2006
DOI: 10.1080/00103620600626825
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Two Micrometeorological Methods to Determine Ammonia Volatilization from Lagoon Swine Effluent

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The radius chosen in this study was smaller (12.5 m) and the surface-roughness length higher due to high-crop stands in the maize experiments. However, Sommer et al (1996) and Warren et al (2006) applied even smaller experimental radii for determining NH 3 losses from manure-storage facilities with the IHF(S) with satisfactory accuracy, as compared to the losses obtained from a reference technique (NH 4 -concentration change in NH 3 source).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The radius chosen in this study was smaller (12.5 m) and the surface-roughness length higher due to high-crop stands in the maize experiments. However, Sommer et al (1996) and Warren et al (2006) applied even smaller experimental radii for determining NH 3 losses from manure-storage facilities with the IHF(S) with satisfactory accuracy, as compared to the losses obtained from a reference technique (NH 4 -concentration change in NH 3 source).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent publication, Misselbrook et al (2005) have shown the reliability of the samplers by Leuning et al (1985) often used in such a simplified IHF method. Apart from this IHF approach, another simplified IHF method with different samplers developed by Schjoerring et al (1992) was also frequently used for the determination of ammonia loss in agricultural studies (e.g., Sommer et al, 1996;Schulz and Dämmgen, 1999;Schjoerring and Mattsson, 2001;Warren et al, 2006). Due to the still demanding experimental requirements, these micrometeorological methods are usually applied without replication.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wind speed was <10 m/s except for 1 d during the period of 19 to 23 May where 24% of the 30-min measurements were >10 m/s. Bypass can be assessed by plotting the amount of NH 3 -N in the tubes facing away from the source (background tubes) vs. the amount of NH 3 -N in the tubes facing toward the source (Sommer et al, 1996;Warren et al, 2006;Cabrera et al, 2011). When bypass is observed, NH 3 -N emissions are calculated by adding the NH 3 -N in the background and exposed tubes instead of subtracting the NH 3 -N in background from the exposed tubes.…”
Section: Ammonia Emissionsmentioning
confidence: 99%