Abstract

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.

Keywords

carbon flux; decomposition; EUROFLUX; respiration; soil organic matter

Published in

Journal of Vegetation Science
2001, Volume: 12, number: 1, pages: 145-150
Publisher: OPULUS PRESS UPPSALA AB

SLU Authors

• Grelle, Achim

  • Department of Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Climate Research
Environmental Sciences
Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences


Publication identifier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2001.tb02626.x

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/43543