Optimizing the closure period for improved accuracy of chamber-based greenhouse gas flux estimates

Non-steady-state chambers are widely used for measuring the exchange of greenhouse gases (GHGs) between soils or ecosystems and the atmosphere. It is known that non-steady-state chambers induce a non-linear concentration development inside the chamber after closure, even across short chamber closure periods, and that both linear and non-linear flux estimates are impacted by the chamber closure period itself. However, despite the existence of recommendations on how long to keep the chamber closed, it has been little explored to what extent the length of the chamber closure period affects the estimated flux rates, and which closure periods may provide the most accurate linear and non-linear flux estimates.

In the current study, we analyzed how linear regression and Hutchinson and Mosier (1981) modeled flux estimates were affected by the length of the chamber closure period by increasing it in increments of 30 s, with a minimum and maximum chamber closure period of 60 and 300 s, respectively. Across 3,159 individual soil CO₂ and CH₄ flux measurements, the effect of chamber closure period length varied between 1.4–8.0% for linear regression estimates and between 0.4–17.8% for Hutchinson–Mosier estimates and the largest effect sizes were observed when the measured fluxes were high.

Both linear regression and Hutchinson–Mosier based flux estimates decreased as the chamber closure period increased. This effect has been observed previously when using linear regression models, but the observed effect on Hutchinson-Mosier modeled estimates is a novel finding. We observed a clear convergence between the short-period linear regression estimates and the long-period Hutchinson–Mosier estimates, showing that closure periods as short as possible should be used for linear regression flux estimation, while ensuring long-enough closure periods to observe a stabilization of flux estimates over time when using the Hutchinson-Mosier model. Our analysis was based on soil flux measurements, but because the perturbation of the concentration gradient is related to the non-steady-state chamber technique rather than the measured ecosystem component, our results have implications for all flux measurements conducted with non-steady-state chambers. However, optimal chamber closure times may depend on individual chamber designs and analyzer setups, which suggests testing individual chamber/system designs for optimal measurement periods prior to field application