Geoscientific Model Development
Geoscientific Model Development
GMD
Articles | Volume 11, issue 5
Articles | Volume 11, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1909-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1909-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Articles | Volume 11, issue 5
Model description paper
 | 
28 May 2018
Model description paper |  | 28 May 2018

Modeling soil CO2 production and transport with dynamic source and diffusion terms: testing the steady-state assumption using DETECT v1.0

Edmund M. Ryan, Kiona Ogle, Heather Kropp, Kimberly E. Samuels-Crow, Yolima Carrillo, and Elise Pendall

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Edmund Ryan on behalf of the Authors (15 Feb 2018)  Author's response   Manuscript 
ED: Publish as is (21 Feb 2018) by Carlos Sierra
AR by Edmund Ryan on behalf of the Authors (23 Feb 2018)  Manuscript 

Post-review adjustments

AA: Author's adjustment | EA: Editor approval
AA by Edmund Ryan on behalf of the Authors (02 May 2018)   Author's adjustment   Manuscript
EA: Adjustments approved (05 May 2018) by Carlos Sierra
Download
Short summary
Our work evaluated the appropriateness of the common steady-state (SS) assumption, for example when partitioning soil respiration of CO2 into recently photosynthesized carbon (C) and older C. Using a new model of soil CO2 production and transport we found that the SS assumption is valid most of the time, especially in sand/silt soils. Non-SS conditions occurred mainly for the few days following large rain events in all soil types, but the non-SS period was prolonged and magnified in clay soils.
Read more