Articles | Volume 16, issue 21
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13417-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13417-2016
Research article
 | 
31 Oct 2016
Research article |  | 31 Oct 2016

Non-stomatal exchange in ammonia dry deposition models: comparison of two state-of-the-art approaches

Frederik Schrader, Christian Brümmer, Chris R. Flechard, Roy J. Wichink Kruit, Margreet C. van Zanten, Undine Zöll, Arjan Hensen, and Jan Willem Erisman

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Frederik Schrader on behalf of the Authors (12 Oct 2016)  Author's response   Manuscript 
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (13 Oct 2016) by Leiming Zhang
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (17 Oct 2016)
ED: Publish as is (18 Oct 2016) by Leiming Zhang
AR by Frederik Schrader on behalf of the Authors (19 Oct 2016)
Download
Short summary
We found a systematic mismatch of modeled and measured NH3 fluxes using two state-of-the-art dry deposition models and data from five sites in Europe. Results of our analysis indicate a too large minimum non-stomatal resistance and too strong temperature response in the parameterization of a unidirectional surface–atmosphere exchange scheme, as well as room for improvement on the emission potential parameterization of a bidirectional model, both directly impacting predicted NH3 exchange fluxes.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint