International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), India Office, CG Block, NASC Complex, Pusa Institute, DPS Marg, New Delhi, 110012, India.
Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Jan;20(1):287-99. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12347. Epub 2013 Nov 11.
Rapid, precise, and globally comparable methods for monitoring greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes are required for accurate GHG inventories from different cropping systems and management practices. Manual gas sampling followed by gas chromatography (GC) is widely used for measuring GHG fluxes in agricultural fields, but is laborious and time-consuming. The photo-acoustic infrared gas monitoring system (PAS) with on-line gas sampling is an attractive option, although it has not been evaluated for measuring GHG fluxes in cereals in general and rice in particular. We compared N2 O, CO2 , and CH4 fluxes measured by GC and PAS from agricultural fields under the rice-wheat and maize-wheat systems during the wheat (winter), and maize/rice (monsoon) seasons in Haryana, India. All the PAS readings were corrected for baseline drifts over time and PAS-CH4 (PCH4 ) readings in flooded rice were corrected for water vapor interferences. The PCH4 readings in ambient air increased by 2.3 ppm for every 1000 mg cm(-3) increase in water vapor. The daily CO2 , N2 O, and CH4 fluxes measured by GC and PAS from the same chamber were not different in 93-98% of all the measurements made but the PAS exhibited greater precision for estimates of CO2 and N2 O fluxes in wheat and maize, and lower precision for CH4 flux in rice, than GC. The seasonal GC- and PAS-N2 O (PN2 O) fluxes in wheat and maize were not different but the PAS-CO2 (PCO2 ) flux in wheat was 14-39% higher than that of GC. In flooded rice, the seasonal PCH4 and PN2 O fluxes across N levels were higher than those of GC-CH4 and GC-N2 O fluxes by about 2- and 4fold, respectively. The PAS (i) proved to be a suitable alternative to GC for N2 O and CO2 flux measurements in wheat, and (ii) showed potential for obtaining accurate measurements of CH4 fluxes in flooded rice after making correction for changes in humidity.
需要快速、准确且在全球范围内具有可比性的方法来监测温室气体(GHG)通量,以便对不同的种植系统和管理实践进行准确的 GHG 清单编制。手动气体采样后进行气相色谱(GC)分析广泛用于测量农业领域的 GHG 通量,但这种方法既繁琐又耗时。带在线气体采样的光声红外气体监测系统(PAS)是一种很有吸引力的选择,尽管它尚未经过评估,不能用于测量一般谷物特别是水稻中的 GHG 通量。我们比较了印度哈里亚纳邦水稻-小麦和玉米-小麦系统下农田中 GC 和 PAS 在小麦(冬季)和玉米/水稻(季风)季节测量的 N2O、CO2 和 CH4 通量。所有 PAS 读数均经过时间基线漂移校正,淹水稻田的 PAS-CH4(PCH4)读数经过水蒸气干扰校正。水蒸气每增加 1000mg cm-3,环境空气中的 PCH4 读数增加 2.3ppm。从同一气室中用 GC 和 PAS 测量的 CO2、N2O 和 CH4 通量在 93-98%的测量中没有差异,但 PAS 对小麦和玉米 CO2 和 N2O 通量的估计具有更高的精度,而对水稻 CH4 通量的估计精度较低。小麦和玉米的季节性 GC 和 PAS-N2O(PN2O)通量没有差异,但 PAS-CO2(PCO2)通量在小麦中比 GC 高 14-39%。在淹水稻田中,不同氮水平下的季节性 PCH4 和 PN2O 通量比 GC-CH4 和 GC-N2O 通量分别高约 2 倍和 4 倍。PAS(i)被证明是 GC 测量小麦中 N2O 和 CO2 通量的合适替代品,(ii)在对湿度变化进行校正后,显示出获得淹水稻中 CH4 通量准确测量的潜力。