Source partitioning of H<sub>2</sub>O and CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes based on high-frequency eddy covariance data: a comparison between study sites

Klosterhalfen, Anne; Graf, Alexander; Brüggemann, Nicolas; Drüe, Clemens; Esser, Odilia; González-Dugo, María P.; Heinemann, Günther; Jacobs, Cor M. J.; Mauder, Matthias; Moene, Arnold F.; Ney, Patrizia; Pütz, Thomas; Rebmann, Corinna; Ramos Rodríguez, Mario; Scanlon, Todd M.; Schmidt, Marius; Steinbrecher, Rainer; Thomas, Christoph K.; Valler, Veronika; Zeeman, Matthias J.; Vereecken, Harry

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-1111-2019

Articles | Volume 16, issue 6

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-1111-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-1111-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 16, issue 6

Research article

|

19 Mar 2019

Research article |

| 19 Mar 2019

Source partitioning of H₂O and CO₂ fluxes based on high-frequency eddy covariance data: a comparison between study sites

Anne Klosterhalfen, Alexander Graf, Nicolas Brüggemann, Clemens Drüe, Odilia Esser, María P. González-Dugo, Günther Heinemann, Cor M. J. Jacobs, Matthias Mauder, Arnold F. Moene, Patrizia Ney, Thomas Pütz, Corinna Rebmann, Mario Ramos Rodríguez, Todd M. Scanlon, Marius Schmidt, Rainer Steinbrecher, Christoph K. Thomas, Veronika Valler, Matthias J. Zeeman, and Harry Vereecken

Download

Final revised paper (published on 19 Mar 2019)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 05 Nov 2018)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

SC1: 'new algebraic solution is available for the flux-variance similarity', xiangmin Sun, 08 Nov 2018
- SC2: 'Answer to 'new algebraic solution is available for the flux-variance similarity'', Anne Klosterhalfen, 14 Nov 2018
RC1: 'Referee comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Nov 2018
- AC1: 'Response to Reviewer #1', Anne Klosterhalfen, 08 Jan 2019
RC2: 'Ambitious effort to compare two flux partitioning approaches', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Nov 2018
- AC2: 'Response to Reviewer #2', Anne Klosterhalfen, 08 Jan 2019

Peer-review completion

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

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (21 Jan 2019) by Trevor Keenan

AR by Anne Klosterhalfen on behalf of the Authors (11 Feb 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (22 Feb 2019) by Trevor Keenan

Download

Article (4684 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

To obtain magnitudes of flux components of H₂O and CO₂ (e.g., transpiration, soil respiration), we applied source partitioning approaches after Scanlon and Kustas (2010) and after Thomas et al. (2008) to high-frequency eddy covariance measurements of 12 study sites covering various ecosystems (croplands, grasslands, and forests) in different climatic regions. We analyzed the interrelations among turbulence, site characteristics, and the performance of both partitioning methods.

Source partitioning of H2O and CO2 fluxes based on high-frequency eddy covariance data: a comparison between study sites

Download

Interactive discussion

Peer-review completion

Source partitioning of H₂O and CO₂ fluxes based on high-frequency eddy covariance data: a comparison between study sites