4.7 Article

Dry deposition of ammonia in a coastal dune area: Measurements and modeling

Journal

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT
Volume 298, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.119596

Keywords

Ammonia fluxes; Dry deposition; Coastal dunes; Measurements; Flux gradient; Modeling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, ammonia deposition in a Dutch coastal dune ecosystem was measured using the aerodynamic flux-gradient method. The average ammonia flux was found to be -7.1 +/- 1.7 ng m- 2 s- 1, with an annual deposition flux of -132 +/- 32 mol ha- 1 yr- 1. Modeling the fluxes with the DEPAC module resulted in an overestimation of deposition fluxes, but captured the diurnal variations well. Adjusting certain DEPAC parameters improved the agreement between model and measurements.
Ammonia deposition is a threat to many natural ecosystems, including coastal dune areas, because of eutro-phication and acidification. Direct measurements of ammonia fluxes are nevertheless scarce. In this paper we present a full year of measurements to derive the ammonia dry deposition flux in a Dutch coastal dune ecosystem, based on the aerodynamic flux-gradient method (AGM). We found a mean ammonia flux of-7.1 +/- 1.7 ng m- 2 s- 1, and an annual ammonia deposition flux of-132 +/- 32 mol ha- 1 yr- 1 (equivalent to 1.8 +/- 0.4 kg N ha- 1 yr- 1), which is at the low end of the range from estimates from literature made with inferential methods. Modeling the fluxes with the DEPAC module resulted in a mean flux of-17.0 ng m- 2 s- 1. The model over-estimated the deposition fluxes, but diurnal variations of the fluxes derived from measurements were well captured by the model. We propose to change certain DEPAC parameters, like the leaf area index, to values more applicable for a dune ecosystem and show that this improves the agreement between model and measurements.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available