Temporal variability of nocturnal turbulent fluxes determined from two different methodologies at the level of 325 m above the Amazon rainforest
Keywords:Nocturnal fluxes, Eddy covariance, Multiresolution
The present study aimed to analyze and compare the temporal variability of the nocturnal fluxes of CO2, sensitive and latent heat, calculated from two different methodologies: one with a 5-minute temporal window (using the eddy covariance technique), and another with 109 minutes (from multiresolution decomposition). For this, night series of 25 nights were used between October and November 2015. The analyzes were made for two groups of distinct turbulence patterns: one with intermittent regime and the other with homogeneous turbulence. The results showed that the fluxes obtained by the classical method of eddy covariance were dependent on the intensity of the turbulence. On the other hand, the fluxes calculated from the multiresolution decomposition technique showed significant fluctuations in the temporal evolution of all scalars analyzed, with the largest percentage differences between the two approaches occurring in the homogeneous turbulence regime group, which was characterized by predominantly weak turbulent activity throughout the night. In the comparison made, the methodology employed in the 109-minute window showed greater efficiency in the estimates of exchanges at 325 m in the ATTO tower, especially during conditions of low turbulent activity.
ACEVEDO, O. C. et al. Intermittency and the exchange of scalars in the nocturnal surface layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 119, p. 41–55, 2006.
ACEVEDO, O. C. et al. Turbulent carbon exchange in very stable conditions. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 125, p. 49–61, 2007.
ACEVEDO, O. C. et al. The influence of submeso processes on stable boundary layer similarity relationships. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, v. 71, n. 1, p. 207–225, 2014.
ANDREAE, M. O. et al. The amazon tall tower observatory (atto): overview of pilot measurements on ecosystem ecology, meteorology, trace gases, and aerosols.
COULTER, R. L.; DORAN, J. C. Spatial and temporal occurrences of intermittent turbulence during CASES-99. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 105, p. 329–349, 2002.
HOWELL, J. F.; MAHRT, L. Multiresolution flux decomposition. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 83, n. 1, p. 117–137, 1997.
HOWELL, J. F.; SUN, J. Surface-layer fluxes in stable conditions. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 90, p. 495–520, 1999.
MAHRT, L. Characteristics of submeso winds in the stable boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 130, n. 1, p. 1–14, 2009.
OLIVEIRA, P. E. S. et al. Turbulent and non-turbulent exchange of scalars between the forest and the atmosphere at night in Amazonia. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, v. 18, p. 3083–3099, 2018.
VICKERS, D.; MAHRT, L. The cospectral gap and turbulent flux calculations. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, v. 20, n. 5, p. 660–672, 2003.
VORONOVICH, V.; KIELY, G. On the gap in the spectra of surface-layer atmospheric turbulence. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 122, p. 67–83, 2007.
ZERI, M.; SA, L. D. A. Horizontal and vertical turbulent fluxes forced by a gravity wave event in the nocturnal atmospheric surface layer over the Amazon Forest. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, v. 138, p. 413–431, 2011.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.