Search

Arctic tundra is facing unprecedented warming, resulting in shifts in the vegetation, thaw regimes, and potentially in the ecosystem–atmosphere exchange of carbon (C). However, the estimates of regional carbon dioxide (CO 2) and methane (CH 4) budgets are highly uncertain. We measured CO 2 and CH 4 fluxes, vegetation composition and leaf area index (LAI), thaw depth, and soil wetness in Tiksi (71 ∘ N, 128 ∘ E), a heterogeneous site located within the prostrate dwarf-shrub tundra zone in northeastern Siberia. Using the closed chamber method, we determined the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of CO 2 , ecosystem respiration in the dark (ER), ecosystem gross photosynthesis (Pg), and CH 4 flux during the growing season. We applied a previously developed high-spatial-resolution land cover map over an area of 35.8 km 2 for spatial extrapolation. Among the land cover types varying from barren to dwarf-shrub tundra and tundra wetlands, the NEE and Pg at the photosynthetically active photon flux density of 800 µ mol m -2 h -1 (NEE 800 and Pg 800) were greatest in the graminoid-dominated habitats, i.e., streamside meadow and fens, with NEE 800 and Pg 800 of up to - 21 (uptake) and 28 mmol m -2 h -1 , respectively. Vascular LAI was a robust predictor of both NEE 800 and Pg 800 and, on a landscape scale, the fens were disproportionately important for the summertime CO 2 sequestration. Dry tundra, including the dwarf-shrub and lichen tundra, had smaller CO 2 exchange rates. The fens were the largest source of CH 4 , while the dry mineral soil tundra consumed atmospheric CH 4 , which on a landscape scale amounted to - 9 % of the total CH 4 balance during the growing season. The largest seasonal mean CH 4 consumption rate of 0.02 mmol m -2 h -1 occurred in sand- and stone-covered barren areas. The high consumption rate agrees with the estimate based on the eddy covariance measurements at the same site. We acknowledge the uncertainty involved in spatial extrapolations due to a small number of replicates per land cover type. This study highlights the need to distinguish different land cover types including the dry tundra habitats to account for their different CO 2 and CH 4 flux patterns, especially the consumption of atmospheric CH 4 , when estimating tundra C exchange on a larger spatial scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arctic tundra is facing unprecedented warming, resulting in shifts in the vegetation, thaw regimes, and potentially in the ecosystem-atmosphere exchange of carbon (C). The estimates of regional carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) budgets, however, are highly uncertain. We measured CO2 and CH4 fluxes, vegetation composition and leaf area index (LAI), thaw depth, and soil wetness in Tiksi (71° N, 128° E), a heterogeneous site located within the prostrate dwarf-shrub tundra zone in northeastern Siberia. Using the closed chamber method, we determined net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of CO2, dark ecosystem respiration (ER), ecosystem gross photosynthesis (Pg), and CH4 fluxes during the growing season. We applied a previously developed high-spatial-resolution land-cover map over an m area of 35.8 km². Among the land-cover types varying from barrens to dwarf-shrub tundra and tundra wetlands, the light-saturated NEE and Pg scaled with the LAI of vascular plants. Thus, the graminoid-dominated tundra wetlands, with high LAI and the deepest thaw depth, had the highest light-saturated NEE and Pg (up to -21 (uptake) and 28 mmol m-2 h-1, respectively) and were disproportionately important for the summertime CO2 sequestration on a landscape scale. Dry tundra, including the dwarf-shrub-dominated vegetation and only sparsely vegetated lichen tundra, had only small CO2 exchange rates. While tundra wetlands were sources of CH4, lichen tundra, including bare ground habitats, consumed atmospheric CH4 at a substantial rate. On a landscape scale, the consumption by lichen tundra and barrens could offset ca. 10% of the CH4 emissions. We acknowledge the uncertainty involved in spatial extrapolations due to a small number of replicates per land-cover type. This study, however, highlights the need for distinguishing different land-cover types including the dry tundra habitats to account for their consumption of the atmospheric CH4 when estimating tundra C-exchange on a larger spatial scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Arctic marine climate system is changing rapidly, which is seen in the warming of the ocean and atmosphere, decline of sea ice cover, increase in river discharge, acidification of the ocean, and changes in marine ecosystems. Socio-economic activities in the coastal and marine Arctic are simultaneously changing. This calls for the establishment of a marine Arctic component of the Pan-Eurasian Experiment (MA-PEEX). There is a need for more in situ observations on the marine atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean, but increasing the amount of such observations is a pronounced technological and logistical challenge. The SMEAR (Station for Measuring Ecosystem–Atmosphere Relations) concept can be applied in coastal and archipelago stations, but in the Arctic Ocean it will probably be more cost-effective to further develop a strongly distributed marine observation network based on autonomous buoys, moorings, autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). These have to be supported by research vessel and aircraft campaigns, as well as various coastal observations, including community-based ones. Major manned drifting stations may occasionally be comparable to terrestrial SMEAR flagship stations. To best utilize the observations, atmosphere–ocean reanalyses need to be further developed. To well integrate MA-PEEX with the existing terrestrial–atmospheric PEEX, focus is needed on the river discharge and associated fluxes, coastal processes, and atmospheric transports in and out of the marine Arctic. More observations and research are also needed on the specific socio-economic challenges and opportunities in the marine and coastal Arctic, and on their interaction with changes in the climate and environmental system. MA-PEEX will promote international collaboration; sustainable marine meteorological, sea ice, and oceanographic observations; advanced data management; and multidisciplinary research on the marine Arctic and its interaction with the Eurasian continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Arctic marine climate system is changing rapidly, seen as warming of the ocean and atmosphere, decline of sea ice cover, increase in river discharge, acidification of the ocean, and changes in marine ecosystems. Socio-economic activities in the coastal and marine Arctic are simultaneously changing. This calls for establishment of a marine Arctic component of the Pan-Eurasian Experiment (MA-PEEX). There is a need for more in-situ observations on the marine atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean, but increasing the amount of such observations is a pronounced technological and logistical challenge. The SMEAR (Station Measuring Ecosystem-Atmosphere Relations) concept can be applied in coastal and archipelago stations, but in the Arctic Ocean it will probably be more cost-effective to further develop a strongly distributed marine observation network based on autonomous buoys, moorings, Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUV), and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). These have to be supported by research vessel and aircraft campaigns, as well as various coastal observations, including community-based ones. Major manned drifting stations may occasionally serve comparable to terrestrial SMEAR Flagship stations. To best utilize the observations, atmosphere-ocean reanalyses need to be further developed. To well integrate MA-PEEX with the existing terrestrial/atmospheric PEEX, focus is needed on the river discharge and associated fluxes, coastal processes, as well as atmospheric transports in and out of the marine Arctic. More observations and research are also needed on the specific socio-economic challenges and opportunities in the marine and coastal Arctic, and on their interaction with changes in the climate and environmental system. MA-PEEX will promote international collaboration, sustainable marine meteorological, sea ice, and oceanographic observations, advanced data management, and multidisciplinary research on the marine Arctic and its interaction with the Eurasian continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several types of filter-based instruments are used to estimate aerosol light absorption coefficients. Two significant results are presented based on Aethalometer measurements at six Arctic stations from 2012 to 2014. First, an alternative method of post-processing the Aethalometer data is presented, which reduces measurement noise and lowers the detection limit of the instrument more effectively than boxcar averaging. The biggest benefit of this approach can be achieved if instrument drift is minimised. Moreover, by using an attenuation threshold criterion for data post-processing, the relative uncertainty from the electronic noise of the instrument is kept constant. This approach results in a time series with a variable collection time (Δ) but with a constant relative uncertainty with regard to electronic noise in the instrument. An additional advantage of this method is that the detection limit of the instrument will be lowered at small aerosol concentrations at the expense of temporal resolution, whereas there is little to no loss in temporal resolution at high aerosol concentrations (>2.1-6.7Mm-1 as measured by the Aethalometers). At high aerosol concentrations, minimising the detection limit of the instrument is less critical. Additionally, utilising co-located filter-based absorption photometers, a correction factor is presented for the Arctic that can be used in Aethalometer corrections available in literature. The correction factor of 3.45 was calculated for low-elevation Arctic stations. This correction factor harmonises Aethalometer attenuation coefficients with light absorption coefficients as measured by the co-located light absorption photometers. Using one correction factor for Arctic Aethalometers has the advantage that measurements between stations become more inter-comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several types of filter-based instruments are used to estimate aerosol light absorption coefficients. Two significant results are presented based on Aethalometer measurements at six Arctic station from 2012-2014. First, an alternative method of post-processing the Aethalometer data is presented which reduces measurement noise and lowers the detection limit of the instrument more effectively than boxcar averaging. The biggest benefit of this approach can be achieved if instrument drift is minimized. Moreover, by using an attenuation threshold criterion for data post-processing, the relative uncertainty from the electronic noise the instrument is kept constant. This approach results in a time series with a variable collection time (Δt), but with a constant relative uncertainty with regard to electronic noise in the instrument. An additional advantage of this method is that the detection limit of the instrument will be lowered at small aerosol concentrations at the expense of temporal resolution, whereas there is little to no loss in temporal resolution at high aerosol concentrations (>2.1-6.7 Mm-1 as measured by the Aethalometers). At high aerosol concentrations, minimising the detection limit of the instrument is less critical. Additionally, utilising co-located filter-based absorption photometers, a correction factor is presented for the Arctic that can be used in Aethalometer corrections available in literature. The correction factor of 3.45 was calculated for low-elevation Arctic stations. This correction factor harmonises Aethalometer attenuation coefficients with light absorption coefficients as measured by the co-located light absorption photometers. Using one correction factor for Arctic Aethalometers has the advantage that measurements between stations become more inter-comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]