<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/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" article-type="research-article">
  <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-23-5035-2026</article-id><title-group><article-title>Net ecosystem exchange of extensive green roofs: the role  of coupled energy, carbon, and water fluxes quantified by long-term micrometeorological observations</article-title><alt-title>Net ecosystem exchange of extensive green roofs</alt-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Markolf</surname><given-names>Niklas</given-names></name>
          <email>n.markolf@tu-braunschweig.de</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6318-4971</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Weber</surname><given-names>Stephan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Climatology and Environmental Meteorology, Institute of Geoecology, Technische Universität Braunschweig, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Niklas Markolf (n.markolf@tu-braunschweig.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>21</day><month>July</month><year>2026</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>14</issue>
      <fpage>5035</fpage><lpage>5053</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>18</day><month>February</month><year>2026</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>4</day><month>March</month><year>2026</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>13</day><month>June</month><year>2026</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>2</day><month>July</month><year>2026</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2026 Niklas Markolf</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</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/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d2e93">Vegetated roofs (i.e. green roofs, GRs) have been emerging as a promising nature-based solution in urban environments to mitigate climate change impacts, such as heat waves, urban flooding, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. Green roofs were shown to provide various ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration from the urban atmosphere.</p>

      <p id="d2e96">The present study leverages a 9-year, long-term time series of continuous, integrated flux measurements on a large, extensive GR in Berlin, Germany, using the eddy-covariance technique. We investigate, (1) whether the GR is a net annual sink for carbon, (2) if the sink intensity remains stable over the whole study period, and (3) the coupling between carbon, water, and energy fluxes at different temporal scales to determine their role in shaping the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of the GR ecosystem.</p>

      <p id="d2e99">The extensive GR was a moderate carbon sink with an average annual NEE of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">92</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>154 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8 g C m<sup>−2</sup> in the study period from 2015–2023. In the final two years, 2022 and 2023, the annual NEE shifted toward net carbon release, coinciding with an abrupt increase in substrate organic carbon, which has been linked to external input of carbon to the GR system. During the study period, the roof retained 51 % of precipitation, with a strong coupling between soil moisture, evapotranspiration, sensible heat flux, and carbon flux. Low substrate water content (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup>) reduced evaporative cooling and suppressed carbon uptake during the summer. The findings demonstrate the importance of integrated flux monitoring and emphasise the multifaceted environmental benefits of extensive GRs while also pointing to their structural constraints.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft</funding-source>
<award-id>505703010</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d2e181">Urban environments are increasingly challenged by the combined pressures of climate change and population growth. As the global urban population continues to rise (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 2019), expanding settlement areas and impervious surfaces exacerbate flooding risks, elevate greenhouse gas emissions, and modify the surface energy balance, leading to the urban heat island effect (Oke, 1982). To address these challenges, sustainable and multifunctional solutions are required. Nature-based solutions (NBS) have proven effective in mitigating such negative impacts by restoring ecosystem functions within cities (Pereira et al., 2023; Ferreira et al., 2022; Soltanifard and Amani-Beni, 2025). However, the limited availability of open space in densely built environments makes their widespread implementation at ground level challenging.</p>
      <p id="d2e184">Green roofs (GRs) – vegetated surfaces installed on rooftops – offer a promising form of NBS that can be integrated into both, new and retrofitted buildings. Roof areas account for approximately 20 %–25 % of total urban surfaces (Akbari and Rose, 2008), representing significant potential for urban greening. On a global scale, it is predicted that the available area for green roofs will increase by around 80 % between 2022 and 2060 (Ürge-Vorsatz et al., 2025), underscoring their future relevance as an urban nature-based solution. GRs deliver multiple ecosystem services, including stormwater retention (Stovin et al., 2012; Schultz et al., 2018; VanWoert et al., 2005; Stovin, 2010; Liu et al., 2019), local air temperature regulation through evapotranspiration cooling (Heusinger et al., 2018; Francis and Jensen, 2017), and carbon sequestration (Heusinger and Weber, 2017b; Konopka et al., 2021; Starry et al., 2014; Teemusk et al., 2019). Their performance, however, depends on design and maintenance factors, particularly substrate depth and vegetation type. While intensive GRs support diverse vegetation due to larger substrate depths, extensive GRs, characterised by shallow substrates and drought-resistant plants such as <italic>Sedum</italic>, are lighter, require less maintenance, and can be applied more widely. In Germany, 86 % of newly constructed GRs in 2023 were extensive systems (Mann and Landwehr, 2024) with a similar value of 84 % reported for Austria for 2022 (Formanek et al., 2024).</p>
      <p id="d2e190">Recent observations of green roof surface–atmosphere exchange reported that GRs are net carbon sinks by sequestering more atmospheric carbon through photosynthesis than they release through ecosystem respiration. Konopka et al. (2021) measured the carbon exchange of an extensive GR located in Berlin, Germany (same GR as in the present study) via eddy covariance (EC) over the course of 5 years (September 2014 until August 2019) and found a consistent annual net uptake of carbon with an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>141 g C m<sup>−2</sup>. For the same GR, Hansen et al. (2025) reported a net uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14 g C m<sup>−2</sup> over the study period of 24 June to 10 November 2022 as observed by EC, and a net uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>51 g C m<sup>−2</sup> as observed by soil chambers. Getter et al. (2009) found that an extensive green roof system in Michigan, USA, sequestered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>187 g C m<sup>−2</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>  in above- and belowground biomass and substrate organic matter, whereas a subtropical intensive green roof in Nanjing, China sequestered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>61 g C m<sup>−2</sup> over a 12-month period (Yang et al., 2023). For a recent overview on sequestration rates of urban green roofs as estimated by different methods the reader is referred to Shafique et al. (2020).</p>
      <p id="d2e301">Although existing studies demonstrated extensive green roofs to be a moderate carbon sink, long-term studies examining the variability of the GR carbon exchange over multiple years are scarce. Hence, there is a lack of knowledge on how the boundary conditions, i.e. temporal dynamics of surface energy balance, water fluxes, and the substrate carbon content, play a role in shaping the carbon exchange of GRs. Additionally, the long-term stability of the carbon sink intensity of extensive GR remains understudied. Atmospheric uptake of carbon via photosynthesis and decomposition of plant litter will increase the amount of carbon in the GR system. This may be complemented by additional carbon from external inputs such as maintenance or management practises (e.g. fertiliser application, mowing, weeding), which subsequently influence substrate respiration and surface-atmosphere carbon exchange of the GR. Consequently, this determines variation of the sink intensity with time. Better insight into these interactions, however, is essential for evaluating GR carbon sequestration potential, resilience, and contribution to urban climate adaptation and mitigation.</p>
      <p id="d2e305">The present study reports on a nine-year eddy covariance dataset of carbon, water, and energy fluxes from a large, extensive green roof in Berlin, Germany. We hypothesise that the extensive green roof is a sink for carbon and investigate how the carbon sink intensity evolves with green roof age. We also investigate to what extent water and energy fluxes jointly shape the net ecosystem exchange and ecosystem service provision. By integrating these components, this study provides a comprehensive empirical assessment of extensive GR functioning, supporting modelling of urban ecosystem services.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Material and Methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Study site</title>
      <p id="d2e323">Data has been collected on an extensive GR in northeast Germany located on a multi-storey car park at Berlin-Brandenburg Airport (BER; lat: 52.37°; lon: 13.51°, Fig. A1). The GR is located southeast of the city centre of Berlin on plain level terrain at a height of 61 m a.s.l. The roof has a slope of about 2 %, a size of 8600 m<sup>2</sup> and was built in 2012. The substrate composition is mainly expanded shale, expanded clay, lava, pumice and compost with a depth of 9 cm (Table 1). Initial substrate organic matter content, which was determined by loss-on-ignition, was 3.1 %, according to the manufacturer's specification. The roof is non-irrigated and has been initially planted mainly with <italic>Sedum</italic> and <italic>Phedimus</italic> species. Vegetation height varies between 0.1 and 0.3 m throughout the year. Plant surface coverage, as estimated from photographs taken at regular intervals (usually every 1–2 months) from up to 11 fixed spots distributed evenly throughout the GR (Heusinger and Weber, 2017a), increased from about 41 % in the summer of 2015 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in 2023 (Fig. A2a). Additional information about the site and substrate properties can be found in Table 1.</p>

<table-wrap id="T1"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d2e354">Location and properties of the studied green roof.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="3.6cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="3.8cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">BER green roof site</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Coordinates</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">lat: 52.37°; lon: 13.51°</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Construction finished</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">May 2012</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Size [m<sup>2</sup>]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">8600</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Slope [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Plant coverage [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (summer 2023)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Dominant plant species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left"><italic>Sedum album</italic> and <italic>-acre, Phedimus spurius</italic> and <italic>-kamtschaticus</italic></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Substrate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">Optigrün M-leicht</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– composition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">lava, pumice, expanded shale, expanded clay, compost</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– depth [cm]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– maximum volumetric water content [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">42.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– porosity [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">71</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– organic matter [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">3.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– dry bulk density [g cm<sup>−3</sup>]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">0.78</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">– bulk density at water saturation [g cm<sup>−3</sup>]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">1.22</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Instrumentation and data processing</title>
      <p id="d2e565">The study period lasted for 9 years from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2023. In 2024, photovoltaic panels were installed across the entire BER roof, which prevents further analysis of the green roof–atmosphere exchange under the same conditions after the end of 2023. Carbon, water and sensible heat fluxes were measured using the eddy covariance technique with a temporal resolution of 10 Hz (Table 2). A Campbell Scientific CSAT3A sonic anemometer and an EC150 open-path infrared gas analyser were installed at a height of 1.15 m above roof level. Meteorological variables included air temperature, relative humidity and all four components of the radiation balance. The volumetric water content (VWC) of the substrate was measured at a substrate depth of 5 cm using Campbell Scientific VWC probes, applying the time-domain reflectometry method. The ground heat flux was measured with a Hukseflux heat flux plate located 5 cm deep in the substrate and corrected for heat storage above the heat flux plate using a soil temperature sensor and the calorimetric method (Liebethal et al., 2005; Weber, 2006). All data were stored with a 30 min time resolution.</p>
      <p id="d2e568">The EC data were post-processed using the EddyPro software Version 7.0.9 (Fratini and Mauder, 2014; LI-COR Biosciences, 2022) according to established procedures in the EC community (Aubinet et al., 2012). The data processing workflow is based on procedures as documented in Konopka et al. (2021) but will be briefly summarised in the following: Spectral correction was applied according to Moncrieff et al. (1997), and despiking of the data was performed. Quality flags were calculated according to Foken et al. (2005), and flags <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were rejected. Furthermore, data were rejected when CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>O signal strengths were <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and data during and 30 min after precipitation were rejected. Data from the wind sector (36–54°), which is the sector where the measurement tripod affects data, was also excluded. The final data availability was 66 % for CO<sub>2</sub> and latent heat fluxes and 75 % for sensible heat fluxes. Missing data were gap-filled using the Look-Up-Tables (LUT) and Mean Diurnal Variation (MDV) approaches (Falge et al., 2001a, 2001b; Reichstein et al., 2005). The LUT algorithm uses data from similar meteorological conditions to replace missing values. If similar meteorological conditions are not found, the MDV approach is used, which is based on temporal-autocorrelation of the fluxes. We follow the standard micrometeorological sign convention: a negative flux is a flux directed towards the surface, whereas a positive flux is a flux directed away from the surface. Furthermore, daytime is defined for gap-filled data with a global radiation value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<sup>−2</sup>.</p>

<table-wrap id="T2" specific-use="star"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d2e644">Overview of measurement setup at BER. Abbreviations: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">v</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> wind vectors, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> sonic temperature, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> shortwave radiation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> longwave radiation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> downward, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> upward, VWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> volumetric water content.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Quantity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Device</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Measurement height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sampling</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">above (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>) / below (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">frequency</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">roof level [m]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">v</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CSAT3A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10 Hz</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO<sub>2</sub>, H<sub>2</sub>O mass densities</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">EC 150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10 Hz</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Huskeflux NR01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Air temperature and air humidity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Vaisala HMP155</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Soil temperature</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CS 107</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.025</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">VWC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CS TDR probe</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Substrate heat flux</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Hukseflux HFP01SC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Data quality control</title>
      <p id="d2e1050">Heusinger and Weber (2017a) documented that the conditions found at BER, e.g. turbulence development, complied with the principles of EC. Measurement setup was the same during the 9-year study period; nonetheless, the data quality and turbulence development were checked for the present data set to investigate potential differences over time. As indicators, turbulence spectra as well as integral turbulence characteristics were calculated.</p>
      <p id="d2e1053">The integral turbulence characteristic, given by the ratio of the standard deviation of the vertical wind velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to friction velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) under neutral stratification, was calculated for different wind directions to assess turbulence development above the GR. The influence of roughness elements on EC measurements was analysed using the aerodynamic roughness length (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), calculated from the logarithmic wind profile.</p>
      <p id="d2e1089">Cospectra were calculated for each flux-averaging period using EddyPro. The program outputs “binned” cospectra by dividing the frequency range into 50 exponentially spaced frequency bins and averaging individual cospectral values that fall within each bin. This reduces noise that typically affects medium and high-frequency ranges. Subsequently, the program calculates ensemble-averaged cospectra for the whole study period that are quality controlled and sorted according to the atmospheric stability regime, defined by the value of the Obukhov length (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; unstable: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>650 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m; stable: 0 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m).</p>
      <p id="d2e1134">To check for potential contributions to the measured flux from areas outside the GR, we calculated the aggregated flux source area (FSA) using the FFP model (Kljun et al., 2015). The input parameter of the boundary layer height (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) was assumed as a fixed value of 1500 m. Kljun et al. (2015) reported minor influence on FSA dimensions when changing the value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % (up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % change in FSA peak location under stable conditions), indicating a low model sensitivity for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Analysis of substrate carbon content</title>
      <p id="d2e1186">Multiple bulk substrate samples for laboratory carbon content analysis were taken every May or June at randomly selected locations on the GR starting in 2020. In the laboratory, the plant material (roots, leaves, etc.) was first removed from the substrate samples. A mortar and pestle were used for crushing, grinding, and mixing each sample. Subsequently, total carbon (C), nitrogen (N) and sulfur (S) in all solid samples were measured by means of an elemental analyser (EuroEA 3000, HEKAtech GmbH, Germany) that combusted 10–20 mg aliquots of each sample in a tin capsule calibrated with a sulfanilamide standard (CD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">41</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">750</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %; ND<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">260</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %; SD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">640</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) and BBOT (2.5-Bis(5-tert-butyl-benzoxazol-2-yl)thiophene; CD72.52 %; ND6.51 %; SD7.44 %). The quality of the measurements was controlled by three certified reference materials – NIST 1515 apple leaves (ND<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">250</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), NCG DC 73030 Chinese soil (CD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6170</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">044</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %; SD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), MOC soil standard (CD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">190</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %; ND<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">270</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %; SD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0430</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">005</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) – and sulfanilamide (1 for every 10 analyses).</p>
      <p id="d2e1334">Samples were not acidified prior to elemental analysis, so the measurements represent total carbon (TC). However, because the substrate consists exclusively of non-carbonate mineral aggregates and contains no carbonate-bearing components, inorganic carbon was assumed to be negligible, and the TC values will therefore be interpreted as total organic carbon (TC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> TOC).</p>
      <p id="d2e1344">In contrast to the laboratory measurements, the manufacturer's value of 3.1 % represents organic matter determined by loss-on-ignition, a method that quantifies total mass loss upon combustion and therefore includes true organic material as well as volatilised structural water and thermally unstable mineral fractions. Hence, the two metrics cannot be directly compared. However, the initial TOC range of 1.5 %–2.5 % was considered plausible based on the substrate composition (Table 1).</p>
      <p id="d2e1347">A mass-balance comparison between substrate TOC and measured EC carbon fluxes was conducted (Sect. 3.4.3, Fig. 11) with the following procedure: Substrate TOC for both the measured values (2020–2023) and the initial value (2012) were converted to g C m<sup>−2</sup>. The values for the other years (2013–2019) have been linearly interpolated. In order to analyse the potential range of substrate TOC, two assumptions were made: (1) the initial TOC was set at 1.5 %, and bulk density was fixed at 0.78 g cm<sup>−3</sup> (lower bound), and (2) the initial TOC was set at 2.5 %, and bulk density increased to 1.18 g cm<sup>−3</sup> in 2020 (upper bound). For the mass-balance comparison, we added the annual carbon sequestration (2015–2023) from EC flux observations to the initial TOC value. For the years 2012–2014, where flux measurements were not yet operational, we assumed a value of 121 g C m<sup>−2</sup> a<sup>−1</sup>, i.e. the average for the period 2015–2021.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Water balance</title>
      <p id="d2e1419">The water balance is written as:

            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M89" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Precipitation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Runoff, ET <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Evapotranspi-ration and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>S <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Change in storage.</p>
      <p id="d2e1494">It is a common practice to neglect changes in the water storage (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) over annual/multi-annual periods in natural ecosystems, because it is minor when compared to the fluxes of the other components (Xue et al., 2013; Greve et al., 2016). Some studies, however, found that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cannot be neglected in the annual water balance (Han et al., 2020; Bruno et al., 2022). The water storage capacity of the BER green roof was found to be 35.8 mm, i.e. maximum possible <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Markolf et al., 2024), indicating its minor contribution to the water balance. The water storage experiences fast fluctuations of storage levels due to the shallow substrate, indicating that water has a short residence time before it leaves the GR via evapotranspiration (ET) or runoff, i.e. extensive GRs are not comparable to natural ecosystems with groundwater access. Hence, we decided to neglect <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the annual water balance. Due to the fact that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and ET are measured variables in this study, we attribute the residual to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Not measuring <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, but calculating it as a residual of the water balance, raises uncertainties in this term. However, by calculating the ratio of ET to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for annual and multi-annual periods, we are able to retrieve an indicator of the volumetric water retention by the GR.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Statistical analysis</title>
      <p id="d2e1590">To evaluate whether there is a statistically significant monotonic trend of a parameter over the study period, two non-parametric rank-based tests were applied. Spearman's rank correlation assesses the strength and direction of a monotonic relationship between a variable and time by converting the data values to ranks and calculating a correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the ranked data and the ranked time sequence. In addition, the Mann-Kendall trend test was used, which evaluates all pairwise comparisons among data points and determines whether later values tend to be systematically larger or smaller, expressed by the Kendall's <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> statistic. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-value determines whether the observed trends are unlikely to have occurred by chance, and statistical significance was evaluated at a threshold of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Both methods are robust to non-normality and outliers (Croux and Dehon, 2010), making them suitable for time-series data with limited sample sizes.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Meteorological conditions during the study period</title>
      <p id="d2e1642">Dominating wind directions at BER are from the sectors W to SSW and E to ENE (Fig. 1). Wind directions 36–54° were excluded in the quality control process (cf. Sect. 2.2). Wind speed is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.75</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m s<sup>−1</sup> on average, but peaks in wind speed are distinctly higher (maximum of 30.3 m s<sup>−1</sup>) due to the exposed location in the North German plain.</p>

      <fig id="F1"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d2e1683">Wind rose showing the frequency of individual wind directions and wind speeds at BER during the study period.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e1692">Mean air temperature was 11.1 °C over the study period, and mean annual precipitation sum was 494 mm (Fig. 2b). Mean air temperature was highest in 2019 (11.6 °C), and lowest in 2021 (10.3 °C), and precipitation was highest in 2023 (736 mm), 2.5 times as much as in the driest year, 2018 (295 mm). Precipitation was evenly distributed over the year, i.e. no rainy seasons (Fig. 2a), but more dry days occurred in summer due to convective rainfall, i.e. less frequent, but heavier events. Air temperature showed clear seasonality: highest temperatures were reached during the summer months (June, July, August), where daily maxima of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C occurred (53 d yr<sup>−1</sup> on average). The coldest months are December, January and February, where temperatures often fell below the freezing point (56 d yr<sup>−1</sup> on average). Temperatures ranged between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13.4 and 37.9 °C during the study period.</p>

      <fig id="F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d2e1739"><bold>(a)</bold> Monthly mean air temperature and precipitation sum for the whole study period. <bold>(b)</bold> Mean air temperature and precipitation sum for every year of the study period. Grey, dashed lines indicate the mean from the study period and red, dashed lines indicate the mean from the reference period (1991–2020, from DWD station 427). <bold>(c)</bold> Annual evapotranspiration (ET) sums and ratio of ET sum to precipitation sum (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for every year (circles) and the whole study period (dashed, horizontal line).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e1763">Compared to data from the 30 years reference period (1991–2020) at the German Weather Service (DWD) station located near the GR (BER: Berlin Brandenburg, DWD-ID 427, 46 m a.s.l., distance 1.9 km) all the years during the study period were warmer than the average (Fig. 2b), with 4 years (2015–2017, 2021) showing lower deviations from the reference period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C) and 5 years showing higher deviations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C). Only 2017 and 2023 had higher precipitation sums than the average of the reference period (117 % and 141 %, respectively), but many years were close (86 %–99 %). The year 2022 and especially 2018 experienced precipitation sums well below the average of the reference period (77 % and 57 %, respectively). Yearly ET varies between 194 in 2018 and 315 mm in 2017 (Fig. 2c). The ratio of yearly ET to yearly precipitation, which is indicative of retention (cf. Sect. 2.5), is between 0.49 and 0.58, except for the drought year 2018 (0.66) and the wettest year 2023 (0.38). Considering the whole study period, the ratio was 0.51.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Data quality</title>
      <p id="d2e1798">The integral turbulence characteristic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under neutral stratification is 1.33 on average with low variation across wind directions (Fig. A3a). This is very close to the value of 1.25 as proposed for well-developed homogeneous turbulence under neutral stratification (Foken and Mauder, 2024). Aerodynamic roughness length (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is consistent throughout wind directions (Fig. A3b), indicating homogeneous vegetation heights across the GR and minor influence of roughness elements on EC measurements (mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.04 m).</p>
      <p id="d2e1837">The normalised cospectra for unstable stratification (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>650 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m; Fig. A4) exhibit the expected turbulent structure with clear peaks at the expected normalised frequencies, consistent scalar behaviour, and an inertial-subrange decay close to the theoretical <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> slope. CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>O cospectra show an enhanced contribution to gas flux from lower frequencies, i.e. larger eddies, and typical high-frequency dampening when compared to the sensible heat cospectrum. The cospectra indicate that the data exhibit good quality, as the expected patterns of turbulence and flux are present with minimal noise or distortion.</p>
      <p id="d2e1897">The 80 % flux source area extends at a maximum of 39 and 36 m towards the dominating wind direction and over an area of 2550 and 1860 m<sup>2</sup> for night- and daytime respectively (Fig. 3). The peak contribution is situated in the sector 200 to 300° at a distance of approx. 2.5 m to the EC station. The 70 % FSA is located entirely within the GR, whereas the 80 % FSA extends beyond the GR, but only at the northern edge (277–13°), where fetch is the smallest. The nocturnal 80 % FSA exceeds the GR by a maximum of 4.8 m. The area exceeding the GR accounts for 4.7 % of the total FSA; however, it contributes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to the total flux since wind from North is rare at BER (Fig. 1).</p>

      <fig id="F3"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d2e1922"><bold>(a)</bold> Site overview. Flux source area calculated by the FFP model (Kljun et al., 2015), aggregated for the whole study period <bold>(b)</bold>, daytime <bold>(c)</bold> and night-time <bold>(d)</bold>. The scale refers to <bold>(b)</bold>, <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> only. Basemap: Imagery © 2026 Airbus, CNES/Airbus, GeoBasis-DE/BKG, Maxar Technologies, Map data © 2026 Google.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f03.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Surface energy balance and water exchange</title>
      <p id="d2e1960">Peak flux density is reached around noon for the shortwave components of the radiation balance and in the early afternoon for the longwave components, corresponding to the time when substrate and atmosphere temperatures reach their daily maxima (Fig. 4a). The ratio of reflected to incoming shortwave radiation (albedo) is 19 % for the study period (Table 3). Available energy for turbulent heat fluxes is obtained as net radiation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) minus ground heat flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Energy balance closure, derived from the regression between available energy and turbulent heat, is 79 %, indicating a 21 % closure gap (Fig. A5).</p>

      <fig id="F4"><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d2e1987">Median diurnal cycle of <bold>(a)</bold> radiation balance and <bold>(b)</bold> energy balance components for the entire study period. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> shortwave radiation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> longwave radiation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> downward, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> upward.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2059">In the median diurnal cycle of the energy balance components, sensible heat flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is negative during night-time (Fig. 4b), indicating that heat is transported from the warmer atmosphere towards the colder GR surface. Also, heat is transported in the substrate towards the cooler surface. During daytime, the flux changes direction, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> become positive, warming the air above the GR and heat is transported into the substrate. Latent heat flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is positive throughout the diurnal cycle. However, there are individual events during the study period where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> becomes negative during night and water vapour is transported towards the surface, i.e. dew formation. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is larger than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the day, and the fluxes peak at noon, when the residual (i.e. the difference between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the sum of the three other components) is largest.</p>
      <p id="d2e2163">The Bowen ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), representing the ratio of sensible to latent heat fluxes, is a diagnostic metric that characterises the distribution of available energy between turbulent heat transfer to the atmosphere and the energy consumed by phase change through evapotranspiration. During winter (DJF) and during the night, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> often becomes negative (Table 3) due to a negative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, when heat is transported from the warmer atmosphere towards the cooler GR. During spring (MAM) and summer (JJA), there is more energy available, leading to larger substrate heat storage and stronger positive fluxes. During the day, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is at least 1 during all seasons except for winter and is highest during the summer months. Considering all data, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for spring and summer and 0.25 during autumn (SON). For the whole 9-year study period, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was close to 1.</p>

<table-wrap id="T3"><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d2e2226">Bowen-ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the seasons, the whole study period (SP) and day- and night-time. The median (daytime) albedo as well as the mean evapotranspiration (ET) sum is given for the individual seasons and the whole study period. DJF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> winter, MAM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> spring, JJA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> summer, SON <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> autumn.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <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"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">DJF</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">MAM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">JJA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">SON</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">SP</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (day)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.62</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (night)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3.15</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Albedo [%]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">19</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">ET [mm]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">101</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2278</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d2e2472">There is a strong dependence of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> on VWC (Fig. 5a), i.e. water availability for ET. If water availability is not limited, energy is primarily partitioned into latent heat flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), resulting in reduced sensible heat exchange and a lower ambient temperature (Fig. 5b). This effect diminishes once moisture levels are below VWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup>. At that threshold, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> increases strongly, and energy partitioning into <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is larger, thus reducing the cooling effect of the GR.</p>

      <fig id="F5" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d2e2546"><bold>(a)</bold> Dependence of the Bowen-ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) on volumetric water content (VWC). Daily averages of VWC were sorted according to their value. A new bin was created every 100 values, and for each bin, the median <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was calculated and assigned to the mid-value of the bin. A hyperbolic fit was calculated. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is indicated by the dashed, horizontal line. <bold>(b)</bold> Dependence of the air temperature on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Half-hour values, restricted to the summer and daytime, were sorted according to their value. A new bin was created every 600 values.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Carbon exchange</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS1">
  <label>3.4.1</label><title>Median diurnal cycles of the carbon flux</title>
      <p id="d2e2608">During night-time the carbon exchange between the GR and atmosphere showed net positive fluxes, representing net carbon release (Fig. 6) with the magnitude between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.85 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>. Net carbon release was larger during the first hours of the night (compared to the last) and larger during the last 4 years of the study period (2020–2023) than during the first period (2015–2019). During daytime, the median diurnal cycle showed net negative fluxes, i.e. net uptake of carbon due to photosynthesis. Peak magnitude was reached around noon and ranged between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3.61 (2020) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.81 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (2023). Hence, the range of annual daytime variation of carbon fluxes is considerably larger than the nocturnal variation.</p>

      <fig id="F6"><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d2e2709">Median diurnal cycle of the carbon flux over the whole study period and for each year.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d2e2718">Towards summer, the magnitude of the fluxes increased (Fig. 7), especially during daytime (higher uptake via photosynthesis), but also at night (higher respiration). Highest daytime net uptake rates were observed during April and May, and lowest during December and January. The highest nocturnal net carbon release rates were observed during June and July, and the lowest during winter. Length of the net uptake and net release phases during the day varies according to the timing of sunrise and sunset and ambient weather conditions. The standard deviation shows that for each month, the flux can vary significantly at a certain time of the day. The standard deviation is largest between 9–12 h and during summer, and lowest during the night and winter.</p>

      <fig id="F7" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d2e2724">Median diurnal cycle of the carbon flux, separately for January to December, with standard deviation (grey).</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS2">
  <label>3.4.2</label><title>Net ecosystem exchange</title>
      <p id="d2e2741">The BER green roof was a carbon sink, i.e. net carbon uptake, in the first 7 study years (Fig. 8), ranging from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>154 (2017) to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>75 g C m<sup>−2</sup> (2018). In 2022 and 2023, however, the roof proved to be a slight source of carbon. On average, the site annually sequestered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>92 g C m<sup>−2</sup> in the period from 2015–2023. The cumulative sum of carbon flux displays a clear seasonality, increasing from the start of the year until February or March (or until April in 2023; representing the source season), then decreasing during the vegetation period until September or October (the sink season), after which it begins to rise again. During the sink season, phases of net carbon release occur during several years (i.e. 2021). Such intermittent net release phases last up to 2 weeks and are often induced by rewetting of the substrate, following dry phases. The Birch effect (Birch, 1958) describes that soil drying and rewetting causes a burst of microbial activity and rapid decomposition (Stage 1) followed by a slower rate (Stage 2), leading to significant carbon release.</p>

      <fig id="F8" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d2e2791">Cumulative sum of the carbon flux (NEE) for every year of the study period.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d2e2800">During spring and summer, there is a net uptake of carbon, while during winter and usually also during fall, a net release of carbon is observed (Fig. 9). On average, the highest net uptake occurs during May, and the highest net release during December. The magnitude of net uptake during summer shows a positive linear relationship with the plant coverage for the years 2015–2020, which diminished after 2020 (Fig. A2b).</p>

      <fig id="F9" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d2e2806">Heatmap containing the cumulative net ecosystem exchange (NEE) for every month, season and year of the study period. DJF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> winter, MAM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> spring, JJA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> summer, SON <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> autumn.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d2e2843">The timings of the sink season are similar between all study years except for 2023, where the sink season is short (Fig. 10). For the sink seasons, the net uptake rate and the NEE do not show a significant trend over the years of the study period (Table A1). For the source seasons, NEE shows a significant increase, while an increase in the net release rate is only significant at a threshold of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the Spearman test.</p>

      <fig id="F10" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d2e2860">Net sink and net source seasons during the study period. The net uptake/release rate is indicated by the bars, the sum of carbon flux (NEE) by the black circles. The day and month of the beginning of each phase are shown.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS3">
  <label>3.4.3</label><title>Sensitivity of NEE to additional carbon in the GR substrate</title>
      <p id="d2e2877">The shift of the annual NEE to a net source of carbon in 2022 and 2023 (Figs. 8, 9) was predominantly driven by increased respiration rather than decreased photosynthetic uptake (Figs. 6, 10). Hence, we examined substrate TOC measurements, which were sampled at the site from 2020 to 2023 (cf. Sect. 2.4), for possible changes such as additional external inputs of carbon between the years 2021 and 2022. We found an abrupt increase in substrate TOC from 2021 to 2022 (Fig. 11a), which coincides with the observed changes in carbon flux measured via EC.</p>

      <fig id="F11"><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d2e2882"><bold>(a)</bold> Boxplot showing the substrate total organic carbon (TOC) at BER for individual years (2020–2023) together with the number of samples (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) collected during that year. The boxplots show the median (red line) as well as the interquartile range (box) and the range within which values are not considered outliers (vertical dashed lines). Outliers are depicted by a red “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>”. <bold>(b)</bold> Development of the substrate TOC since the beginning of operation of the green roof in 2012 (grey area). The red area represents the initial TOC value plus the annual carbon sequestration of every year (2015–2023) from flux observations.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f11.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d2e2910">We used the initial substrate TOC and added the annually observed NEE value (red area in Fig. 11b). In contrast, the substrate TOC as quantified from substrate samples was linearly interpolated for the period from 2012 to 2020 and displayed for different assumptions of the dry bulk density and initial TOC (cf. Sect. 2.4). It is evident that the increase in substrate TOC is not entirely due to atmospheric carbon sequestration but due to an additional source of carbon, as indicated by the two estimates separating after 2021 (Fig. 11b).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS4">
  <label>3.4.4</label><title>Role of water, and energy fluxes in shaping the NEE</title>
      <p id="d2e2922">Carbon flux is also influenced by the environmental conditions on the GR. During winter, higher temperatures lead to increased respiration due to enhanced activity of soil microbes (Fig. 12a). During autumn, daily NEE is positive when the daily mean temperature is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C and in spring, net uptake is evident even at colder temperatures. Differences in light availability between the seasons lead to higher net uptake rates during spring compared to autumn and winter at the same temperature range. In summer, the temperature optimum, at which the highest net carbon uptake is observed, is between 15 and 20 °C daily mean temperature. At temperatures higher than this range, net uptake is reduced.</p>

      <fig id="F12" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d2e2937">Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE) in dependence on air temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">air</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>a</bold>), volumetric water content (VWC, <bold>b</bold>), Bowen-ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>c</bold>) and daytime shortwave-downward radiation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>d</bold>). Daily means of the independent variables were used and sorted according to their value. A new bin was created every 30 values, and for each bin, the median value of the dependent variable was calculated and assigned to the mid-value of the bin. DJF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> winter, MAM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> spring, JJA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> summer, SON <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> autumn.</p></caption>
            <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f12.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d2e3015">Substrate water availability influences carbon flux (Fig. 12b). During spring and summer, droughts (i.e. VWC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup>), lead to a reduction in net carbon uptake by the GR. Higher values result in lower net uptake during spring. For autumn and winter, this is valid for the whole range of VWC values, due to increased microbial activity in the substrate at higher substrate water contents. The carbon flux has a negative correlation with shortwave-downward radiation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). When the mean daytime <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reaches values <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<sup>−2</sup> during winter and autumn, net uptake of carbon is evident (Fig. 12d). Carbon uptake in spring and summer is more negative at the same <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>↓</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values. Highest net carbon uptake is observed when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is between 1 and 3 during spring and summer.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Net ecosystem exchange and carbon flux dynamics</title>
      <p id="d2e3128">The annual NEE of the Berlin green roof based on direct turbulent flux measurements using eddy-covariance ranged between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>154 and 8 with an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">92</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g C m<sup>−2</sup> for the period 2015–2023. For the same GR and measurement setup as in the present study, Konopka et al. (2021) documented a consistent annual net uptake of carbon with an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>141 g C m<sup>−2</sup> over the course of 5 years (September 2014 until August 2019). The lower average annual NEE in the present study stems from the slight net carbon release during the last two years after consistent annual net uptake in the first 7 years of the study period. Kuronuma and Watanabe (2017) measured the plant and substrate carbon concentrations for <italic>Sedum mexicanum</italic> on a green roof in Chiba (Japan) over a one-year period. They reported annual carbon sequestration values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>276 under non-irrigated conditions and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>336 g C m<sup>−2</sup> under regular irrigation. Yang et al. (2023) measured the carbon exchange of an intensive green roof in Nanjing (China) over 1 year using eddy covariance and found the annual NEE to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>61 g C m<sup>−2</sup>. Getter et al. (2009) found that an extensive green roof system sequestered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>375 g C m<sup>−2</sup> in above- and belowground biomass and substrate organic matter over two years. This results in an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>187 g C m<sup>−2</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>. Hence, our estimates are at the lower end of the range reported for carbon sequestration in other green roof studies that employed different measurement approaches.</p>
      <p id="d2e3283">The same applies for the comparison to other types of urban green infrastructures (which are discussed as urban NBS) or natural ecosystems. Thölix et al. (2025) used different ecosystem models (JSBACH, LPJ-GUESS, SUEWS) combined with eddy-covariance measurements in Helsinki, Finland, to estimate the annual NEE of different urban vegetation types. The mean NEE for forested sites was approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>92 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>143 for the period 2006–2021, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>76 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>123 g C m<sup>−2</sup> for an urban park, whereas the mean NEE for lawns was approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>30 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>7 g C m<sup>−2</sup>, for JSBACH and LPJ-GUESS, respectively. The entire vegetation sector, comprising different urban vegetation types, sequestered <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>40 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>44 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>52 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) g C m<sup>−2</sup> as quantified from the JSBACH, LPJ-GUESS, and SUEWS model output, respectively. Nowak et al. (2013) quantified carbon sequestration by urban trees in the United States using urban tree field data from 28 cities and 6 states and applying biomass and growth equations. The annual net carbon sequestration varied between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>81 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>401 g C m<sup>−2</sup> of tree cover and averaged to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>205 g C m<sup>−2</sup> of tree cover.</p>
      <p id="d2e3463">In comparison with natural ecosystems, the GR shows a lower magnitude of annual carbon sequestration, given the structural constraints of extensive systems such as shallow substrates, limited rooting volume, and low water and nutrient availability, restricting vegetation development. Klosterhalfen et al. (2023), for instance, found the annual NEE of an unmanaged mixed beech forest in central Germany to range between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>393 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>670 g C m<sup>−2</sup> over the period from 2000 to 2022. They reported a decline of carbon uptake by up to 54 % during the drought years 2018, 2019 and 2022. The annual NEE of 19 grassland sites throughout Europe was found to vary between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>653 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>171, with an average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>150 g C m<sup>−2</sup> (Gilmanov et al., 2007). This indicates that natural ecosystems may exhibit large drought-induced variation in carbon uptake, whereas the GR's NEE fluctuates within a relatively narrow range, reflecting the stress tolerance and drought-adapted physiology of its vegetation. Additionally, the GR enables the sequestration of carbon in areas that would otherwise have no capacity for this, effectively converting impervious urban surfaces into carbon sinks.</p>
      <p id="d2e3526">The carbon flux measurements provide valuable insights into the temporal dynamics of the GR's carbon exchange. The GR shows seasonality in the carbon flux, with the length of the daily net uptake phase associated with sunrise and sunset timings. Peak net uptake is reached, on average, during May, followed by April, July, June and August. This suggests that during late spring, conditions are optimal for high carbon uptake due to high light availability accompanied by less extreme temperatures and higher water availability compared to the summer months. Higher incoming radiation and thus energy availability led to increased net uptake rates, while mean daily temperatures exceeding values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C during summer decreased net carbon uptake, potentially due to stomatal closure to reduce transpiration (Grossiord et al., 2020; McAdam and Brodribb, 2015). There is a clear trend towards lower carbon uptake by the GR when water availability drops below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup> during spring and summer. At higher VWC values, there was no effect on carbon fluxes observed during summer, but reduced net uptake during spring, which might be due to the spring season incorporating colder phases (e.g. March) where VWC is usually high but light availability and therefore photosynthesis are low.</p>
      <p id="d2e3571">These results illustrate how carbon flux is affected by various environmental and biotic factors. During the first five summers, higher plant coverage corresponded to increased net carbon uptake. In subsequent years, net uptake was lower at comparable coverage, suggesting that other factors have exerted a stronger influence on carbon fluxes.</p>
      <p id="d2e3574">The carbon exchange of the GR–atmosphere system was strongly shaped by diurnal patterns, with respiration intensifying in the later years of the study (cf. Figs. 6, 10). Correspondingly, annual NEE became slightly positive in 2022 and 2023, after 7 years of consistent net uptake. Our findings indicate that increased respiration, rather than decreased photosynthetic uptake, caused the observed change in annual NEE. While sink season NEE showed no long-term trend, source season NEE increased distinctly. During the last two source seasons, temperatures did not exceed those of previous years, but they showed the highest mean VWC value. Studies show that microbial activity and soil respiration increase with soil temperature and peak at moderate levels of VWC, where they are not constrained by low water availability or by oxygen limitation under excessive soil moisture (Lloyd and Taylor, 1994; Yan et al., 2016). High soil moisture might have contributed to the observed higher net release rates, but cannot be seen as the sole explanatory factor. With a value of 2.5 % in 2021, substrate TOC remained close to its initial value of 1.5 %–2.5 %, possibly showing some substrate ageing (accumulation of organic matter from decomposing plants and animals), but then increased abruptly to 7.9 % in 2022 and remained elevated thereafter. Higher respiration during 2022–2023 is consistent with the increase in substrate TOC. Other studies indicate that respiration is substantially higher in high-organic GR substrates than low-organic substrates (Halim et al., 2022). Hence, carbon fluxes are sensitive to additional input of carbon into the system, pointing to the potential impact of management practices (e.g. fertiliser application) on carbon sequestration potentials of GR ecosystems.</p>
      <p id="d2e3577">A mass-balance comparison underpins that atmospheric carbon sequestration, as estimated from NEE observation, which is cumulatively added to the initial substrate TOC, agrees well with measured substrate TOC until 2021 (Fig. 11b). Besides the substrate, carbon from atmospheric sequestration is stored in above- and belowground biomass. In Fig. 11b, we show that even if we allocate the entire annual NEE to the substrate and do not consider export of carbon via runoff, the abrupt rise of TOC after 2022 cannot be explained by atmospheric sequestration alone.</p>
      <p id="d2e3580">This suggests external carbon inputs – such as unremoved plant litter after maintenance by gardeners (1–2 times per year, cf. Heusinger and Weber, 2017b) or application of carbon-rich material (e.g. organic fertilisers) – as the most plausible cause, although no specific maintenance events were reported by the operator of the GR. Hence, we argue that the observed shift from a robust carbon sink to carbon-neutral conditions was primarily driven by the sudden increase in substrate TOC, which originated from sources other than atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> sequestration. Assuming that the threshold at which the GR is not a sink for carbon anymore (i.e. NEE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0 g C m<sup>−2</sup>) is defined by the substrate TOC of 7.9 % in 2022, it would take at least 32 years to reach that value when extrapolating the time series from 2022 onwards at an average rate of sequestration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>121 g C m<sup>−2</sup> a<sup>−1</sup> (the average rate of sequestration for the years 2015–2021). Further assessment is not possible after 2023 due to the installation of photovoltaics and the resulting alteration of the GR system.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Water exchange and energy partitioning</title>
      <p id="d2e3651">During the 9-year study period, we found that 49 % of the precipitation resulted in GR runoff, meaning that 51 % was retained. Except for the years 2018 and 2023, annual retention ranged between 49 %–58 %. The retention capacity of the BER GR is within the range of values found in other studies for extensive GRs: Schultz et al. (2018) studied runoff patterns from two extensive GRs with substrate depths of 7.5 and 12.5 cm in Portland, Oregon, USA, for a full annual cycle. From a total of 808 mm precipitation, 23.2 (7.5 cm GR) and 32.9 % (12.5 cm GR) was retained. In 2023, precipitation sum for BER (9 cm substrate depth) was similar (736 mm), and retention was 38 % of the annual precipitation sum. Stovin et al. (2012) reported a value of 50 % retention from a UK extensive GR test bed and VanWoert et al. (2005) 61 % on a roof platform with full vegetation coverage. Our data suggests that high annual precipitation sums lead to lower annual retention. Studies report that meteorological conditions, e.g. precipitation sum, and other factors such as GR design may have a considerable influence on the retention capacity of GRs (Liu et al., 2019; Stovin, 2010; Schultz et al., 2018). Our results suggest that the water storage of the GR provides sufficient capacity to enhance ET and reduce runoff, which in turn has the potential to reduce the burden on wastewater structures as well as the risk of flooding in urban areas.</p>
      <p id="d2e3654">Since substrate water availability not only determines the hydrological performance but also directly affects the energy and carbon fluxes of the system, the interaction between water content, Bowen ratio, and carbon flux was further examined. When <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> reaches values <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during summer and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during spring, net carbon uptake by the GR is reduced. This is the case when VWC is below a critical threshold of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup>. The three variables are coupled: Low VWC reduce ET, resulting in increased partitioning of available energy into sensible heat flux, i.e. higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, as well as lower net carbon uptake. With regard to the ecosystem services of extensive GR, it would therefore be advisable to keep VWC values above that threshold to preserve the cooling effect and to increase carbon uptake by the GR. This could be achieved through a sustainable automated irrigation, e.g. using on-site harvested rainwater, which activates during dry conditions (e.g. Heusinger et al., 2018).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d2e3733">Over a 9-year period from 2015 to 2023, the exchange of carbon, water, and energy between an extensive green roof and the atmosphere was analysed using the eddy-covariance technique. The long-term data provide detailed insights into the coupled exchange dynamics of the green roof ecosystem. Over the study period, the site was a moderate carbon sink with an annual average uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>92, and an annual range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>154 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g C m<sup>−2</sup>. The shift from net carbon uptake to a slight net release in the final two years of the study period is primarily due to higher respiration rates in 2022 and 2023. Our data suggests that higher respiration rates are related to an abrupt increase in the substrate organic carbon content, caused by external carbon input. Given the moderate net ecosystem exchange of extensive green roofs in comparison to other vegetated ecosystems, this highlights the sensitivity of the carbon sink intensity to additional carbon in the system, e.g. by management practises such as fertiliser application.</p>
      <p id="d2e3772">The GR retained 51 % of the precipitation over the study period, suggesting that extensive green roofs effectively reduce urban runoff volume and enhance evapotranspiration. The analysis proved that water, carbon, and energy fluxes in green roof ecosystems are tightly coupled: low substrate moisture contents limit evapotranspiration rates, increase sensible heat fluxes (higher Bowen ratio), and suppress carbon uptake. A substrate water availability of approximately 0.05 m<sup>3</sup> m<sup>−3</sup> is critical for maintaining evaporative cooling and (high) carbon uptake during summer. From a practical perspective and with a view to climate adaptation and mitigation, maintaining the volumetric water content above this level – potentially through automated, rainwater-based irrigation – can optimise ecosystem services. These findings emphasise the multifaceted environmental benefits of green roofs while also pointing to structural constraints such as shallow substrate and (limited) water availability, especially in warm and dry periods.</p>
      <p id="d2e3796">The present study closes a knowledge gap by providing multi-year continuous datasets of carbon, water and energy fluxes from an extensive green roof, highlighting both its potential and limitations as a component of sustainable urban green infrastructure. The findings also demonstrate the importance of integrated flux monitoring for the evaluation of green roof performance. Future research could focus on quantifying the long-term evolution of substrate carbon and its implications for roof carbon budgets. Moreover, improving the attribution of flux variability to meteorological and substrate conditions remains an important research need.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <label>Appendix A</label><title/>

      <fig id="FA1"><label>Figure A1</label><caption><p id="d2e3811">Photo of the green roof and measurement setup taken on 18 July 2024.</p></caption>
        
        <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f13.jpg"/>

      </fig>

<fig id="FA2"><label>Figure A2</label><caption><p id="d2e3825"><bold>(a)</bold> Development of the green roof plant coverage over the years. Overall plant coverage was estimated from photographs taken at regular intervals (usually every 1–2 months) from up to 11 fixed spots distributed evenly throughout the GR. A mean value for a season was only calculated when there were at least two data points within a season, and on those days, at least 8 spots were captured. DJF <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> winter, MAM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> spring, JJA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> summer, SON <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> autumn. <bold>(b)</bold> Relationship between plant coverage and net ecosystem exchange (NEE) for summer. A linear fit is shown for the data 2015–2020.</p></caption>
        
        <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f14.png"/>

      </fig>

      <fig id="FA3"><label>Figure A3</label><caption><p id="d2e3872"><bold>(a)</bold> Integral turbulence characteristic, given by the ratio of the standard deviation of the vertical wind velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to friction velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) under neutral stratification. The grey line indicates a value of 1.25 proposed for well-developed homogeneous turbulence (Foken and Mauder, 2024), while the dashed, blue line shows the mean value from observations. <bold>(b)</bold> Roughness length (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) with mean value indicated by dashed, blue line. <bold>(c)</bold> Mean quality flag values, calculated according to Foken et al. (2005), of sensible- (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and latent- (<italic>LE</italic>) heat flux as well as CO<sub>2</sub> flux for 10° wind direction classes after rejection of quality flags <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Boxplots are given for 10° wind direction classes with the median (red line) as well as the interquartile range (box) and the range within which values are not considered outliers (vertical dashed lines). Outliers are depicted by a red “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>”.</p></caption>
        
        <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f15.png"/>

      </fig>

<fig id="FA4"><label>Figure A4</label><caption><p id="d2e3964">Cospectra (sensible heat, CO<sub>2</sub>, H<sub>2</sub>O) for unstable stratification (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>650 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) for the time period of 1 April 2022–31 March 2023.</p></caption>
        
        <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f16.png"/>

      </fig>

      <fig id="FA5"><label>Figure A5</label><caption><p id="d2e4016">Half-hourly values of available energy (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) plotted against the sum of turbulent heat fluxes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). A linear regression has been fit (red line) and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" 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 (dashed) plotted.</p></caption>
        
        <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/5035/2026/bg-23-5035-2026-f17.png"/>

      </fig>

<table-wrap id="TA1"><label>Table A1</label><caption><p id="d2e4079">Results from the Spearman Rank Correlation test and the Mann-Kendall test.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Spearman </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">Mann-Kendall </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-value</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Net uptake rate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.183</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.644</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.111</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.761</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Net release rate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.667</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.083</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.500</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.109</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sink season NEE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.317</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.410</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.167</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.612</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Source season NEE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.786</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.028</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.643</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.031</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>


</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d2e4232">Data will be made available on request.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d2e4238">Niklas Markolf: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Software, Visualization, Writing (original draft preparation). Stephan Weber: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing (review and editing).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d2e4244">The contact author has declared that neither of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d2e4250">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. The authors bear the ultimate responsibility for providing appropriate place names. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d2e4256">We thank the Flughafen Berlin Brandenburg GmbH (FBB) for their permission and cooperation in using the green roof site for EC measurements. We also want to thank Hagen Mittendorf (Climatology and Environmental Meteorology, TU Braunschweig) for EC station maintenance as well as the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive critics on the earlier version of the manuscript.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d2e4261">This research has been supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) (GREENVELOPES (grant no. 505703010)).This open-access publication was funded  by Technische Universität Braunschweig.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d2e4272">This paper was edited by Paul Stoy and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Akbari, H. and Rose, L. S.: Urban Surfaces and Heat Island Mitigation Potentials, JHES, 11, 85–101, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1618/jhes.11.85" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1618/jhes.11.85</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Aubinet, M., Vesala, T., and Papale, D. (Eds.): Eddy Covariance: A Practical Guide to Measurement and Data Analysis, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Birch, H. F.: The effect of soil drying on humus decomposition and nitrogen availability, Plant Soil, 10, 9–31, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01343734" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF01343734</ext-link>, 1958.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Bruno, G., Avanzi, F., Gabellani, S., Ferraris, L., Cremonese, E., Galvagno, M., and Massari, C.: Disentangling the role of subsurface storage in the propagation of drought through the hydrological cycle, Adv. Water Resour., 169, 104305, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2022.104305" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.advwatres.2022.104305</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Croux, C. and Dehon, C.: Influence functions of the Spearman and Kendall correlation measures, Stat. Method Appl., 19, 497–515, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-010-0142-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10260-010-0142-z</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Olson, R., Anthoni, P., Aubinet, M., Bernhofer, C., Burba, G., Ceulemans, R., Clement, R., Dolman, H., Granier, A., Gross, P., Grünwald, T., Hollinger, D., Jensen, N.-O., Katul, G., Keronen, P., Kowalski, A., Lai, C. T., Law, B. E., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Moors, E., Munger, J., Pilegaard, K., Rannik, Ü., Rebmann, C., Suyker, A., Tenhunen, J., Tu, K., Verma, S., Vesala, T., Wilson, K., and Wofsy, S.: Gap filling strategies for defensible annual sums of net ecosystem exchange, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 107, 43–69, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00225-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00225-2</ext-link>, 2001a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Olson, R., Anthoni, P., Aubinet, M., Bernhofer, C., Burba, G., Ceulemans, R., Clement, R., Dolman, H., Granier, A., Gross, P., Grünwald, T., Hollinger, D., Jensen, N.-O., Katul, G., Keronen, P., Kowalski, A., Ta Lai, C., Law, B. E., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Moors, E., William Munger, J., Pilegaard, K., Rannik, Ü., Rebmann, C., Suyker, A., Tenhunen, J., Tu, K., Verma, S., Vesala, T., Wilson, K., and Wofsy, S.: Gap filling strategies for long term energy flux data sets, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 107, 71–77, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00235-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00235-5</ext-link>, 2001b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Ferreira, C. S. S., Potočki, K., Kapović-Solomun, M., and Kalantari, Z.: Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation and Resilience in Urban Areas, in: Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation, edited by: Ferreira, C. S. S., Kalantari, Z., Hartmann, T., and Pereira, P., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 59–78, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2021_758" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/698_2021_758</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Foken, T. and Mauder, M.: Grundgleichungen der atmosphärischen Turbulenz, in: Angewandte Meteorologie: Mikrometeorologische Methoden, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 75, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68333-0_2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-3-662-68333-0_2</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Foken, T., Göockede, M., Mauder, M., Mahrt, L., Amiro, B., and Munger, W.: Post-Field Data Quality Control, in: Handbook of Micrometeorology: A Guide for Surface Flux Measurement and Analysis, edited by: Lee, X., Massman, W., and Law, B., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 181–208, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2265-4_9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/1-4020-2265-4_9</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation> Formanek, S., Mauss, K., Peritsch, M., and Schultes, C.: Green Market Report: Bauwerksbegrünung in Österreich 2019–2022, Vienna GRÜNSTATTGRAU Forschungs- und Innovations GmbH, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Francis, L. F. M. and Jensen, M. B.: Benefits of green roofs: A systematic review of the evidence for three ecosystem services, Urban For. Urban Gree., 28, 167–176, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Fratini, G. and Mauder, M.: Towards a consistent eddy-covariance processing: an intercomparison of EddyPro and TK3, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2273–2281, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2273-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-7-2273-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Getter, K. L., Rowe, D. B., Robertson, G. P., Cregg, B. M., and Andresen, J. A.: Carbon sequestration potential of extensive green roofs, Environmental Science &amp; Technology, 43, 7564–7570, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es901539x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es901539x</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Gilmanov, T. G., Soussana, J. F., Aires, L., Allard, V., Ammann, C., Balzarolo, M., Barcza, Z., Bernhofer, C., Campbell, C. L., Cernusca, A., Cescatti, A., Clifton-Brown, J., Dirks, B., Dore, S., Eugster, W., Fuhrer, J., Gimeno, C., Gruenwald, T., Haszpra, L., Hensen, A., Ibrom, A., Jacobs, A., Jones, M. B., Lanigan, G., Laurila, T., Lohila, A., Manca, G., Marcolla, B., Nagy, Z., Pilegaard, K., Pinter, K., Pio, C., Raschi, A., Rogiers, N., Sanz, M. J., Stefani, P., Sutton, M., Tuba, Z., Valentini, R., Williams, M. L., and Wohlfahrt, G.: Partitioning European grassland net ecosystem CO2 exchange into gross primary productivity and ecosystem respiration using light response function analysis, Agriculture, Ecosystems &amp; Environment, 121, 93–120, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.008</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Greve, P., Gudmundsson, L., Orlowsky, B., and Seneviratne, S. I.: A two-parameter Budyko function to represent conditions under which evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2195–2205, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-2195-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-20-2195-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Grossiord, C., Buckley, T. N., Cernusak, L. A., Novick, K. A., Poulter, B., Siegwolf, R. T. W., Sperry, J. S., and McDowell, N. G.: Plant responses to rising vapor pressure deficit, New Phytol., 226, 1550–1566, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16485" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/nph.16485</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Halim, M. A., Vantellingen, J., Gorgolewski, A. S., Rose, W. K., Drake, J. A. P., Margolis, L., and Thomas, S. C.: Greenhouse gases and green roofs: carbon dioxide and methane fluxes in relation to substrate characteristics, Urban Ecosyst., 25, 487–498, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01166-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11252-021-01166-8</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Han, J., Yang, Y., Roderick, M. L., McVicar, T. R., Yang, D., Zhang, S., and Beck, H. E.: Assessing the Steady-State Assumption in Water Balance Calculation Across Global Catchments, Water Resour. Res., 56, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027392" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020WR027392</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Hansen, P., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Carbon and water exchange in extensive green roofs: A comparison between eddy covariance and soil flux chamber observations, Urban For. Urban Gree., 113, 129099, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2025.129099" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ufug.2025.129099</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Heusinger, J. and Weber, S.: Surface energy balance of an extensive green roof as quantified by full year eddy-covariance measurements, Sci. Total Environ., 577, 220–230, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.168" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.168</ext-link>, 2017a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Heusinger, J. and Weber, S.: Extensive green roof CO2 exchange and its seasonal variation quantified by eddy covariance measurements, Sci. Total Environ., 607–608, 623–632, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.052" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.052</ext-link>, 2017b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Heusinger, J., Sailor, D. J., and Weber, S.: Modeling the reduction of urban excess heat by green roofs with respect to different irrigation scenarios, Build. Environ., 131, 174–183, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.003</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Kljun, N., Calanca, P., Rotach, M. W., and Schmid, H. P.: A simple two-dimensional parameterisation for Flux Footprint Prediction (FFP), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3695–3713, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3695-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-8-3695-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Klosterhalfen, A., Fellert, D., Koebsch, F., Kreilein, H., Markwitz, C., Mund, M., Peksa, M., Tiedemann, F., Tunsch, E., and Knohl, A.: Analysis of a 23-years Long Eddy-covariance Fluxes Dataset from a Mixed Deciduous Forest in Germany, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 Apr 2023, EGU23–13689, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13689" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13689</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Konopka, J., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Extensive Urban Green Roof Shows Consistent Annual Net Uptake of Carbon as Documented by 5 Years of Eddy-Covariance Flux Measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 126, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JG005879" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JG005879</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Kuronuma, T. and Watanabe, H.: Relevance of Carbon Sequestration to the Physiological and Morphological Traits of Several Green Roof Plants during the First Year after Construction, AJPS, 8, 14–27, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2017.81002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4236/ajps.2017.81002</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>LI-COR Biosciences: Eddy Covariance Processing Software (EddyPro, Version 7.0.9) [Software], <uri>https://www.licor.com/products/eddy-covariance/eddypro</uri> (last access: 20 July 2026), 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Liebethal, C., Huwe, B., and Foken, T.: Sensitivity analysis for two ground heat flux calculation approaches, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 132, 253–262, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.08.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.08.001</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Liu, W., Feng, Q., Chen, W., Wei, W., and Deo, R. C.: The influence of structural factors on stormwater runoff retention of extensive green roofs: new evidence from scale-based models and real experiments, J. Hydrol., 569, 230–238, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.066" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.066</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Lloyd, J. and Taylor, J. A.: On the Temperature Dependence of Soil Respiration, Functional Ecology, 8, 315, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2389824" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2307/2389824</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation> Mann, G. and Landwehr, R.: BuGG-Marktreport Gebäudegrün 2024: Dach-, Fassaden- und Innenraumbegrünung Deutschland, Bundesverband GebäudeGrün e.V. (BuGG), ISSN  2750-3763, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Markolf, N., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Water storage levels and water storage capacity of an extensive green roof quantified from multi-year eddy covariance measurements, Ecol. Eng., 206, 107333, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107333" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107333</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>McAdam, S. A. M. and Brodribb, T. J.: The evolution of mechanisms driving the stomatal response to vapor pressure deficit, Plant Physiol., 167, 833–843, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.252940" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1104/pp.114.252940</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Moncrieff, J. B., Massheder, J. M., Bruin, H. de, Elbers, J., Friborg, T., Heusinkveld, B., Kabat, P., Scott, S., Soegaard, H., and Verhoef, A.: A system to measure surface fluxes of momentum, sensible heat, water vapour and carbon dioxide, J. Hydrol., 188–189, 589–611, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03194-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03194-0</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., and Lapoint, E.: Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States, Environ. Pollut., 178, 229–236, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Oke, T. R.: The energetic basis of the urban heat island, Q. J. Ro. Meteor. Soc., 108, 1–24, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710845502" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/qj.49710845502</ext-link>, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Pereira, P., Yin, C., and Hua, T.: Nature-based solutions, ecosystem services, disservices, and impacts on well-being in urban environments, Current Opinion in Environmental Science &amp; Health, 33, 100465, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100465" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100465</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Reichstein, M., Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Papale, D., Aubinet, M., Berbigier, P., Bernhofer, C., Buchmann, N., Gilmanov, T., Granier, A., Grünwald, T., Havránková, K., Ilvesniemi, H., Janous, D., Knohl, A., Laurila, T., Lohila, A., Loustau, D., Matteucci, G., Meyers, T., Miglietta, F., Ourcival, J.-M., Pumpanen, J., Rambal, S., Rotenberg, E., Sanz, M., Tenhunen, J., Seufert, G., Vaccari, F., Vesala, T., Yakir, D., and Valentini, R.: On the separation of net ecosystem exchange into assimilation and ecosystem respiration: review and improved algorithm, Glob. Change Biol., 11, 1424–1439, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001002.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001002.x</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Schultz, I., Sailor, D. J., and Starry, O.: Effects of substrate depth and precipitation characteristics on stormwater retention by two green roofs in Portland OR, J. Hydrol., 18, 110–118, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.06.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.06.008</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Shafique, M., Xue, X., and Luo, X.: An overview of carbon sequestration of green roofs in urban areas, Urban For. Urban Gree., 47, 126515, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126515" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126515</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Soltanifard, H. and Amani-Beni, M.: The cooling effect of urban green spaces as nature-based solutions for mitigating urban heat: insights from a decade-long systematic review, Climate Risk Management, 49, 100731, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2025.100731" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.crm.2025.100731</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Starry, O., Lea-Cox, J. D., Kim, J., and van Iersel, M. W.: Photosynthesis and water use by two Sedum species in green roof substrate, Environ. Exp. Bot., 107, 105–112, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.05.014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.05.014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Stovin, V.: The potential of green roofs to manage Urban Stormwater, Water Environ. J., 24, 192–199, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2009.00174.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1747-6593.2009.00174.x</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Stovin, V., Vesuviano, G., and Kasmin, H.: The hydrological performance of a green roof test bed under UK climatic conditions, J. Hydrol., 414–415, 148–161, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.022</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Teemusk, A., Kull, A., Kanal, A., and Mander, Ü.: Environmental factors affecting greenhouse gas fluxes of green roofs in temperate zone, Sci. the Total Environ., 694, 133699, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133699" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133699</ext-link>, 2019. </mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Thölix, L., Backman, L., Havu, M., Karvinen, E., Soininen, J., Trémeau, J., Nevalainen, O., Ahongshangbam, J., Järvi, L., and Kulmala, L.: Carbon sequestration in different urban vegetation types in Southern Finland, Biogeosciences, 22, 725–749, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-725-2025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-22-725-2025</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation> United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision (ST/ESA/SER.A/420), New York, ISBN: 978-92-1-148319-2, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Chatterjee, S., Cabeza, L. F., and Molnár, G.: Global and regional estimation and evaluation of suitable roof area for solar and green roof applications, Developments in the Built Environment, 21, 100607, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2025.100607" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.dibe.2025.100607</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>VanWoert, N. D., Rowe, D. B., Andresen, J. A., Rugh, C. L., Fernandez, R. T., and Xiao, L.: Green Roof Stormwater Retention, Journal of Environment Quality, 34, 1036–1044, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2004.0364" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2134/jeq2004.0364</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Weber, S.: Comparison of in-situ measured ground heat fluxes within a heteorogeneous urban ballast layer, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 83, 169–179, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0137-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00704-005-0137-0</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Xue, B.-L., Wang, L., Li, X., Yang, K., Chen, D., and Sun, L.: Evaluation of evapotranspiration estimates for two river basins on the Tibetan Plateau by a water balance method, J. Hydrol., 492, 290–297, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.04.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.04.005</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Yan, Z., Liu, C., Todd-Brown, K. E., Liu, Y., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Bailey, V. L.: Pore-scale investigation on the response of heterotrophic respiration to moisture conditions in heterogeneous soils, Biogeochemistry, 131, 121–134, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-016-0270-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10533-016-0270-0</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Yang, S., Kong, F., Yin, H., Zhang, N., Tan, T., Middel, A., and Liu, H.: Carbon dioxide reduction from an intensive green roof through carbon flux observations and energy consumption simulations, Sustain. Cities Soc., 99, 104913, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104913" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scs.2023.104913</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Net ecosystem exchange of extensive green roofs: the role  of coupled energy, carbon, and water fluxes quantified by long-term micrometeorological observations</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Akbari, H. and Rose, L. S.: Urban Surfaces and Heat Island Mitigation
Potentials, JHES, 11, 85–101, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1618/jhes.11.85" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1618/jhes.11.85</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Aubinet, M., Vesala, T., and Papale, D. (Eds.): Eddy Covariance: A Practical
Guide to Measurement and Data Analysis, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1</a>,
2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Birch, H. F.: The effect of soil drying on humus decomposition and nitrogen
availability, Plant Soil, 10, 9–31, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01343734" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01343734</a>,
1958.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bruno, G., Avanzi, F., Gabellani, S., Ferraris, L., Cremonese, E., Galvagno,
M., and Massari, C.: Disentangling the role of subsurface storage in the
propagation of drought through the hydrological cycle, Adv. Water
Resour., 169, 104305, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2022.104305" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2022.104305</a>,
2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Croux, C. and Dehon, C.: Influence functions of the Spearman and Kendall
correlation measures, Stat. Method Appl., 19, 497–515,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-010-0142-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-010-0142-z</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Olson, R., Anthoni, P., Aubinet, M., Bernhofer,
C., Burba, G., Ceulemans, R., Clement, R., Dolman, H., Granier, A., Gross,
P., Grünwald, T., Hollinger, D., Jensen, N.-O., Katul, G., Keronen, P.,
Kowalski, A., Lai, C. T., Law, B. E., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Moors, E.,
Munger, J., Pilegaard, K., Rannik, Ü., Rebmann, C., Suyker, A.,
Tenhunen, J., Tu, K., Verma, S., Vesala, T., Wilson, K., and Wofsy, S.: Gap
filling strategies for defensible annual sums of net ecosystem exchange,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 107, 43–69,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00225-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00225-2</a>, 2001a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Olson, R., Anthoni, P., Aubinet, M., Bernhofer,
C., Burba, G., Ceulemans, R., Clement, R., Dolman, H., Granier, A., Gross,
P., Grünwald, T., Hollinger, D., Jensen, N.-O., Katul, G., Keronen, P.,
Kowalski, A., Ta Lai, C., Law, B. E., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Moors, E.,
William Munger, J., Pilegaard, K., Rannik, Ü., Rebmann, C., Suyker, A.,
Tenhunen, J., Tu, K., Verma, S., Vesala, T., Wilson, K., and Wofsy, S.: Gap
filling strategies for long term energy flux data sets, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 107, 71–77,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00235-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00235-5</a>, 2001b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ferreira, C. S. S., Potočki, K., Kapović-Solomun, M., and Kalantari,
Z.: Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation and Resilience in Urban
Areas, in: Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation, edited by: Ferreira,
C. S. S., Kalantari, Z., Hartmann, T., and Pereira, P., Springer
International Publishing, Cham, 59–78,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2021_758" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2021_758</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Foken, T. and Mauder, M.: Grundgleichungen der atmosphärischen
Turbulenz, in: Angewandte Meteorologie: Mikrometeorologische Methoden,
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 75,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68333-0_2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68333-0_2</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Foken, T., Göockede, M., Mauder, M., Mahrt, L., Amiro, B., and Munger,
W.: Post-Field Data Quality Control, in: Handbook of Micrometeorology: A
Guide for Surface Flux Measurement and Analysis, edited by: Lee, X.,
Massman, W., and Law, B., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 181–208,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2265-4_9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2265-4_9</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Formanek, S., Mauss, K., Peritsch, M., and Schultes, C.: Green Market
Report: Bauwerksbegrünung in Österreich 2019–2022, Vienna GRÜNSTATTGRAU Forschungs- und Innovations GmbH, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Francis, L. F. M. and Jensen, M. B.: Benefits of green roofs: A systematic
review of the evidence for three ecosystem services, Urban For.
Urban Gree., 28, 167–176, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015</a>,
2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fratini, G. and Mauder, M.: Towards a consistent eddy-covariance processing: an intercomparison of EddyPro and TK3, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2273–2281, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2273-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2273-2014</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Getter, K. L., Rowe, D. B., Robertson, G. P., Cregg, B. M., and Andresen, J.
A.: Carbon sequestration potential of extensive green roofs, Environmental
Science &amp; Technology, 43, 7564–7570, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es901539x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es901539x</a>,
2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gilmanov, T. G., Soussana, J. F., Aires, L., Allard, V., Ammann, C.,
Balzarolo, M., Barcza, Z., Bernhofer, C., Campbell, C. L., Cernusca, A.,
Cescatti, A., Clifton-Brown, J., Dirks, B., Dore, S., Eugster, W., Fuhrer,
J., Gimeno, C., Gruenwald, T., Haszpra, L., Hensen, A., Ibrom, A., Jacobs,
A., Jones, M. B., Lanigan, G., Laurila, T., Lohila, A., Manca, G., Marcolla,
B., Nagy, Z., Pilegaard, K., Pinter, K., Pio, C., Raschi, A., Rogiers, N.,
Sanz, M. J., Stefani, P., Sutton, M., Tuba, Z., Valentini, R., Williams, M.
L., and Wohlfahrt, G.: Partitioning European grassland net ecosystem CO2
exchange into gross primary productivity and ecosystem respiration using
light response function analysis, Agriculture, Ecosystems &amp; Environment,
121, 93–120, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.008</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Greve, P., Gudmundsson, L., Orlowsky, B., and Seneviratne, S. I.: A two-parameter Budyko function to represent conditions under which evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2195–2205, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-2195-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-2195-2016</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Grossiord, C., Buckley, T. N., Cernusak, L. A., Novick, K. A., Poulter, B.,
Siegwolf, R. T. W., Sperry, J. S., and McDowell, N. G.: Plant responses to
rising vapor pressure deficit, New Phytol., 226, 1550–1566,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16485" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16485</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Halim, M. A., Vantellingen, J., Gorgolewski, A. S., Rose, W. K., Drake, J.
A. P., Margolis, L., and Thomas, S. C.: Greenhouse gases and green roofs:
carbon dioxide and methane fluxes in relation to substrate characteristics,
Urban Ecosyst., 25, 487–498, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01166-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01166-8</a>,
2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Han, J., Yang, Y., Roderick, M. L., McVicar, T. R., Yang, D., Zhang, S., and
Beck, H. E.: Assessing the Steady-State Assumption in Water Balance
Calculation Across Global Catchments, Water Resour. Res., 56,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027392" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027392</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hansen, P., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Carbon and water exchange in
extensive green roofs: A comparison between eddy covariance and soil flux
chamber observations, Urban For. Urban Gree., 113, 129099,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2025.129099" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2025.129099</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heusinger, J. and Weber, S.: Surface energy balance of an extensive green
roof as quantified by full year eddy-covariance measurements, Sci.
Total Environ., 577, 220–230,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.168" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.168</a>, 2017a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heusinger, J. and Weber, S.: Extensive green roof CO2 exchange and its
seasonal variation quantified by eddy covariance measurements, Sci.
Total Environ., 607–608, 623–632,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.052" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.052</a>, 2017b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heusinger, J., Sailor, D. J., and Weber, S.: Modeling the reduction of urban
excess heat by green roofs with respect to different irrigation scenarios,
Build. Environ., 131, 174–183,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.003</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kljun, N., Calanca, P., Rotach, M. W., and Schmid, H. P.: A simple two-dimensional parameterisation for Flux Footprint Prediction (FFP), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3695–3713, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3695-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3695-2015</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Klosterhalfen, A., Fellert, D., Koebsch, F., Kreilein, H., Markwitz, C., Mund, M., Peksa, M., Tiedemann, F., Tunsch, E., and Knohl, A.: Analysis of a 23-years Long Eddy-covariance Fluxes Dataset from a Mixed Deciduous Forest in Germany, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 Apr 2023, EGU23–13689, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13689" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13689</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Konopka, J., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Extensive Urban Green Roof Shows
Consistent Annual Net Uptake of Carbon as Documented by 5 Years of
Eddy-Covariance Flux Measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 126,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JG005879" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JG005879</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kuronuma, T. and Watanabe, H.: Relevance of Carbon Sequestration to the
Physiological and Morphological Traits of Several Green Roof Plants during
the First Year after Construction, AJPS, 8, 14–27,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2017.81002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2017.81002</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
LI-COR Biosciences: Eddy Covariance Processing Software (EddyPro, Version 7.0.9) [Software], <a href="https://www.licor.com/products/eddy-covariance/eddypro" target="_blank"/> (last access: 20 July 2026), 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liebethal, C., Huwe, B., and Foken, T.: Sensitivity analysis for two ground
heat flux calculation approaches, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 132,
253–262, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.08.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.08.001</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, W., Feng, Q., Chen, W., Wei, W., and Deo, R. C.: The influence of
structural factors on stormwater runoff retention of extensive green roofs:
new evidence from scale-based models and real experiments, J.
Hydrol., 569, 230–238, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.066" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.11.066</a>,
2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lloyd, J. and Taylor, J. A.: On the Temperature Dependence of Soil
Respiration, Functional Ecology, 8, 315, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2389824" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2307/2389824</a>,
1994.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mann, G. and Landwehr, R.: BuGG-Marktreport Gebäudegrün 2024: Dach-,
Fassaden- und Innenraumbegrünung Deutschland, Bundesverband GebäudeGrün e.V. (BuGG), ISSN  2750-3763, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Markolf, N., Heusinger, J., and Weber, S.: Water storage levels and water
storage capacity of an extensive green roof quantified from multi-year eddy
covariance measurements, Ecol. Eng., 206, 107333,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107333" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107333</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
McAdam, S. A. M. and Brodribb, T. J.: The evolution of mechanisms driving
the stomatal response to vapor pressure deficit, Plant Physiol., 167,
833–843, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.252940" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.252940</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Moncrieff, J. B., Massheder, J. M., Bruin, H. de, Elbers, J., Friborg, T.,
Heusinkveld, B., Kabat, P., Scott, S., Soegaard, H., and Verhoef, A.: A
system to measure surface fluxes of momentum, sensible heat, water vapour
and carbon dioxide, J. Hydrol., 188–189, 589–611,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03194-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03194-0</a>, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., and Lapoint, E.: Carbon
storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the
United States, Environ. Pollut., 178, 229–236,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Oke, T. R.: The energetic basis of the urban heat island, Q. J. Ro.
Meteor. Soc., 108, 1–24, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710845502" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710845502</a>, 1982.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Pereira, P., Yin, C., and Hua, T.: Nature-based solutions, ecosystem
services, disservices, and impacts on well-being in urban environments,
Current Opinion in Environmental Science &amp; Health, 33, 100465,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100465" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100465</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Reichstein, M., Falge, E., Baldocchi, D., Papale, D., Aubinet, M.,
Berbigier, P., Bernhofer, C., Buchmann, N., Gilmanov, T., Granier, A.,
Grünwald, T., Havránková, K., Ilvesniemi, H., Janous, D., Knohl,
A., Laurila, T., Lohila, A., Loustau, D., Matteucci, G., Meyers, T.,
Miglietta, F., Ourcival, J.-M., Pumpanen, J., Rambal, S., Rotenberg, E.,
Sanz, M., Tenhunen, J., Seufert, G., Vaccari, F., Vesala, T., Yakir, D., and
Valentini, R.: On the separation of net ecosystem exchange into assimilation
and ecosystem respiration: review and improved algorithm, Glob. Change
Biol., 11, 1424–1439, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001002.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001002.x</a>,
2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schultz, I., Sailor, D. J., and Starry, O.: Effects of substrate depth and
precipitation characteristics on stormwater retention by two green roofs in
Portland OR, J. Hydrol., 18, 110–118,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.06.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.06.008</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shafique, M., Xue, X., and Luo, X.: An overview of carbon sequestration of
green roofs in urban areas, Urban For. Urban Gree., 47, 126515,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126515" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126515</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Soltanifard, H. and Amani-Beni, M.: The cooling effect of urban green spaces
as nature-based solutions for mitigating urban heat: insights from a
decade-long systematic review, Climate Risk Management, 49, 100731,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2025.100731" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2025.100731</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Starry, O., Lea-Cox, J. D., Kim, J., and van Iersel, M. W.: Photosynthesis
and water use by two Sedum species in green roof substrate, Environ.
Exp. Bot., 107, 105–112,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.05.014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.05.014</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Stovin, V.: The potential of green roofs to manage Urban Stormwater, Water
Environ. J., 24, 192–199,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2009.00174.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.2009.00174.x</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Stovin, V., Vesuviano, G., and Kasmin, H.: The hydrological performance of a
green roof test bed under UK climatic conditions, J. Hydrol.,
414–415, 148–161, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.022</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
Teemusk, A., Kull, A., Kanal, A., and Mander, Ü.: Environmental factors
affecting greenhouse gas fluxes of green roofs in temperate zone, Sci. the Total Environ., 694, 133699,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133699" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133699</a>, 2019.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
Thölix, L., Backman, L., Havu, M., Karvinen, E., Soininen, J., Trémeau, J., Nevalainen, O., Ahongshangbam, J., Järvi, L., and Kulmala, L.: Carbon sequestration in different urban vegetation types in Southern Finland, Biogeosciences, 22, 725–749, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-725-2025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-725-2025</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population
Division: World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision
(ST/ESA/SER.A/420), New York, ISBN: 978-92-1-148319-2, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Chatterjee, S., Cabeza, L. F., and Molnár, G.:
Global and regional estimation and evaluation of suitable roof area for
solar and green roof applications, Developments in the Built Environment,
21, 100607, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2025.100607" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2025.100607</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
      
VanWoert, N. D., Rowe, D. B., Andresen, J. A., Rugh, C. L., Fernandez, R.
T., and Xiao, L.: Green Roof Stormwater Retention, Journal of Environment Quality, 34,
1036–1044, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2004.0364" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2004.0364</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
      
Weber, S.: Comparison of in-situ measured ground heat fluxes within a
heteorogeneous urban ballast layer, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 83, 169–179,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0137-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0137-0</a>, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
      
Xue, B.-L., Wang, L., Li, X., Yang, K., Chen, D., and Sun, L.: Evaluation of
evapotranspiration estimates for two river basins on the Tibetan Plateau by
a water balance method, J. Hydrol., 492, 290–297,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.04.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.04.005</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yan, Z., Liu, C., Todd-Brown, K. E., Liu, Y., Bond-Lamberty, B., and Bailey,
V. L.: Pore-scale investigation on the response of heterotrophic respiration
to moisture conditions in heterogeneous soils, Biogeochemistry, 131,
121–134, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-016-0270-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-016-0270-0</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yang, S., Kong, F., Yin, H., Zhang, N., Tan, T., Middel, A., and Liu, H.:
Carbon dioxide reduction from an intensive green roof through carbon flux
observations and energy consumption simulations, Sustain. Cities Soc., 99, 104913, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104913" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104913</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
