Optimized methods for diffusive greenhouse gas flux analyses in inland waters

  • Lin Zhu
  • Jianghua Yu
  • Bryce Van Dam
  • Huayong Cao
  • Yinyu Pu
  • Wenqing ShiEmail author
  • Boqiang QinEmail author
Sediment Environment, Pollution and Remediation


Inland waters are considered hotspots of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and have been extensively researched. Static chamber (STAT) and thin boundary layer (BLE) are two commonly used methods for analyzing diffusive GHG emissions from inland waters. However, the STAT method is often disturbed by GHG bubbles; meanwhile, many kinds of headspace gas are used in the BLE method, but the differences between their diffusive GHG emission analysis results are not understood. In this study, the chamber in the STAT method was modified to combat the disturbances from GHG bubbles, and the typically used gases for the BLE method, namely, pure nitrogen, air, and filtered air, were comparatively studied. Results demonstrated that the modified chamber could effectively prevent the invasion of GHG bubbles; it increased the success rate from 67 to 90% in the field test, with no obvious impacts on the results of the GHG emission analyses. The use of air and filtered air in the BLE method yielded the lower values of GHG emissions relative to pure nitrogen, and this finding was potentially attributed to the inhibition effects of the residual GHGs and high humidity in air and filtered air on the extraction of diffusive GHGs from the surface water. This study improved the commonly used methods for diffusive GHG emission analysis, and the current findings are beneficial to the study of GHG emissions from inland waters.


Inland waters Greenhouse gas Static chamber Thin boundary layer Greenhouse gas bubble Diffusive greenhouse gas 


Funding information

Funding for this study was provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 41701112).

Supplementary material

11356_2019_6436_MOESM1_ESM.docx (130 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 129 kb)


  1. Allen MR, Barros VR, Broome J, Cramer W, Christ R, Church JA, Clarke L, Dahe Q, Dasgupta P, Dubash NK (2014) IPCC fifth assessment synthesis report-climate change 2014 synthesis reportGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbosa PM, Melack JM, Farjalla VF, Amaral JHF, Scofield V, Forsberg BR (2016) Diffusive methane fluxes from Negro, Solimões and Madeira rivers and fringing lakes in the Amazon basin. Limnol Oceanogr 61(S1): S221–S237Google Scholar
  3. Bastviken D, Tranvik LJ, Downing JA, Crill PM, Enrich-Prast A (2011) Freshwater methane emissions offset the continental carbon sink. Science 331:50–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckmann M, Lloyd D (2010) Mass spectrometric monitoring of gases (CO2, CH4, O2) in a mesotrophic peat core from Kopparås Mire, Sweden. Glob Chang Biol 7:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Billett MF, Moore TR (2010) Supersaturation and evasion of CO2 and CH4 in surface waters at Mer Bleue Peatland, Canada. Hydrol Process 22:2044–2054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Broecker WS, Peng T-H (1974) Gas exchange rates between air and sea. Tellus 26:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butman D, Raymond PA (2011) Significant efflux of carbon dioxide from streams and rivers in the United States. Nat Geosci 4:839–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Casper P, Maberly SC, Hall GH, Finlay BJ (2000) Fluxes of methane and carbon dioxide from a small productive lake to the atmosphere. Biogeochemistry 49:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DelSontro T, McGinnis DF, Sobek S, Ostrovsky I, Wehrli B (2010) Extreme methane emissions from a Swiss hydropower reservoir: contribution from bubbling sediments. Environ Sci Technol 44:2419–2425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diem T, Koch S, Schwarzenbach S, Wehrli B, Schubert C (2012) Greenhouse gas emissions (CO 2, CH 4, and N 2 O) from several perialpine and alpine hydropower reservoirs by diffusion and loss in turbines. Aquat Sci 74:619–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duchemin E, Lucotte M, Canuel R (1999) Comparison of static chamber and thin boundary layer equation methods for measuring greenhouse gas emissions from large water bodies. Environ Sci Technol 33:350–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Erkkilä K-M, Ojala A, Bastviken D, Biermann T, Heiskanen JJ, Lindroth A, Peltola O, Rantakari M, Vesala T, Mammarella I (2018) Methane and carbon dioxide fluxes over a lake: comparison between eddy covariance, floating chambers and boundary layer method. Biogeosciences 15(2):429–445Google Scholar
  13. Fedorov AV, Brierley CM, Emanuel K (2010) Tropical cyclones and permanent El Nino in the early Pliocene epoch. Nature 463:1066–1U84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Juutinen S, Rantakari M, Kortelainen P, Huttunen JT, Larmola T, Alm J, Silvola J, Martikainen PJ (2009) Methane dynamics in different boreal lake types. Biogeosciences 6:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Laurion I, Vincent WF, MacIntyre S, Retamal L, Dupont C, Francus P, Pienitz R (2010) Variability in greenhouse gas emissions from permafrost thaw ponds. Limnol Oceanogr 55:115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li J, Wei L, Li X (2015) An improved cubic model for the mutual solubilities of CO2–CH4–H2S–brine systems to high temperature, pressure and salinity. Appl Geochem 54:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu L, De Kock T, Wilkinson J, Cnudde V, Xiao S, Buchmann C, Uteau D, Peth S, Lorke A (2018) Methane bubble growth and migration in aquatic sediments observed by X-ray μCT. Environ Sci Technol 52:2007–2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Min SK, Zhang XB, Zwiers FW, Hegerl GC (2011) Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes. Nature 470:378–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Musenze RS, Werner U, Grinham A, Udy J, Yuan Z (2015) Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from a subtropical coastal embayment (Moreton Bay, Australia). J Environ Sci 29:82–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Raymond PA, Hartmann J, Lauerwald R, Sobek S, McDonald C, Hoover M, Butman D, Striegl R, Mayorga E, Humborg C (2013) Global carbon dioxide emissions from inland waters. Nature 503:355–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Read JS, Hamilton DP, Desai AR, Rose KC, MacIntyre S, Lenters JD, Smyth RL, Hanson PC, Cole JJ, Staehr PA, Rusak JA, Pierson DC, Brookes JD, Laas A, Wu CH (2012) Lake-size dependency of wind shear and convection as controls on gas exchange. Geophys Res Lett 39(9):L09405Google Scholar
  22. Roland F, Vidal LO, Pacheco FS, Barros NO, Assireu A, Ometto JP, Cimbleris AC, Cole JJ (2010) Variability of carbon dioxide flux from tropical (Cerrado) hydroelectric reservoirs. Aquat Sci 72:283–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schlüter M, Gentz T (2008) Application of membrane inlet mass spectrometry for online and in situ analysis of methane in aquatic environments. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 19:1395–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shi WQ, Chen QW, Yi QT, Yu JH, Ji YY, Hu LM, Chen YC (2017) Carbon emission from cascade reservoirs: spatial heterogeneity and mechanisms. Environ Sci Technol 51:12175–12181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Solomon S (2007) Climate change 2007-the physical science basis: working group I contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC, 4. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  26. Tollefson J (2012) Heatwaves blamed on global warming. Nature 488:143–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vachon D, Prairie YT, Cole JJ (2010) The relationship between near-surface turbulence and gas transfer velocity in freshwater systems and its implications for floating chamber measurements of gas exchange. Limnol Oceanogr 55(4):1723–1732Google Scholar
  28. Van Dam BR, Tobias C, Holbach A, Paerl HW, Zhu G (2018) CO2 limited conditions favor cyanobacteria in a hypereutrophic lake: an empirical and theoretical stable isotope study. Limnol Oceanogr 63(4):1643–1659Google Scholar
  29. Varadharajan C, Hermosillo R, Hemond HF (2010) A low-cost automated trap to measure bubbling gas fluxes. Limnol Oceanogr Methods 8:363–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wanninkhof R (2014) Relationship between wind speed and gas exchange over the ocean revisited. Limnol Oceanogr Methods 12:351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Watson AJ, Upstill-Goddard RC, Liss PS (1991) Air–sea gas exchange in rough and stormy seas measured by a dual-tracer technique. Nature 349:145–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Weigelhofer G, Hein T (2015) Efficiency and detrimental side effects of denitrifying bioreactors for nitrate reduction in drainage water. Environ Sci Pollut R 22:13534–13545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weiss RF (1974) Carbon dioxide in water and seawater: the solubility of a non-ideal gas. Mar Chem 2:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weiss R, Price B (1980) Nitrous oxide solubility in water and seawater. Mar Chem 8:347–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Whitfield CJ, Aherne J, Baulch HM (2011) Controls on greenhouse gas concentrations in polymictic headwater lakes in Ireland. Sci Total Environ 410:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wiesenburg DA, Guinasso NL Jr (1979) Equilibrium solubilities of methane, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen in water and sea water. J Chem Eng Data 24:356–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wik M, Crill PM, Varner RK, Bastviken D (2013) Multiyear measurements of ebullitive methane flux from three subarctic lakes. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 118:1307–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wilkinson J, Maeck A, Alshboul Z, Lorke A (2015) Continuous seasonal river ebullition measurements linked to sediment methane formation. Environ Sci Technol 49:13121–13129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xiao S, Wang Y, Liu D, Yang Z, Lei D, Zhang C (2013) Diel and seasonal variation of methane and carbon dioxide fluxes at Site Guojiaba, the Three Gorges Reservoir. J Environ Sci 25:2065–2071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xiao W, Liu S, Li H, Xiao Q, Wang W, Hu Z, Hu C, Gao Y, Shen J, Zhao X (2014) A flux-gradient system for simultaneous measurement of the CH4, CO2, and H2O fluxes at a lake–air interface. Environ Sci Technol 48:14490–14498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yamamoto S, Alcauskas JB, Crozier TE (1976) Solubility of methane in distilled water and seawater. J Chem Eng Data 21:78–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang L, Lu F, Wang X, Duan X, Tong L, Ouyang Z, Li H (2013) Spatial and seasonal variability of CO2 flux at the air-water interface of the Three Gorges Reservoir. J Environ Sci 25:2229–2238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yu J, Zhang J, Chen Q, Yu W, Hu L, Shi W, Zhong J, Yan W (2018) Dramatic source-sink transition of N 2 O in the water level fluctuation zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir during flooding-drying processes. Environ Sci Pollut R:1–9Google Scholar
  44. Yvon-Durocher G, Montoya JM, Woodward G, Jones JI, Trimmer M (2011) Warming increases the proportion of primary production emitted as methane from freshwater mesocosms. Glob Chang Biol 17:1225–1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhang Y, Wang L, Xie X, Huang L, Wu Y (2013) Effects of invasion of Spartina alterniflora and exogenous N deposition on N2O emissions in a coastal salt marsh. Ecol Eng 58:77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhu L, Qin B, Zhou J, Van Dam B, Shi W (2018) Effects of turbulence on carbon emission in shallow lakes. J Environ Sci 69:166–172Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Environmental Science and EngineeringNanjing University of Information Science & TechnologyNanjingChina
  2. 2.Institute of Coastal ResearchHelmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht (HZG)GeesthachtGermany
  3. 3.Center for Eco-Environment ResearchNanjing Hydraulic Research InstituteNanjingChina
  4. 4.Nanjing Institute of Geography and LimnologyChinese Academy of SciencesNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations