키워드: Automatic and manual closed chambers

검색결과 1건 처리시간 0.018초

Comparison of automatic and manual chamber methods for measuring soil respiration in a temperate broad-leaved forest

  • Lee, Jae-Seok
    • Journal of Ecology and Environment
    • /
    • 제42권4호
    • /
    • pp.272-277
    • /
    • 2018
  • Background: Studying the ecosystem carbon cycle requires analysis of interrelationships between soil respiration (Rs) and the environment to evaluate the balance. Various methods and instruments have been used to measure Rs. The closed chamber method, which is currently widely used to determine Rs, creates a closed space on the soil surface, measures $CO_2$ concentration in the inner space, and calculates Rs from the increase. Accordingly, the method is divided into automatic or manual chamber methods (ACM and MCM, respectively). However, errors of these methods and differences in instruments are unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the characteristics and difference of Rs values calculated using both methods with actual data. Results: Both methods determined seasonal variation patterns of Rs, reflecting overall changes in soil temperature (Ts). ACM clearly showed detailed changes in Rs, but MCM did not, because such small changes are unknown as Rs values are collected monthly. Additionally, Rs measured using MCM was higher than that using ACM and differed depending on measured plots, but showed similar tendencies with all measurement times and plots. Contrastingly, MCM Rs values in August for plot 4 were very high compared with ACM Rs values because of soil disturbances that easily occur during MCM measurements. Comparing Rs values calculated using monthly means with those calculated using MCM, the ACM calculated values for monthly averages were higher or lower than those of similar measurement times using the MCM. The difference between the ACM and MCM was attributed to greater or lesser differences. These Rs values estimated the carbon released into the atmosphere during measurement periods to be approximately 57% higher with MCM than with ACM, at 5.1 and $7.9C\;ton\;ha^{-1}$, respectively. Conclusion: ACM calculated average values based on various Rs values as high and low for measurement periods, but the MCM produced only specific values for measurement times as representative values. Therefore, MCM may exhibit large errors in selection differences during Rs measurements. Therefore, to reduce this error using MCM, the time and frequency of measurement should be set to obtain Rs under various environmental conditions. Contrastingly, the MCM measurement is obtained during $CO_2$ evaluation in the soil owing to soil disturbance caused by measuring equipment, so close attention should be paid to measurements. This is because the measurement process is disturbed by high $CO_2$ soil concentration, and even small soil disturbances could release high levels into the chamber, causing large Rs errors. Therefore, the MCM should be adequately mastered before using the device to measure Rs.