<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">BG</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Biogeosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BG</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Biogeosciences</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1726-4189</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/bg-16-785-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Automatic high-frequency measurements of full soil greenhouse<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> gas fluxes in
a tropical forest</article-title><alt-title>Automatic high-frequency measurements of full soil greenhouse gas fluxes</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Automatic high-frequency measurements of full soil greenhouse gas fluxes}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{E. A. Courtois  et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Courtois</surname><given-names>Elodie Alice</given-names></name>
          <email>elodie.courtois@cnrs.fr</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Stahl</surname><given-names>Clément</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Burban</surname><given-names>Benoit</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Van den Berge</surname><given-names>Joke</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Berveiller</surname><given-names>Daniel</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Bréchet</surname><given-names>Laëtitia</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2744-8820</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff5">
          <name><surname>Soong</surname><given-names>Jennifer Larned</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Arriga</surname><given-names>Nicola</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6 aff7">
          <name><surname>Peñuelas</surname><given-names>Josep</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7215-0150</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Janssens</surname><given-names>Ivan August</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Biology University of Antwerp, Centers of Excellence Global Change Ecology and PLECO (Plants and
Ecosystems), Universiteitsplein 1, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Laboratoire Ecologie, évolution, interactions des systèmes
amazoniens (LEEISA), Université de Guyane, CNRS, IFREMER, 97300 Cayenne,
French Guiana</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>INRA, UMR EcoFoG, CNRS, Cirad, AgroParisTech, Université des
Antilles, Université de Guyane, 97310 Kourou, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>CNRS/Université Paris-sud, 362 rue du doyen André Guinier,
91405 Orsay CEDEX, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Climate and Ecosystem Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, 94720, Berkeley, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>CSIC, Global Ecology Unit CREAF-CSIC-UAB, Bellaterra, 08193
Catalonia, Spain</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>CREAF, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Catalonia, Spain</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Elodie Alice Courtois (elodie.courtois@cnrs.fr)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>12</day><month>February</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>16</volume>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <fpage>785</fpage><lpage>796</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>16</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>15</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>23</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>25</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2019 Elodie Alice Courtois et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e206">Measuring in situ soil fluxes of carbon dioxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), methane
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and nitrous oxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) continuously at high
frequency requires appropriate technology. We tested the combination of a
commercial automated soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux chamber system (LI-8100A) with a
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> analyzer (Picarro G2308) in a tropical
rainforest for 4 months. A chamber closure time of 2 min was sufficient for
a reliable estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes (100 %
and 98.5 % of fluxes were above minimum detectable flux – MDF,
respectively). This closure time was generally not suitable for a reliable
estimation of the low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes in this ecosystem but was
sufficient for detecting rare major peak events. A closure time of 25 min
was more appropriate for reliable estimation of most <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes
(85.6 % of measured fluxes are above MDF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.002 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Our study highlights the importance of
adjusted closure time for each gas.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e367">After water vapor, carbon dioxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), methane (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and
nitrous oxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are the three main greenhouse gases (GHGs) in terms
of radiative forcing. Increases in these GHG concentrations in the
atmosphere are driving anthropogenic global warming. Understanding the
magnitude of GHG fluxes in natural ecosystems has recently become a priority
in the study of GHG balances (Merbold et al., 2015). Tropical intact forests
cover 1392 Mha globally and represent about 70 % of the total tropical
forest area (1949 Mha), which accounts for the largest area of global forest
biomes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). Very few reliable long-term datasets on
full GHG balances are available from tropical ecosystems, despite their
known importance for the global cycles of these three GHGs (Dutaur and
Verchot, 2007). This is in part due to the challenges of designing and
operating continuous, multi-gas flux analysis systems in tropical forests.
Soil processes in particular are responsible for an important part of GHGs
that are produced or consumed in tropical ecosystems (Oertel et al., 2016).
Soil physical, chemical, and biological characteristics are linked to
variation in GHG emissions from soils, which in turn can display very high
spatial and temporal variability (Arias-Navarro et al., 2017; Silver et al.,
1999).</p>
      <p id="d1e415">Historically, soil GHG fluxes (emission or consumption) have been measured
using the static chamber method. This involves closing chambers manually for
a known period of time, usually 30–60 min, and repeated collection of
air samples for further analysis via gas chromatography (Verchot et al.,
1999, 2000). Fluxes are then computed from the change<?pagebreak page786?> in gas concentration
per unit of time, per surface area enclosed by the chamber, and corrected by
the volume of the chamber. While these labor-intensive and time-consuming
manual measurements are well-adapted to capture high spatial flux
variability (Arias-Navarro et al., 2017; Pumpanen et al., 2004), they do not
capture high temporal variation, which is necessary for the accurate
estimation of annual GHG budgets. Moreover, short-term transient spikes in
the emission or consumption of these GHGs likely remains undetected with
static chamber methods, imposing a lost opportunity to fully understand the
production or consumption processes of GHGs and their response to rapidly
changing environmental conditions. One of the key challenges of contemporary
GHG flux research is to close these knowledge gaps in order to improve the
quantitative prediction of GHG fluxes (Merbold et al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e418">The use of automatic chambers is one approach to obtain continuous
estimation of soil GHG flux data at high temporal frequency (several
measurements per days) at various sampling points. Since the 1970s (Denmead,
1979), a variety of technical solutions for automated flux sampling have
been developed (Ambus et al., 2010; Breuer et al., 2000; Görres et al.,
2016; Kostyanovsky et al., 2018; O'Connell et al., 2018; Petrakis et al.,
2017a; Savage et al., 2014), particularly for soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes. However,
accurate detection of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes from soils via flow
through systems is more difficult than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> due to significantly lower
background concentrations and lower flux rates (Kostyanovsky et al., 2018).
The budgetary requirements for large infrastructure and intensive
maintenance compared to manual chamber measurements have prevented the
widespread application of automated systems. The use of automated and
continuous methods to estimate full GHG budgets in situ remains scarce, especially
in complex biomes with extreme climate such as tropical forests. Therefore,
only a few studies actually address the difficulties and challenges
associated with operating these systems under field conditions (Görres
et al., 2016; Koskinen et al., 2014).</p>
      <p id="d1e467">Recent technological advances have now made more automated chamber systems
commercially available, and an increasing number of custom-made systems are
being designed and deployed for soil GHG flux measurements (De Klein and
Harvey, 2012). Here, we present a detailed field deployment of a custom-built automated soil GHG flux system – the LI-8100A Soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Flux
System (LI-COR Biosciences Inc., Lincoln, NE, USA) running in line with a
Picarro G2308 (Picarro Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA). Using a 4-month dataset
of continuous measurements of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes
simultaneously under tropical forest conditions, we present an optimized
sampling protocol for the estimation of the full GHG budget in this
ecosystem.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Measurement site</title>
      <p id="d1e527">This study was conducted at the Paracou research station (5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N,
52<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>55<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W), located in the coastal area of French Guiana, South
America. The automated soil GHG flux system was deployed in the footprint of
the Guyaflux site, which holds a 55 m tall tower upon which canopy <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and energy fluxes have been monitored since 2004 using the eddy
covariance technique (Aguilos et al., 2018; Bonal et al., 2008). The site is
covered with pristine tropical forest and located in the northernmost part
of the Guiana shield. It is characterized by a succession of small
elliptical hills rising to 10–40 m a.s.l., sometimes associated with
plateaus of similar altitude.</p>
      <p id="d1e591">The soils are mostly nutrient-poor Acrisols (FAO/ISRIC/ISSS, 1998) with pockets of
sandy Ultisols developed over a Precambrian metamorphic formation called the
“Bonidoro series” and composed of schist and sandstone, sporadically
traversed by veins of pegmatite, aplite, and quartz (Bonal et al., 2008). The
forest around the tower is characteristic of a pristine tropical forest with
both high tree density (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">620</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> trees with a dbh <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 cm ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and species richness (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">140</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> species ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The climate is highly
seasonal due to the north–south movement of the Inter-Tropical Convergence
Zone. The wet season, characterized by heavy rain events, lasts for 8 months
(December–July) and alternates with a 4-month dry period (August–November)
during which precipitation is typically lower than
100 mm month<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the period
2004–2015, annual rainfall quantities were on average 3103 mm yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
relative extractable water (an index of soil water availability; Wagner et
al., 2011) varied from 0.93 in the wet season to 0.46 in the dry season, and
soil temperature was on average 25.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C with little seasonal nor diurnal
variation (Aguilos et al., 2018).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Automated sampling system</title>
      <p id="d1e685">A schematic view of the automatic sampling system is shown in Fig. 1a. The
system consisted of four main components: 16 automated long-term
chambers (8100-104, LI-COR Biosciences), a multiplexer to link one chamber at
a time to the gas analyzers (LI-8150, LI-COR Biosciences), an infrared gas
analyzer (IRGA) to measure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (LI-8100A, LI-COR
Biosciences), and a cavity ring-down spectroscopy (CRDS) instrument to
measure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations (G2308, Picarro) that
was fitted with an external recirculation pump (A0702, Picarro). Both the
IRGA and CRDS systems were necessary to measure all three GHG concentrations
due to the different abundances and flux rates of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The IRGA methodology is accurate and precise
enough to detect small <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration changes at high background
concentrations (approximately<?pagebreak page787?> 400 ppmv; parts per million in volume units).
However, the detection of small changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations, even at their low background atmospheric concentrations on
the order of 2000 ppbv (ppbv; parts per billion in volume units) and
300 ppbv, respectively, requires higher accuracy and precision levels that
can be detected with the CRDS.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e796">Experimental design.
<bold>(a)</bold> Schematic view of the installation composed of four main
components: 16 automated long-term chambers (8100-104, LI-COR Biosciences), a
multiplexer to link one of these chambers to the gas analyzers (LI-8150,
LI-COR Biosciences), an infrared gas analyzer (IRGA) to measure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations (LI-8100A, LI-COR Biosciences), and a cavity ring-down
spectroscopy (CRDS) instrument to measure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations (G2308, Picarro) that was fitted with an external pump.
<bold>(b)</bold> Schematic representation of the grid with the shelter housing
the equipment in the middle and the 16 chambers (grey dots) linked to the
LI-8150 multiplexer with 15 m cables (black lines). <bold>(c)</bold> Picture of
the instruments in the field.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f01.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e850">Power supply was delivered through a 12 kVa generator (Perkins STORM15)
fitted with batteries located 400 m away from the instruments. Both the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> analyzer control unit and the multiplexer (LI-COR) had their
own weather-proof casing, requiring no additional protection in the field.
Nonetheless, in consideration of the high precipitation at the site, these
devices were placed under a wooden shelter for added protection. The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> analyzer (Picarro), its external pump, and a
computer monitor were housed in a waterproof shelter that was specifically
designed to host them (Fig. 1c). The LI-8100 and the G2308 computers were
connected through an ethernet connection to ensure time synchronization. The
16 automated soil chambers (8100-104, LI-COR Biosciences) were installed
in a grid in the forest (Fig. 1b) covering in total an area of approximately
300 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (15 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 m). Each chamber was only closed during
individual chamber measurement periods and was fully open when not sampling.
The PVC collars that were provided with the 8100-104 automatic chambers were
inserted in the soil 1 month prior to the first measurement (20.3 cm inner
diameter and 21.3 cm outer diameter; enclosed soil area <?xmltex \hack{\mbox\bgroup}?><inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">318</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><?xmltex \hack{\egroup}?> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; insertion depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm; offset <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm; green
PVC). When the chambers close, they are automatically lowered so that they
cover each soil collar and ensure a fully sealed chamber. The chamber lid
does not directly rest on the collar rim, but on a metal plate surrounding
the collar, leaving the collar undisturbed and minimizing lateral leaks (Hupp
et al., 2009).</p>
      <p id="d1e946">The 16 chambers were connected via 15 m Bev-A-Line tubing (8 mm inner
diameter) with the multiplexer (LI-8150), which allows for switching among
each of the 16 chambers in any given sequence. Soil temperature (0–10 cm)
was monitored with 8100-201 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> thermistor probes (Omega Engineering
Inc., Stamford, CT, USA), and soil volumetric water content (0–10 cm) was
monitored with 8100-202 ECH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O model EC-5 soil moisture sensors (Decagon
Devices Inc., Pullman, WA, USA). Soil temperature and soil volumetric water
content sensors were directly connected to the chambers and recorded by the
LI-COR system using the same time step.</p>
      <p id="d1e966">Each chamber was purged for 15 s prior to each measurement and 45 s after
each measurement in order to flush the lines and restore background gas
levels in the system. The flow rate during the purging and the measurements
was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> between the LI-8150 and the chambers, which
ensures sufficient air mixing in the chamber headspace during the
measurements (Görres et al., 2016). Flow rates in the subsampling lines
(LI-8100 and Picarro) were lower and set between 1.5 and 1.7 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as
recommended by the manufacturers. The LI-8100 software provided the rate of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration increase in the chamber, which was used to
quantify the flux of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the soil surface into the atmosphere
(taking into account the enclosed soil surface area and the total system
volume). A subsampling loop was inserted after the analyzer (LI-8100A) and
before the multiplexer (LI-8150) to pull the air sample through the Picarro
G2308 CRDS analyzer for the determination of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations and flux estimations, before going back to the chamber
(Fig. 1a). All three gas concentrations were recorded every second over the
sampling periods.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Flux calculations</title>
      <p id="d1e1056">All flux estimations were carried out using commercially available
SoilFluxPro software (LI-COR Biosciences). An R script (Supplement) was
created to merge all the Picarro files from a given week in order to import
them into the SoilFluxPro software. The Picarro creates one file per hour and
when Picarro files are not merged, SoilFluxPro software is not able to deal
with measurements overlapping between two distinct Picarro files (e.g., when
a single measurement is performed from 09:50 to
10:15 UTC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3), leading to incorrect estimation of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes. To avoid underestimation of fluxes
(Fig. S1 in the Supplement), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
fluxes were measured as exponential fit of gas concentration with time using
SoilFluxPro software and include a 60 s dead band to account for soil
surface pressure disturbances due to the closing of the chamber.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <title>Minimum detectable fluxes</title>
      <p id="d1e1132">The minimum detectable flux (MDF) for each gas was estimated by using a
metric originally developed by Christiansen et al. (2015), which was modified
by Nickerson (2016) to make it more suitable for high-frequency measurements
(Christiansen et al., 2015; Nickerson, 2016):

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M76" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MDF</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msqrt><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">VP</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SRT</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the analytical accuracy of the analyzer (25 ppb for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 10 ppb for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the Picarro G2308 and
600 ppb for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the LI-8100, recorded from the technical data
sheets of the analyzers), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the closure time of the chamber
in seconds, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of points that are available to compute the
flux (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> divided by the sampling periodicity, every 1 s in
this study), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the chamber volume (0.0040761 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
atmospheric pressure (101 325 Pa), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the chamber surface area
(0.03178 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the ideal gas constant
(8.314 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Pa K<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> mol<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the ambient temperature
(298.15 K). We computed the MDF of each gas for closure times from 2 to
30 min in order to select the optimal chamber closure time for each gas
in our integrated system (Table 1).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e1340">Minimum detectable fluxes (MDFs) for each gas and for closure times
from 2 to 30 min. The two closure times that were used in this study (2 and
25 min) are highlighted in bold.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.92}[.92]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Closure</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">time</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(minutes)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>2</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>0.100</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.040</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.393</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.025</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.605</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.009</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.004</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.214</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.005</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.002</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.117</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.003</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.001</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.076</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>25</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>0.002</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>0.001</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>0.054</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.002</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.001</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.041</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page788?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <title>Closure time</title>
      <p id="d1e1629">Selecting the best length of time for soil GHG measurements and accurate flux
calculation in an integrated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
automated measurement system requires careful consideration. At low fluxes,
longer measurement periods are needed to reach reliable measurements of real
concentration changes, while at high fluxes possible storage and saturation
effects in the chamber headspace might result in nonlinear concentration
increases and thereby underestimated fluxes if fluxes are calculated
linearly. In order to maximize the detectable percentage of fluxes for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> without impeding spatial coverage and
temporal resolution, we built a combined program with two different closure
times. Each week, 4 out of 16 chambers were programmed to stay closed<?pagebreak page789?> for a
longer measurement period to ensure a reliable estimation of low fluxes while
the other 12 chambers were programmed to stay closed for a shorter period to
capture diel variation and detect high fluxes. For the short closure time
(SHORT hereafter), we used a 2 min measurement period because (1) this is a
standard closure time for soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux calculations (Janssens et
al., 2000), (2) MDF for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux is typically low (Epron et al.,
2006; Bonal et al., 2008; Bréchet et al., 2009; Courtois et al., 2018),
and (3) corresponding MDFs of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.04 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.1 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) are compatible with the
detection of emission or consumption peaks of these two gases in this region
(Courtois et al., 2018; Petitjean et al., 2015). For the long closure time
(LONG hereafter), we decided to use a 25 min measurement period in order to
optimize the trade-off between a reliable estimation of low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
fluxes (Table 1) and a program length that allows for a sufficient number of
flux measurements per chamber and per day.</p>
      <p id="d1e1800">We therefore programmed the multiplexer for 2.5 h cycles (9–10 measurements
per chamber per day), which included four chambers with LONG measurements and
12 chambers with SHORT measurements. Each week, the program was modified
manually so that the four LONG measurements were rotated across the chambers.
Each chamber was therefore measured with the LONG closure time for one
7-consecutive-day period per month (4 weeks).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <title>System maintenance and data processing</title>
      <p id="d1e1809">The automated sampling system was installed on 1 June 2016 and operated until
29 September 2016 (4 months), totaling 17 592 individual measurements for
each gas (4098 with LONG closure time and 13 494 with SHORT closure time).
Coarse wood debris were removed weekly but small litter, such as leaves,
fruits, and twigs, was left in the collar area. Every week, living plants
growing inside the collars, and the dead leaves on the chambers, were
carefully removed by hand. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of the exponential increase in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over 2 min was used as an indicator that the system was
functioning correctly and not impeded by debris (Görres et al., 2016;
Savage et al., 2014). When the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the regression between time and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration was lower than 0.9, we considered this to be an
indication that there may have been an issue with the chamber closing and
sealing correctly and removed the flux measurement for all three gases from
our analysis.</p>
      <p id="d1e1856">For <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, we observed a strong concentration saturation effect when
using the LONG closure time (25 min), leading to an underestimation of
fluxes (Fig. 2). All <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates were therefore based on
2 min regressions only, using either full concentration measurements of the
SHORT closure time or the first 2 min of the LONG closure time. Following
recommendations (Rubio and Detto, 2017), we removed anomalous values, i.e.,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes estimation with a difference greater than
5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with adjacent measurements or lower than
0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. For <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, we observed only a
slight saturation effect when using the LONG closure time (Fig. 2). Variation
in the flux calculations did not differ between the SHORT and LONG chamber
closure measurements. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux calculations were much more variable
when measuring with the SHORT closure time compared to the LONG closure time
(Fig. 2). Even if fluxes were above the detection limit, the low fluxes
estimated with the SHORT closure time were not reliable as shown by the low
correlation in Fig. 2. For both <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, we therefore
decided to apply the following quality check procedure and to discard
(1) all fluxes that were not complying with MDF criterion, (2) all fluxes
estimated with the SHORT closure time with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> lower than 0.8 (Savage
et al., 2014), and (3) all anomalous values (difference greater than
5 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with adjacent measurements).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2041">Comparison of 2 and 25 min estimations for
<bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes. For this, we used measurements made over
25 min and recomputed the flux with the first 2 min for 2 weeks (from 2 to
9 August in black and from 16 to 25 August in grey) covering the whole range
of fluxes during the study period. All fluxes were computed using exponential
fit. The dashed line represents the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> line while the solid grey line
represents the linear regression between 2 and 25 min estimations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
values of these regressions are indicated in each panel).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2122">Mean, standard deviation (SD), minimum (Min), and maximum (Max)
values of each gas and each chamber over the study period. These values are
computed using all flux estimations (with either SHORT or LONG closure
times) remaining after quality check. The number (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of fluxes that were used
is also indicated for each chamber. The last line of the table is the mean
of all fluxes by chamber by gas and the min and max for all chambers by
gas.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.94}[.94]?><oasis:tgroup cols="16">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="14" colname="col14" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="15" colname="col15" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="16" colname="col16" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col6" align="center" colsep="1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col11" align="center" colsep="1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col12" nameend="col16" align="center"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">940</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">10.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.08</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">28.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">840</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">284</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1166</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.09</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">11.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">899</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">285</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1135</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">22.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">745</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.61</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">2.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">208</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1154</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1105</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">224</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1139</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">12.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">752</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">3.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">382</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">17.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1070</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">8.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">801</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">272</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">22.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">988</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">19.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">749</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">7.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">216</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1099</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">18.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">785</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">202</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1002</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">11.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">879</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">332</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">13.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1037</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.91</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">10.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">657</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">252</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">18.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1004</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">41.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">855</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">1.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">199</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">968</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">6.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.29</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">41.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">891</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">204</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">944</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">26.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">654</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">1.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">335</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">987</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">6.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">35.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">691</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">231</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">29.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">850</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.46</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">8.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">839</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.96</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">185</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber 16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">994</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">843</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">0.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">187</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">29.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16 477</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">41.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">12 985</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">7.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">3998</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3602">Distribution of fluxes: histogram of <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over the
study period. For <bold>(b)</bold> and <bold>(c)</bold>, the dotted line represents
null fluxes.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results and discussions</title>
      <p id="d1e3669">A cleaning frequency of once a week was necessary and sufficient to remove
falling leaves and branches from the automatic chamber system, prevent leaks,
and generate a continuous dataset of soil GHG fluxes from this tropical
forest. Temperature variations are typically small below the canopy due to
the shadowing by dense canopy crown and microclimatic conditions. During the
study period, temperature at 2 m in height varied from 22 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in the
night to 28 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C during the day. The presence of water condensation
inside the tubing lines was carefully checked every week and never occurred
during the study period. The automatic chamber system worked well most of the
time, but some data gaps did exist. Over the 17 592 individual flux
estimations, 343 (1.9 %) had to be discarded because of (1) problems in
the connection between the chamber and the multiplexer (154 measurements,
0.9 % of data points) and (2) imperfect chamber closing, which was detected
by an insufficient increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (189 measurements, 1 % of
data points).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{{$\protect\chem{CO_{{2}}}$} fluxes}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes</title>
      <?pagebreak page791?><p id="d1e3717">In addition to the 343 fluxes that were removed after the first steps of
the quality check procedure, 758 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimations were also
considered to be anomalous because the difference with adjacent
measurements were either greater than 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(758 measurements, i.e., 4.3 %) or lower than
0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (14 measurements). In total, 16 477
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over 17 592 (93.6 %) could be used over the 4-month period. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were on average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Table 2), which would correspond to a
mean annual soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux of 3050 gC m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, which
falls into the upper range of the extensive review of mean annual soil
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux estimations in tropical forest provided recently by
Rubio and Detto (2017). Nonetheless, our study period (June–September) only
covered the end of the wet season and more data are needed to make this
estimation more precise. All 2 min measurements of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes from the
4-month study period were above the MDF of 2.39 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the LI-8100 analyzer (Table 1). No saturation effect was detected using
the SHORT closure time, and estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over a shorter time
period is not recommended (Davidson et al., 2002). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes using
the LONG closure time would be underestimated due to the buildup of high
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations due to large fluxes over this long time period
(Fig. 2), and are not recommended. For small chambers like the one
used in this study, we therefore conclude that a 2 min sampling time
including a dead band of 60 s should be used for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
calculations since the MDF of this short measurement period allowed for the
retention of 100 % of the data. When the chambers stay closed longer for
accurate detection of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes, only the first
2 min of data should be used for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux calculations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4024"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes through time: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes for each
chamber (1 to 16) over the study period with fluxes estimated with a SHORT
(2 min) closure time in black and fluxes estimated with the first 2 min
of the LONG (25 min) closure time in grey. All panels have the same limits
on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis (from 0 to 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4092">The use of 16 automated flux chambers allowed for the capture of spatial and
temporal variability in soil respiration. Over this 4-month period,
corresponding to the end of the wet season in French Guiana, temporal
variability remained low (Fig. 4). This dataset is therefore not long enough
to detect the seasonal variation in soil respiration that was highlighted in
previous study (Rowland et al., 2014; Rubio and Detto, 2017). We did found
that soil respiration tended to decrease in very humid soils (Fig. S2 in the
Supplement) as highlighted previously at the same site (Rowland et al., 2014)
but more data are needed to precisely disentangle the importance of seasonal
and diurnal variability from the responses to environmental triggers of soil
respiration. Nonetheless, even during this relatively short period, our data
clearly demonstrated a strong spatial variability in soil respiration, even
at a low spatial scale (Fig. 5, Table 2), with some local spots clearly displaying
stronger values of soil respiration during the study period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><caption><p id="d1e4098">Mean values per day for <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over the
study period. Each chamber is represented by a distinct color.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{{$\protect\chem{CH_{{4}}}$} fluxes}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes</title>
      <p id="d1e4169">In addition to the 343 fluxes that were removed after the first steps of the
quality check procedure, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimations were also discarded
because of (1) problems with Picarro files (12 measurements), (2) application
of the MDF criterion (137 measurements), (3) application of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
criterion for SHORT closure time (3751 measurements, i.e., 28 % of the
SHORT measurements), and (4) detection of anomalous values (364 measurements).
In total, 12 985 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over 17 592 (73.8 %) could be
used over the 4-month period. No saturation effect was detected using the
LONG closure time and fluxes estimated with the SHORT closure time were very
well-correlated to fluxes using the LONG closure time, even for small fluxes
(Fig. 2). Totals of 68.4 % and 98.2 % of fluxes measured with the SHORT and
LONG closure times, respectively, were retained in our quality control data
processing over the 4-month study period. These measurement periods,
therefore, allowed for the retention of a large majority of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emission or consumption fluxes in our data analysis.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4218"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes through time: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes for each
chamber (1 to 16) over the study period with fluxes estimated with a SHORT
(2 min) closure time in black and fluxes estimated with a LONG (25 min)
closure time in grey. The dotted line displays the zero flux line. All panels
have the same limits on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis (from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
30 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4291"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes through time: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes for each
chamber (1 to 16) over the study period with fluxes estimated with the SHORT
(2 min) closure time in black and fluxes estimated with the LONG (25 min)
closure time in grey. The dotted line displays the zero flux line. Due to the
high differences among chambers, each panel has a specific limit on the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/16/785/2019/bg-16-785-2019-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4333"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were on average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
with a high variability among chambers (Table 2) but the frequency of
negative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes (consumption, 59 % of fluxes) was greater
than for positive fluxes (emission, 41 % of fluxes)<?pagebreak page792?> during this period
(Fig. 3). Most of the time, soils were either consuming or emitting small
amounts of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, but large transient emission peaks were
periodically detected at individual chamber locations during the study period
(Fig. 6). Tropical soils are generally considered to be a sink at a yearly basis
(Dutaur and Verchot, 2007) but it is known that these soils can shift from a
source in the wet season to a sink in the dry season (Courtois et al., 2018;
Davidson et al., 2008; Teh et al., 2014). No clear temporal trend could be
detected during the study period and there was a slight correlation of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes with surface soil humidity (higher fluxes at
intermediate soil humidity, Fig. S2). Longer time series covering at least a
full year are needed to explore the seasonal and diurnal variability in
fluxes. As highlighted previously in French Guiana (Courtois et al., 2018),
spatial variability in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission was high, even at a small
spatial scale (Figs. 5, 6). Interestingly, some spots clearly displayed high
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions during the whole study period (Figs. 5, 6).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{{$\protect\chem{N_{{2}}O}$} fluxes}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes</title>
      <?pagebreak page794?><p id="d1e4457">In addition to the 343 fluxes that were removed after the first steps of the
quality check procedure, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimations were also discarded
because of (1) problems with Picarro files (12 measurements), (2) application
of the MDF criterion (1594 measurements), (3) application of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
criterion for SHORT closure time (11 643 measurements, i.e., 28 % of the
SHORT measurements), and (4) detection of anomalous values (364 measurements).
In total, 3998 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over 17 592 measurements (22.7 %, 140
measurements with the SHORT and 3858 measurements with the LONG closure time)
could be used over the 4-month period. A total of 94.1 % of fluxes measured with
the LONG closure times were retained after our quality control data
processing over the 4-month study period. When measured over 25 min,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes at our site could therefore be considered reliable.
Using the SHORT closure time, most flux estimations had to be discarded
because they led to unreliable flux estimations (Fig. 2). Nonetheless, the
SHORT closure time still allowed the detection of high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission
or consumption events than were detected during the study period (Figs. 5 and
7).</p>
      <p id="d1e4523"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were on average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
with a high variability among chambers (Table 2). At the same chamber,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux can shift from consumption to emission with 28 % of
fluxes indicating a sink and 72 % a source for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 3).
The high variability in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes that we detected over 4 months with our automated system is in agreement with the typical high
variability in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes measured from tropical soils over space
and time using static chambers (Arias-Navarro et al., 2017; Courtois et al.,
2018). Moreover, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes did not show any relationship with
surface soil humidity (Fig. S2), which underlines the complexity of the
biological process underlying these fluxes. In a previous study in the same
environment (Courtois et al., 2018), we estimated that the minimum detectable
flux using gas chromatography analysis of four discrete gas samples over
30 min for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
MDF estimated in the present study using high-frequency measurement was
0.002 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> or 0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> which is therefore <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> times lower. Such result
indicates that this long-term system is well-adapted to capture and estimate
the low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes occurring in this ecosystem.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e4794">We demonstrated here that the combination of a commercial soil GHG chamber
system – the LI-8100A Automated Soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Flux System – running in
parallel with a Picarro G2308, enables the continuous long-term measurement
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simultaneously under
tropical conditions. Similar configurations have been recently implemented in
temperate climate (Petrakis et al., 2017a, b), but to our knowledge, this is
the first time that this experimental setup is fully described and tested
under tropical field conditions for the measurement of the three soil GHG
fluxes simultaneously. Additionally, our study determined the optimal chamber
closure time for each GHG. The sampling system of SHORT and LONG closure
times with a weekly rotation presented here has three major advantages, which
ultimately can provide high confidence in the annual estimation of the full
GHG budgets of tropical soils: (1) the LONG closure time allows a reliable
estimation of the low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes in this ecosystem, which was
clearly not achieved using a shorter closure time; (2) the number of data
points per day are sufficiently high (9 to 10 measurements per day) to
capture potential diurnal variation (Nicolini et al., 2013; Rubio and Detto,
2017) in the three gases with good spatial replication (16 chambers);
(3) periodic extreme events of high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes can still be
detected with the SHORT closure time period, which occurs at a higher frequency
than the LONG closure measurements. Our study underlines the importance of
appropriate closure time for each GHG gas for accurate estimation of GHG
budgets. This information is crucial for the calculation of accurate soil
fluxes at diurnal time steps and for the estimation of annual GHG budgets.
This combination of automated closed dynamic chambers and advanced GHG
analyzers makes it possible to (1) account for short-term variability in GHG fluxes
while taking into account spatial variability, (2) estimate annual GHG
budgets at these locations, (3) tracking the variability in GHG fluxes along
hours, days, seasons, and years, and (4) study the impact of climatic
change on soil GHG budgets.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e4875">Data used in this study can be freely accessed through the
Zenodo repository: <uri>https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2555299</uri> (Courtois and
Stahl, 2019).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e4881">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-785-2019-supplement" xlink:title="zip">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-785-2019-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e4890">JVB and NA designed the experiment and EAC, CS, BB, and
DB carried it out. EAC and CS prepared the paper with contributions from all
co-authors. EAC and CS contributed equally to the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e4896">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e4902">This research was supported by the European Research Council Synergy grant
ERC-2013-SyG 610028-IMBALANCE-P. We thank Jan Segers for help in the initial
setting of the system and Renato Winkler from Picarro and Rod Madsen and
Jason Hupp from LI-COR for their help in combining the systems. We thank the
staff of Paracou station, managed by UMR Ecofog (CIRAD, INRA; Kourou), which
received support from “Investissement d'Avenir” grants managed by Agence
Nationale de la Recherche (CEBA: ANR-10-LABX-25-01, ANAEE-France:
ANR-11-INBS-0001). This study was conducted in collaboration with the
Guyaflux program belonging to SOERE F-ORE-T, which is supported annually by
Ecofor, Allenvi, and the French national research infrastructure, ANAEE-F.
This program also received support from an “investissement d'avenir” grant
from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (CEBA, ref ANR-10-LABX-25-01).
Ivan August Janssens acknowledges support from Antwerp University (Methusalem
funding), Nicola Arriga from ICOS-Belgium and Fonds Wetenschappelijk
Onderzoek (FWO),<?pagebreak page795?> and Jennifer Larned Soong from the U.S. Department of Energy
under contract DE-AC02-05CH11231.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by:
Kees Jan van Groenigen<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: three anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aguilos, M., Hérault, B., Burban, B., Wagner, F., and Bonal, D.: What
drives long-term variations in carbon flux and balance in a tropical
rainforest in French Guiana?, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 253, 114–123, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Ambus, P., Skiba, U., Drewer, J., Jones, S., Carter, M. S., Albert, K. R.,
and Sutton, M.: Development of an accumulation-based system for
cost-effective chamber measurements of inert trace gas fluxes, Eur. J. Soil
Sci., 61, 785–792, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Arias-Navarro, C., Díaz-Pinés, E., Klatt, S., Brandt, P., Rufino, M.
C., Butterbach-Bahl, K., and Verchot, L.: Spatial variability of soil
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes in different topographic positions in
a tropical montane forest in Kenya, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 122, 514–527,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bonal, D., Bosc, A., Ponton, S., Goret, J. Y., Burban, B., Gross, P.,
Bonnefond, J., Elbers, J., Longdoz, B., and Epron, D.: Impact of severe dry
season on net ecosystem exchange in the Neotropical rainforest of French
Guiana, Glob. Change Biol., 14, 1917–1933, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bréchet, L., Ponton, S., Roy, J., Freycon, V., Coûteaux, M.-M.,
Bonal, D., and Epron, D.: Do tree species characteristics influence soil
respiration in tropical forests? A test based on 16 tree species planted in
monospecific plots, Plant Soil, 319, 235–246, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Breuer, L., Papen, H., and Butterbach-Bahl, K.: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission from
tropical forest soils of Australia, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105,
26353–26367, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Christiansen, J. R., Outhwaite, J., and Smukler, S. M.: Comparison of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> soil-atmosphere exchange
measured in static chambers with cavity ring-down spectroscopy and gas
chromatography, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 211, 48–57, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Courtois, E. A. and Stahl, C.: Dataset from: Automatic high-frequency
measurements of full soil greenhouse gas fluxes in a tropical forest
Biogeosciences 2019, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2555299" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.2555299</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Courtois, E. A., Stahl, C., Van den Berge, J., Bréchet, L., Van
Langenhove, L., Richter, A., Urbina, I., Soong, J. L., Peñuelas, J., and
Janssens, I. A.: Spatial variation of soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes across topographical positions in tropical forests of
the Guiana Shield, Ecosystems, 21, 1445–1458, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E., Savage, K., Verchot, L., and Navarro, R.: Minimizing artifacts
and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 113, 21–37, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Nepstad, D. C., Ishida, F. Y., and Brando, P. M.: Effects of
an experimental drought and recovery on soil emissions of carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrous oxide, and nitric oxide in a moist tropical forest, Glob.
Change Biol., 14, 2582–2590, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
De Klein, C. and Harvey, M.: Nitrous oxide chamber methodology guidelines,
Ministry for Primary Industries: Wellington, New Zealand, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Denmead, O.: Chamber systems for measuring nitrous oxide emission from soils
in the field, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 43, 89–95, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Dutaur, L. and Verchot, L. V.: A global inventory of the soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
sink, Glob. Biogeochem. Cy., 21, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GB002734" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006GB002734</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Epron, D., Bosc, A., Bonal, D., and Freycon, V.: Spatial variation of soil
respiration across a topographic gradient in a tropical rain forest in French
Guiana, J. Trop. Ecol., 22, 565–574, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
FAO/ISRIC/ISSS: World Reference Base for Soil Resources.FAO, ISRIC, ISSS, World Soil Resources Reports 84, Rome, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Görres, C.-M., Kammann, C., and Ceulemans, R.: Automation of soil flux
chamber measurements: potentials and pitfalls, Biogeosciences, 13,
1949–1966, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-1949-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-13-1949-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Hupp, J. R., Garcia, R. L., Madsen, R., and McDermitt, D. K.: Measurement of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> evolution in a multiplexed flask system, Amer. Soc.
Horticultural Science, Alexandria, USA, Vol. 44, 1143–1143, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Janssens, I. A., Kowalski, A. S., Longdoz, B., and Ceulemans, R.: Assessing
forest soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux: an in-situ comparison of four techniques,
Tree Physiol., 20, 23–32, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Koskinen, M., Minkkinen, K., Ojanen, P., Kämäräinen, M., Laurila,
T., and Lohila, A.: Measurements of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exchange with an automated
chamber system throughout the year: challenges in measuring night-time
respiration on porous peat soil, Biogeosciences, 11, 347–363,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-347-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-347-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Kostyanovsky, K., Huggins, D., Stockle, C., Waldo, S., and Lamb, B.:
Developing a flow through chamber system for automated measurements of soil
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, Measurement, 113, 172–180, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Merbold, L., Wohlfahrt, G., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Pilegaard, K., DelSontro,
T., Stoy, P., and Zona, D.: Preface: Towards a full greenhouse gas balance of
the biosphere, Biogeosciences, 12, 453–456,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-453-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-12-453-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Nickerson, N.: Evaluating gas emission measurements using Minimum Detectable
Flux (MDF), Eosense Inc., Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Nicolini, G., Castaldi, S., Fratini, G., and Valentini, R.: A literature
overview of micrometeorological <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
measurements in terrestrial ecosystems, Atmos. Environ., 81, 311–319, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>O'Connell, C. S., Ruan, L., and Silver, W. L.: Drought drives rapid shifts in
tropical rainforest soil biogeochemistry and greenhouse gas emissions, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1348, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03352" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-018-03352</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Oertel, C., Matschullat, J., Zurba, K., Zimmermann, F., and Erasmi, S.:
Greenhouse gas emissions from soils-A review, Chem. Erde-Geochem., 76,
327–352, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Petitjean, C., Hénault, C., Perrin, A.-S., Pontet, C., Metay, A.,
Bernoux, M., Jehanno, T., Viard, A., and Roggy, J.-C.: Soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions in French Guiana after the conversion of tropical forest to
agriculture with the chop-and-mulch method, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 208,
64–74, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Petrakis, S., Seyfferth, A., Kan, J., Inamdar, S., and Vargas, R.: Influence
of experimental extreme water pulses on greenhouse gas emissions from soils,
Biogeochemistry, 133, 147–164, 2017a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page796?><ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Petrakis, S., Barba, J., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Vargas, R.: Using greenhouse
gas fluxes to define soil functional types, Plant Soil, 1–10, 2017b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Pumpanen, J., Kolari, P., Ilvesniemi, H., Minkkinen, K., Vesala, T.,
Niinistö, S., Lohila, A., Larmola, T., Morero, M., and Pihlatie, M.:
Comparison of different chamber techniques for measuring soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
efflux, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 123, 159–176, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Rowland, L., Hill, T. C., Stahl, C., Siebicke, L., Burban, B.,
Zaragoza-Castells, J., Ponton, S., Bonal, D., Meir, P., and Williams, M.:
Evidence for strong seasonality in the carbon storage and carbon use
efficiency of an Amazonian forest, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 979–991, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Rubio, V. E. and Detto, M.: Spatiotemporal variability of soil respiration in
a seasonal tropical forest, Ecol. Evol., 7, 7104–7116, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Savage, K., Phillips, R., and Davidson, E.: High temporal frequency
measurements of greenhouse gas emissions from soils, Biogeosciences, 11,
2709–2720, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2709-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-2709-2014</ext-link>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Silver, W. L., Lugo, A., and Keller, M.: Soil oxygen availability and
biogeochemistry along rainfall and topographic gradients in upland wet
tropical forest soils, Biogeochemistry, 44, 301–328, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Teh, Y. A., Diem, T., Jones, S., Huaraca Quispe, L. P., Baggs, E., Morley,
N., Richards, M., Smith, P., and Meir, P.: Methane and nitrous oxide fluxes
across an elevation gradient in the tropical Peruvian Andes, Biogeosciences,
11, 2325–2339, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2325-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-2325-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Verchot, L. V., Davidson, E. A., Cattânio, H., Ackerman, I. L., Erickson,
H. E., and Keller, M.: Land use change and biogeochemical controls of
nitrogen oxide emissions from soils in eastern Amazonia, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 13, 31–46, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Verchot, L. V., Davidson, E. A., Cattânio, J. H., and Ackerman, I. L.:
Land-use change and biogeochemical controls of methane fluxes in soils of
eastern Amazonia, Ecosystems, 3, 41–56, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Wagner, F., Hérault, B., Stahl, C., Bonal, D., and Rossi, V.: Modeling
water availability for trees in tropical forests, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151,
1202–1213, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Automatic high-frequency measurements of full soil greenhouse gas fluxes in a tropical forest</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Measuring in situ soil fluxes of carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>), methane
(CH<sub>4</sub>), and nitrous oxide (N<sub>2</sub>O) continuously at high
frequency requires appropriate technology. We tested the combination of a
commercial automated soil CO<sub>2</sub> flux chamber system (LI-8100A) with a
CH<sub>4</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O analyzer (Picarro G2308) in a tropical
rainforest for 4 months. A chamber closure time of 2&thinsp;min was sufficient for
a reliable estimation of CO<sub>2</sub> and CH<sub>4</sub> fluxes (100&thinsp;%
and 98.5&thinsp;% of fluxes were above minimum detectable flux – MDF,
respectively). This closure time was generally not suitable for a reliable
estimation of the low N<sub>2</sub>O fluxes in this ecosystem but was
sufficient for detecting rare major peak events. A closure time of 25&thinsp;min
was more appropriate for reliable estimation of most N<sub>2</sub>O fluxes
(85.6&thinsp;% of measured fluxes are above MDF&thinsp;±&thinsp;0.002&thinsp;nmol&thinsp;m<sup>−2</sup>&thinsp;s<sup>−1</sup>). Our study highlights the importance of
adjusted closure time for each gas.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aguilos, M., Hérault, B., Burban, B., Wagner, F., and Bonal, D.: What
drives long-term variations in carbon flux and balance in a tropical
rainforest in French Guiana?, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 253, 114–123, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Ambus, P., Skiba, U., Drewer, J., Jones, S., Carter, M. S., Albert, K. R.,
and Sutton, M.: Development of an accumulation-based system for
cost-effective chamber measurements of inert trace gas fluxes, Eur. J. Soil
Sci., 61, 785–792, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Arias-Navarro, C., Díaz-Pinés, E., Klatt, S., Brandt, P., Rufino, M.
C., Butterbach-Bahl, K., and Verchot, L.: Spatial variability of soil
N<sub>2</sub>O and CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes in different topographic positions in
a tropical montane forest in Kenya, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 122, 514–527,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bonal, D., Bosc, A., Ponton, S., Goret, J. Y., Burban, B., Gross, P.,
Bonnefond, J., Elbers, J., Longdoz, B., and Epron, D.: Impact of severe dry
season on net ecosystem exchange in the Neotropical rainforest of French
Guiana, Glob. Change Biol., 14, 1917–1933, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bréchet, L., Ponton, S., Roy, J., Freycon, V., Coûteaux, M.-M.,
Bonal, D., and Epron, D.: Do tree species characteristics influence soil
respiration in tropical forests? A test based on 16 tree species planted in
monospecific plots, Plant Soil, 319, 235–246, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Breuer, L., Papen, H., and Butterbach-Bahl, K.: N<sub>2</sub>O emission from
tropical forest soils of Australia, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105,
26353–26367, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Christiansen, J. R., Outhwaite, J., and Smukler, S. M.: Comparison of
CO<sub>2</sub>, CH<sub>4</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O soil-atmosphere exchange
measured in static chambers with cavity ring-down spectroscopy and gas
chromatography, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 211, 48–57, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Courtois, E. A. and Stahl, C.: Dataset from: Automatic high-frequency
measurements of full soil greenhouse gas fluxes in a tropical forest
Biogeosciences 2019, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2555299" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2555299</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Courtois, E. A., Stahl, C., Van den Berge, J., Bréchet, L., Van
Langenhove, L., Richter, A., Urbina, I., Soong, J. L., Peñuelas, J., and
Janssens, I. A.: Spatial variation of soil CO<sub>2</sub>, CH<sub>4</sub> and
N<sub>2</sub>O fluxes across topographical positions in tropical forests of
the Guiana Shield, Ecosystems, 21, 1445–1458, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E., Savage, K., Verchot, L., and Navarro, R.: Minimizing artifacts
and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 113, 21–37, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Nepstad, D. C., Ishida, F. Y., and Brando, P. M.: Effects of
an experimental drought and recovery on soil emissions of carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrous oxide, and nitric oxide in a moist tropical forest, Glob.
Change Biol., 14, 2582–2590, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
De Klein, C. and Harvey, M.: Nitrous oxide chamber methodology guidelines,
Ministry for Primary Industries: Wellington, New Zealand, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Denmead, O.: Chamber systems for measuring nitrous oxide emission from soils
in the field, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 43, 89–95, 1979.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Dutaur, L. and Verchot, L. V.: A global inventory of the soil CH<sub>4</sub>
sink, Glob. Biogeochem. Cy., 21, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GB002734" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GB002734</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Epron, D., Bosc, A., Bonal, D., and Freycon, V.: Spatial variation of soil
respiration across a topographic gradient in a tropical rain forest in French
Guiana, J. Trop. Ecol., 22, 565–574, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
FAO/ISRIC/ISSS: World Reference Base for Soil Resources.FAO, ISRIC, ISSS, World Soil Resources Reports 84, Rome, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Görres, C.-M., Kammann, C., and Ceulemans, R.: Automation of soil flux
chamber measurements: potentials and pitfalls, Biogeosciences, 13,
1949–1966, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-1949-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-1949-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hupp, J. R., Garcia, R. L., Madsen, R., and McDermitt, D. K.: Measurement of
CO<sub>2</sub> evolution in a multiplexed flask system, Amer. Soc.
Horticultural Science, Alexandria, USA, Vol. 44, 1143–1143, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Janssens, I. A., Kowalski, A. S., Longdoz, B., and Ceulemans, R.: Assessing
forest soil CO<sub>2</sub> efflux: an in-situ comparison of four techniques,
Tree Physiol., 20, 23–32, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Koskinen, M., Minkkinen, K., Ojanen, P., Kämäräinen, M., Laurila,
T., and Lohila, A.: Measurements of CO<sub>2</sub> exchange with an automated
chamber system throughout the year: challenges in measuring night-time
respiration on porous peat soil, Biogeosciences, 11, 347–363,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-347-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-347-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Kostyanovsky, K., Huggins, D., Stockle, C., Waldo, S., and Lamb, B.:
Developing a flow through chamber system for automated measurements of soil
N<sub>2</sub>O and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, Measurement, 113, 172–180, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Merbold, L., Wohlfahrt, G., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Pilegaard, K., DelSontro,
T., Stoy, P., and Zona, D.: Preface: Towards a full greenhouse gas balance of
the biosphere, Biogeosciences, 12, 453–456,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-453-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-453-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Nickerson, N.: Evaluating gas emission measurements using Minimum Detectable
Flux (MDF), Eosense Inc., Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Nicolini, G., Castaldi, S., Fratini, G., and Valentini, R.: A literature
overview of micrometeorological CH<sub>4</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O flux
measurements in terrestrial ecosystems, Atmos. Environ., 81, 311–319, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
O'Connell, C. S., Ruan, L., and Silver, W. L.: Drought drives rapid shifts in
tropical rainforest soil biogeochemistry and greenhouse gas emissions, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1348, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03352" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03352</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Oertel, C., Matschullat, J., Zurba, K., Zimmermann, F., and Erasmi, S.:
Greenhouse gas emissions from soils-A review, Chem. Erde-Geochem., 76,
327–352, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Petitjean, C., Hénault, C., Perrin, A.-S., Pontet, C., Metay, A.,
Bernoux, M., Jehanno, T., Viard, A., and Roggy, J.-C.: Soil N<sub>2</sub>O
emissions in French Guiana after the conversion of tropical forest to
agriculture with the chop-and-mulch method, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 208,
64–74, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Petrakis, S., Seyfferth, A., Kan, J., Inamdar, S., and Vargas, R.: Influence
of experimental extreme water pulses on greenhouse gas emissions from soils,
Biogeochemistry, 133, 147–164, 2017a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Petrakis, S., Barba, J., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Vargas, R.: Using greenhouse
gas fluxes to define soil functional types, Plant Soil, 1–10, 2017b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Pumpanen, J., Kolari, P., Ilvesniemi, H., Minkkinen, K., Vesala, T.,
Niinistö, S., Lohila, A., Larmola, T., Morero, M., and Pihlatie, M.:
Comparison of different chamber techniques for measuring soil CO<sub>2</sub>
efflux, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 123, 159–176, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Rowland, L., Hill, T. C., Stahl, C., Siebicke, L., Burban, B.,
Zaragoza-Castells, J., Ponton, S., Bonal, D., Meir, P., and Williams, M.:
Evidence for strong seasonality in the carbon storage and carbon use
efficiency of an Amazonian forest, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 979–991, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Rubio, V. E. and Detto, M.: Spatiotemporal variability of soil respiration in
a seasonal tropical forest, Ecol. Evol., 7, 7104–7116, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Savage, K., Phillips, R., and Davidson, E.: High temporal frequency
measurements of greenhouse gas emissions from soils, Biogeosciences, 11,
2709–2720, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2709-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2709-2014</a>, 2014.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Silver, W. L., Lugo, A., and Keller, M.: Soil oxygen availability and
biogeochemistry along rainfall and topographic gradients in upland wet
tropical forest soils, Biogeochemistry, 44, 301–328, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Teh, Y. A., Diem, T., Jones, S., Huaraca Quispe, L. P., Baggs, E., Morley,
N., Richards, M., Smith, P., and Meir, P.: Methane and nitrous oxide fluxes
across an elevation gradient in the tropical Peruvian Andes, Biogeosciences,
11, 2325–2339, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2325-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2325-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Verchot, L. V., Davidson, E. A., Cattânio, H., Ackerman, I. L., Erickson,
H. E., and Keller, M.: Land use change and biogeochemical controls of
nitrogen oxide emissions from soils in eastern Amazonia, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 13, 31–46, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Verchot, L. V., Davidson, E. A., Cattânio, J. H., and Ackerman, I. L.:
Land-use change and biogeochemical controls of methane fluxes in soils of
eastern Amazonia, Ecosystems, 3, 41–56, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Wagner, F., Hérault, B., Stahl, C., Bonal, D., and Rossi, V.: Modeling
water availability for trees in tropical forests, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151,
1202–1213, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
