238 R. Leuning et al. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 104 2000 233–249
the best least-squares fit and sensitivity of the solution to errors in the matrix operator D
D D
. Using the criterion α=
0.01, six is the maximum number of source lay- ers that can be obtained from the eight concentration
measurement heights used in this study. However, the number of layers finally adopted was reduced to five
because errors in the measured scalar concentrations also contributed to instability of the inversion analysis.
3. Experimental site and methods
3.1. Study site Measurements were made in a rice paddy located
at the agricultural station of Okayama University 34
◦
32
′
N, 133
◦
56
′
E from 6 to 13 August 1996. The field measured ∼300 m×300 m and was surrounded
by similar rice fields in all directions, providing a fetch of 400 m in the prevailing SE wind direction.
Average plant height was 0.72 m during the obser- vation period, row spacing was 0.29 m and leaf area
index measured using a canopy analyser LAI-2000 LiCor Inc., Lincoln, NE, USA was 3.1±0.3 S.D..
The normal weekly irrigation cycle consisted of flood- ing for 4 days followed by a drained period of 3 days.
The field was drained on the afternoon of 6 August until midday on 9 August, and the mean water depth
during flooding thereafter was 0.08–0.10 m.
3.2. Measurement of temperature, water vapour, CO
2
and CH
4
profiles Temperature and relative humidity profiles were
measured using Humitter sensors Vaisala Oy, Helsinki, Finland housed in double-walled radi-
ation shields ventilated at 3 m s
− 1
. Air inlets to the radiation shields were located at eight heights
above the water, 0.12, 0.24, 0.36, 0.48, 0.60, 0.72, 1.10 and 2.40 m The sensors were calibrated using
a high-precision temperaturehumidity chamber to a precision of 0.05
◦
C in both temperature and dewpoint. Before the experiment, the sensors were also placed
at the same height to provide an inter-calibration of the instruments.
Concentrations of CO
2
and CH
4
were measured using non-dispersive infrared analysers, an LI-6251
LiCor Inc., Lincoln, NE USA for CO
2
, and a GA- 360E Horiba, Kyoto, Japan for CH
4
Miyata et al., 2000. The latter instrument was equipped with an air
pre-conditioner to minimise the interference of non- methane hydrocarbons and water vapour in methane
analysis Harazono et al., 1998. The methane analyser was calibrated between 09:00–10:00 and 17:00–18:00
hours each day using a reference cylinder of high grade air containing 1.7 ppmv CH
4
Takachiho, Tokyo, Japan. The CO
2
analyser was calibrated at the same time using two reference cylinders with 350 and 400
ppmv CO
2
in N
2
Takachiho, Tokyo, Japan. Air was sampled for gas analysis at the same eight
heights as the temperature sensors, plus an extra line for reference air at 2.50 m. For each line, a diaphragm
pump sampled air continuously through 10 mm i.d. nylon tubing, through an ice-trap to reduce moisture
content, into a cylindrical PVC buffer 70 dm
3
in vol- ume, and then to a T-junction. A tube connected to the
second arm of the T junction was immersed in a water tank 600 mm deep to control the air pressure and flow
rate in the sampling line, and to vent excess air when not required for gas analysis. The third arm of each
T-junction was connected to a solenoid valve and man- ifold to permit selection of each sampling line in turn
for gas analysis. Air from a selected line was passed through flow meters, dried to a dew point of 2
◦
C us- ing a Peltier cooler condenser, before being split and
passed through the CO
2
and CH
4
analysers. For CO
2
analysis, reference and sample air lines were brought to the same pressure before the analyser by venting
excess air through water bubblers 60 mm deep. For CH
4
, reference and sample air were passed to the pre-conditioning unit. A full sampling sequence was
completed in 30 min. The standard error of concen- trations measured by the CH
4
analyser was 2.5 ppbv when it was used in fast-response mode and 1.0 ppbv
in slow-response mode. The corresponding figure for the CO
2
analyser is 0.2 ppmv. These error estimates are more relevant than the absolute errors induced by
uncertainties in the calibration gases because the anal- ysis of sourcesink distributions utilises profiles of the
difference in concentration between each level and a reference level Eq. 6.
3.3. Turbulence measurements A miniature 3-D sonic anemometer with a 50 mm
path length Kaijo Denki, DAT 395 was placed at
R. Leuning et al. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 104 2000 233–249 239
various heights within the canopy to measure σ
w
. Friction velocity, u
∗
, was measured using another 3-D sonic anemometer with path length of 0.15 m
and installed at a height of 2.2 m Solent 1021R, Gill Instruments Ltd., Lymigton, UK. The two
sets of measurements were combined to develop a composite profile of σ
w
u
∗
. as a function of zh
c
, where z is measurement height above water when
the paddy was flooded or above ground when it was drained.
Fluxes of sensible heat, H, water vapour, E, and CO
2
, F
CO
2
at 2.2 m above the ground were mea- sured using the eddy covariance method Miyata
et al., 2000. Fluctuations of the three wind velocity components and of air temperature were measured
with a Solent RS3A sonic anemometer. Sonic virtual temperature fluctuations were corrected for variation
in the speed of sound with air density according to Hignett 1992. A fast response, open-path infrared
gas analyser with a 0.20 m span E009, Advanet Inc., Okayama, Japan was installed at the same
height as the sonic anemometer with a horizontal separation of 0.17 m to measure the fluctuations in
the CO
2
and water vapour concentrations. Miyata et al. 2000 provide details of corrections to account
for the high-frequency losses in eddy covariance measurements resulting from path-averaging and
instrument separation Moore, 1986; Leuning and Moncrieff, 1990. Corrections to eddy fluxes aris-
ing from density fluctuations due to H and E Webb et al., 1980, and for the cross-sensitivity of the CO
2
gas analyser to water vapour Leuning and Mon- crieff, 1990; Leuning and Judd, 1996 were also
applied. Methane fluxes above the canopy were estimated
using classical flux-gradient relationships as de- scribed in detail by Miyata et al. 2000. In that
paper, both the friction velocity and CO
2
were used as ‘tracers’ to evaluate the eddy diffusivity, K,
required in
F
CH
4
= − ρ
a
K M
CH
4
M
a
ds
CH
4
dz 14
where s
CH
4
is the mixing ratio of CH
4
relative to dry air and ρ
a
is the density of dry air, and M
a
and M
CH
4
are the molecular masses of dry air and CH
4
, respec- tively.
4. Results