Complex controls on nitrous oxide flux across a large-elevation gradient in the tropical Peruvian Andes

Diem, Torsten; Morley, Nicholas J.; Ccahuana Quispe, Adan Julian; Huaraca Quispe, Lidia Priscila; Baggs, Elizabeth M.; Meir, Patrick; Richards, Mark I. A.; Smith, Pete; Teh, Yit Arn

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-5077-2017

Articles | Volume 14, issue 22

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-5077-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-5077-2017

© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 14, issue 22

Research article

|

15 Nov 2017

Research article |

| 15 Nov 2017

Complex controls on nitrous oxide flux across a large-elevation gradient in the tropical Peruvian Andes

Torsten Diem, Nicholas J. Morley, Adan Julian Ccahuana Quispe, Lidia Priscila Huaraca Quispe, Elizabeth M. Baggs, Patrick Meir, Mark I. A. Richards, Pete Smith, and Yit Arn Teh

Download

Final revised paper (published on 15 Nov 2017)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 30 Mar 2017)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'review', Anonymous Referee #1, 03 May 2017
RC2: 'Great combination of field measurement and laboratory experiments', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 May 2017
RC3: 'review of Diem et al.', Anonymous Referee #3, 08 May 2017
RC4: 'bg-2017-107', Anonymous Referee #4, 11 May 2017
EC1: 'Please prepare reply', Fortunat Joos, 11 May 2017
AC1: 'Detailed Response to Referees', Yit Arn Teh, 15 Jun 2017

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (16 Jun 2017) by Fortunat Joos

AR by Yit Arn Teh on behalf of the Authors (25 Jul 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (31 Jul 2017) by Fortunat Joos

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (12 Aug 2017)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (20 Aug 2017)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Thank you so much to the authors for taking all the reviewers’ suggestion to heart. I do like the manuscript, and the improvement are satisfactory. This is a very important manuscript, where the work neatly combines field measurements and laboratory experiments to tease out drivers of nitrous oxide emissions. A few comments remain, but they probably more reflect my ignorance, and elsewhere are more of editorial nature.
Abstract: I am not sure whether unweighted means need to be part of the abstract, as the weighting really more reflect the montane tropical N2O emissions.
Abstract L35: Can it be added that this conclusion stems from 15N enrichement experiment?
Abstract L 53: I suggest to start the last sentence with “Yet, nitrous oxide flux…” to highlight the contrast to the finding of N2O emission being a function of N richness.

L98 suggest to use “large” instead of “long”
L115 This seems at odds with the data, for most of the time WFPS is < 60%
Paragraph starting with L 121: In my previous review I suggested to try to work with lags. The authors countered that the time series is too short for doing that. While I am not sure that 30 months is long enough for lag analysis, the visual lag correlation is striking. At the same time, it is probably not the reviewer’s choice on how the analysis should be conducted.
L233: Check throughout the manuscript to use consistently use “litter-fall” or “litterfall”.
L241: Not clear what “at the bottom” means when you give a depth range.
L261: Can you indicate the N concentration (eg. ug/L), of the isotope solution added?
Result section: I really appreciate the extra work the authors put in to make this section much more readable.
L 817: Does this contradict L 800, where you say that N poor habitats have a greater proportional response (where you suggest that there is a response to NO3 addition)?

Figure 3: replace “broken line” with “dashed line”

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (13 Sep 2017) by Fortunat Joos

AR by Yit Arn Teh on behalf of the Authors (19 Sep 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (19 Sep 2017) by Fortunat Joos

AR by Yit Arn Teh on behalf of the Authors (25 Sep 2017) Author's response Manuscript

Download

Article (1836 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

Montane ecosystems in the southern Peruvian Andes were atmospheric sources of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide, exceeding prior emissions estimates from bottom-up process models. Nitrous oxide flux originated primarily from nitrate reduction. Nitrous oxide fluxes showed an inverse trend with elevation, and only weak evidence of seasonal variability. Nitrous oxide fluxes were influenced by the availability of nitrate and soil moisture content, but were not predicted by inputs of labile carbon.