Grelle, Achim
- Institutionen för skoglig produktionsekologi, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet
Sammanfattning
This paper responds to the Forum contribution by Piovesan & Adams (2000) who criticized the results obtained by the EUROFLUX network on carbon fluxes of several European forests. The major point of criticism was that the data provided by EUROFLUX are inconsistent with current scientific understanding. It is argued that understanding the terrestrial global carbon cycle requires more than simply restating what was known previously, and that Piovesan & Adams have not been able to show any major conflicts between our findings and ecosystem or atmospheric-transport theories.
Nyckelord
carbon flux; decomposition; EUROFLUX; respiration; soil organic matter
Publicerad i
Journal of Vegetation Science
2001, volym: 12, nummer: 1, sidor: 145-150
Utgivare: OPULUS PRESS UPPSALA AB
SLU författare
UKÄ forskningsämne
Klimatvetenskap
Miljövetenskap
Meteorologi och atmosfärsvetenskap
Publikationens identifierare
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2001.tb02626.x
Permanent länk till denna sida (URI)
https://res.slu.se/id/publ/43543