A new version of this entry is available:
Loading...
Article
2023
Evaluation of calibrated passive sampling for quantifying ammonia emissions in multi‐plot field trials with slurry application
Evaluation of calibrated passive sampling for quantifying ammonia emissions in multi‐plot field trials with slurry application
Abstract (English)
Background: There is a great need for simple and inexpensive methods to quantify ammo-
nia emissions in multi-plot field trials. However, methods that meet these criteria have to
be thoroughly validated. In the calibrated passive sampling approach, acid traps placed
in the center of quadratic plots absorb ammonia, enabling relative comparisons between
plots. To quantify ammonia emissions, these acid trap samplings are scaled by means of
a transfer coefficient (TC) obtained from simultaneous measurements with the dynamic
tube method (DTM). However, dynamic tube measurements are also comparatively costly
and time-consuming.
Aims: Our objective was to assess the best practice for using calibrated passive sampling
in multi-plot field trials. One particular challenge in such experiments is to evaluate the
influence of ammonia drift between plots.
Methods: In a series of eight multi-plot field trials, acid traps and DTM were used simulta-
neously on all plots to measure ammonia emissions caused by different slurry application
techniques. Data obtained by both methods were correlated, and the influence of the
ubiquitous ammonia background on both methods was evaluated by comparing net
values, including the subtraction of the background with gross values (no background
subtraction). Finally, we provide recommendations for calculating a TC for calibrating
relative differences between plots, based on simultaneous acid trap and dynamic tube
measurements on selected plots.
Results: Treatment mean values obtained by both methods correlated well. For most field
trials, R2 values between 0.6 and 0.8 were obtained. Ammonia background concentrations
affected both methods. Drift between plots contributed to the background for the acid
traps, whereas the contamination of the chamber system might have caused the back-
ground for the DTM. Treatments with low emissions were comparatively more affected
by that background.
File is subject to an embargo until
This is a correction to:
A correction to this entry is available:
This is a new version of:
Notes
Publication license
Publication series
Published in
Journal of plant nutrition and soil science, 186 (2023), 4, 451-463.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.202200333.
ISSN: 1522-2624
Faculty
Institute
Examination date
Supervisor
Edition / version
Citation
DOI
ISSN
ISBN
Language
English
Publisher
Publisher place
Classification (DDC)
630 Agriculture
Collections
Original object
Standardized keywords (GND)
Sustainable Development Goals
BibTeX
@article{ten Huf2023,
url = {https://hohpublica.uni-hohenheim.de/handle/123456789/16185},
doi = {10.1002/jpln.202200333},
author = {ten Huf, Martin and Reinsch, Thorsten and Kluß, Christof et al.},
title = {Evaluation of calibrated passive sampling for quantifying ammonia emissions in multi‐plot field trials with slurry application},
journal = {Journal of plant nutrition and soil science},
year = {2023},
volume = {186},
number = {4},
}