Billesbach D P, Arkebauer T J, Sullivan R C
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, 68583, USA.
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, 68583, USA.
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 19;14(1):21866. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67911-z.
We present a comparison of four different methods of measuring sensible (H) and latent (LE) heat fluxes for a year over a mixed grass prairie ecosystem in the Nebraska SandHills [eddy covariance (EC), energy balance/Bowen ratio (EBBR), residual energy (RES), modified Bowen ratio (MBR) methods]. Additionally, we developed a set of quality control criteria for each method and present a simplification to the traditional EBBR setup. Using EC as reference, all methods yielded similar estimates of yearly H (regression slopes (m) ~ 2% from unity; H > H, H, and H). For yearly LE, EBBR and RES yielded similar estimates with EC (m ~ 2% from unity; LE < LE and LE), while a larger bias was found from MBR (m ~ 8% from unity; LE > LE). At shorter time scales (~ hourly), moderate scatter was found about linear regression fits for H between EBBR and EC (R = 0.81), with smaller scatter between RES and MBR, and EC (R = 0.91). For LE, smaller scatter was also measured between EC, and EBBR and RES (R = 0.89 and 0.87, respectively), with the larger scatter between EC and MBR (R = 0.65). This suggests methods other than EC may be well suited to longer-term applications (≥ yearly), but have larger uncertainty on individual measurements.
我们展示了内布拉斯加州沙丘混合草甸生态系统一年中测量显热(H)和潜热(LE)通量的四种不同方法的比较[涡度协方差(EC)、能量平衡/鲍文比(EBBR)、剩余能量(RES)、修正鲍文比(MBR)方法]。此外,我们为每种方法制定了一套质量控制标准,并对传统的EBBR设置进行了简化。以EC为参考,所有方法对年H的估计相似(回归斜率(m)约为1的2%;H>H、H和H)。对于年LE,EBBR和RES与EC的估计相似(m约为1的2%;LE<LE和LE),而MBR的偏差较大(m约为1的8%;LE>LE)。在较短时间尺度(约每小时)下,EBBR和EC之间H的线性回归拟合存在适度离散(R=0.81),RES和MBR与EC之间的离散较小(R=0.91)。对于LE,EC与EBBR和RES之间的离散也较小(分别为R=0.89和0.87),EC与MBR之间的离散较大(R=0.65)。这表明除EC之外的方法可能非常适合长期应用(≥每年),但在单个测量上具有较大的不确定性。