Response to 'The European nitrogen cycle: response to Schulze et al, Global 
Change Biology (2010) 16, pp. 1451-1469'

Schulze, E. D.; Luyssaert, S.; Ciais, P.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02440.x

アイテム詳細

登録内容を編集ファイル形式で保存

一時保存へ追加

タグ情報を表示リリース履歴を表示詳細要約

公開

学術論文

Response to 'The European nitrogen cycle: response to Schulze et al, Global Change Biology (2010) 16, pp. 1451-1469'

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons62549

Schulze, E. D.
Emeritus Group, Prof. E.-D. Schulze, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

There are no locators available

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

フルテキスト (公開)

公開されているフルテキストはありません

付随資料 (公開)

There is no public supplementary material available

引用

Schulze, E. D., Luyssaert, S., & Ciais, P. (2011). Response to 'The European nitrogen cycle: response to Schulze et al, Global Change Biology (2010) 16, pp. 1451-1469'. Global Change Biology, 17(8), 2758-2761. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02440.x.

引用: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-000E-DCAA-2

要旨

Winniwarter and colleagues present alternative estimates for several of the nitrogen (N) fluxes provided by Schulze and colleagues. They reason that numeric discrepancies between largely dependent estimates and lack of detail in Schulze's estimates urges caution in interpreting these numbers. In this reply we provide methodological details enhancing the transparency of Schulze's estimates and argue that convergence between land-and atmosphere-based estimates should be reached before individual estimates can be rejected. Only for the nitrous oxide and NO(x) fluxes a balance between atmosphere and land-based estimates has been reached. Convergence between independent estimates has not been reached yet for NO-, NH(3)- and N-deposition estimates. As stated by Schulze and colleagues these N-fluxes remain potentially biased and therefore come with a large uncertainty, irrespective of the reported precision.