, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 267–272 | Cite as

Chamber series and space-scale analysis of CO2 gas-exchange in grassland vegetation: A novel approach

  • Sz. Czobel
  • Sz. Foti
  • J. Balogh
  • Z. Nagy
  • S. Bartha
  • Z. Tuba


Significant part of our work was developing a new type of CO2 and H2O gas exchange chambers fit for measuring stand patches. Ground areas of six chambers (ranged between 0.044–4.531 m2) constituted a logarithmic series with doubling diameters from 7.5 to 240.0 cm. We demonstrate one of the first results for stand net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) rates and temporal variability for two characteristic Central European grassland types: loess and sand. The measured mean NEE rates and their ranges in these grasslands were similar to values reported in other studies on temperate grasslands. We also dealt with the spatial scale dependence from ecophysiological point of view. Our chamber-series measurement was performed in a perennial ruderal weed association. The variability of CO2-assimilation of this weed vegetation showed clear spatial scale-dependence. We found the lowest variability of the vegetation photosynthesis at the small-middle scales. The results of spatial variability suggest the 0.2832 m2 patch size is the characteristic unit of the investigated weed association and there is a kind of synphysiological minimi-area with characteristic size for each vegetation type.

Additional key words

canopy chamber grassland loess sand stand CO2 measurements 





transpiration rate


eddy correlation


Festucetum vaginatae danubiale


ground area


geographic information systems


leaf area index


number of replications


normalised difference vegetation index


net ecosystem CO2 exchange


photosynthetically active radiation


relative humidity


Salvio-Festucetum rupicolae


standard deviation of measurements performed within one-day


soil water content


air temperature


soil temperature


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Angell, R.F., Svejcar, T., Bates, J., Saliendra, N.Z., Johnson, D.A.: Bowen ratio and closed chamber carbon dioxide flux measurements over sagebrush steppe vegetation. — Agr. Forest Meteorol. 108: 153–161, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartha, S., Czaran, T., Scheuring, I.: Spatiotemporal scales of non-equilibrium community dynamics: a methodological challenge. — New Zeal. J. Ecol. 21: 199–206, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, G.S.: Extinction coefficients for radiation in plant canopies calculated using an ellipsoidal inclination angle distribution. — Agr. Forest Meteorol. 36: 317–321, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis, F.W., Schimel, D.S., Friedl, M.A., Michaelsen, J.C., Kittel, T.G.F., Dubayah, R., Dozier, J.: Covariance of biophysical data with digital topographic and land use maps over the FIFE site. — J. geophys. Res. 97: 19,009–19,021, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. Dugas, W.A., Reicosky, D.C., Kiniry, J.R.: Chamber and micrometeorological measurements of CO2 and H2O fluxes for three C4 grasses. — Agr. Forest Meteorol. 83: 113–133, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fekete, G.: The holistic view of succession reconsidered. — Coenoses 7: 21–29, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. Fekete, G., Tuba, Z., Melko, E.: Background processes at the population level during succession in grasslands on sand. — Vegetatio 77: 33–41, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fekete, G., Tuba, Z., Precsenyi, I.: Application of three approaches to evaluate abundance and rarity in a sand grassland community. — Coenoses 10: 29–38, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. Frank, A.B., Liebig, M.A., Hanson, J.D.: Soil carbon dioxide fluxes in northern semiarid grasslands. — Soil Biol. Biochem. 34: 1235–1241, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall, D.O., Scurlock, J.M.O., Bolhar-Nordenkampf, H.R., Leegood, R.C., Long, S.P.: Photosynthesis and Production in a Changing Environment. A Field and Laboratory Manual. — Chapman & Hall, London — Glasgow — New York — Tokyo — Melbourne — Madras 1993.Google Scholar
  11. Hunt, J.E., Kelliher, F.M., McSeveny, T.M., Byers, J.M.: Evaporation and carbon dioxide exchange between the atmosphere and a tussock grassland during a summer drought. — Agr. Forest Meteorol. 111: 65–82, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Long, S.P., Hallgren, J.-E.: Measurement of CO2 assimilation by plants in the field and the laboratory. — In: Hall, D.O., Scurlock, J.M.O., Bolhar-Nordenkampf, H.R., Leegood, R.C., Long, S.P. (ed.). Photosynthesis and Production in a Changing Environment. A Field and Laboratory Manual. Pp. 129–167. Chapman & Hall, London — Glasgow — New York — Tokyo — Melbourne — Madras 1993.Google Scholar
  13. Loveland, T.R., Merchant, J.W., Ohlen, D.O., Brown, J.F.: Development of a land-cover characteristics database for the conterminous U. S. — Photogrammetric Eng. remote Sensing 57: 1453–1463, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. Monteith, J.L., Unsworth, M.H.: Principles of Environmental Physics. — Edward Arnold, London — New York — Melbourne — Auckland 1995.Google Scholar
  15. Mucina, L., Bartha, S.: Variance in species richness and guild proportionality in two contrasting dry grassland community. — Biologia (Bratislava) 54: 67–75, 1999.Google Scholar
  16. Norman, J.M., Kucharik, C.J., Gower, S.T., Baldocchi, D.D., Crill, P.M., Rayment, M., Savage, K., Striegl, R.G.: A comparison of six methods for measuring soil-surface carbon dioxide fluxes. — J. geophys. Res. 28: 771–777, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. Sestak, Z., Eatsky, J., Jarvis, P.G. (ed.): Plant Photosynthetic Production, Manual of Methods. — Dr W. Junk Publ., The Hague 1971.Google Scholar
  18. Suyker, A.E., Vermal, S.B.: Year-round observations of the net ecosystem exchange of carbon dioxide in a native tallgrass prairie. — Global Change Biol. 7: 279–289, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tuba, Z., Csintalan, Zs., Nagy, Z., Szente, K., Kemeny, G., Takacs, Z., Koch, J., Badacsonyi, A., Murakeozy, P., Palicz, G., Kobor, Sz., Otvos, E., Bartha, S.: [Synphysiology: basic theories and explorative investigations for an emerging field of plant ecology.] — In: Fekete, G. (ed.) Front Lines of the Community Ecology. Pp. 171–196. Scientia Publisher, Budapest 1998. [In Hung.]Google Scholar
  20. Verseghy, K., Kovacs-Lang, E.: Investigations on production of grassland communities of sandy soil in the IBP area near Csevharaszt (Hungary) I. Production of lichens. — Acta biol. Acad. Sci. hung. 22: 393–411, 1971.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Zamolodchikov, D.G., Karelin, D.V.: An empirical model of carbon fluxes in Russian tundra. Global Change Biol. 7: 147–161, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zolyomi, B., Fekete, G.: The Pannonian loess steppe: Differentiation in space and time. — Abstr. Bot. 18: 29–41, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Experimental Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sz. Czobel
    • 1
  • Sz. Foti
    • 1
  • J. Balogh
    • 2
  • Z. Nagy
    • 1
  • S. Bartha
    • 3
  • Z. Tuba
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Botany and Plant Physiology, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental SciencesSzent Istvan UniversityGodolloHungary
  2. 2.Plant Ecological Research Group of Hungarian Academy of SciencesSzent Istvan UniversityGodolloHungary
  3. 3.Institute of Ecology and BotanyHungarian Academy of SciencesVacratotHungary

Personalised recommendations