Validation of theoretical footprint models using experimental measurements of turbulent fluxes over maize fields in Po Valley

Representative source area of turbulent fluxes measured by eddy covariance stations is an important issue which has not yet been fully investigated. In particular, the validation of the analytical footprint models is generally based on the comparison with Lagrangian model predictions, while experimental results are not largely diffused in literature. In this work, spatial distribution of carbon dioxide, latent and sensible heat fluxes across two different maize fields in Po Valley, is used to validate two theoretical footprint models. Experiments are performed in two totally different scenarios at bare and vegetated soils using two eddy covariance systems: one fixed station which is located about in the middle of the field and a mobile station which is placed at various distances from the field edge to investigate the horizontal variation of the vertical scalar fluxes. The first objective of this work is to provide detailed information about the spatial distribution of turbulent fluxes across Po Valley characteristic fields at bare and vegetated soils, highlighting peculiarities and uniqueness. The second objective consists in the comparison between mobile measurements of carbon dioxide, latent and sensible heat fluxes and the predictions of two analytical footprint models widely used in literature. Contemporaneously, the latter objective will permit to understand what is the best footprint model which, under typical Po Valley atmospheric turbulent conditions, describes a representative source area compatible with the field dimensions and the turbulent flux distributions. The results show that both models are in good agreement with experimental measurements. The results also show that the spatial distribution of turbulent fluxes is strongly influenced by the presence of vegetation in the field. Moreover, the representative source area is different for different scalar fluxes. Another result is about 10: 1 fetch-to-height obtained for both field situations.