This paper responds to the Forum contribution by Piovesan & Adams (2000) who criticized the results obtained by the EUROFLUX network on carbon fluxes of several European forests. The major point of criticism was that the data provided by EUROFLUX are inconsistent with current scientific understanding. It is argued that understanding the terrestrial global carbon cycle requires more than simply restating what was known previously, and that Piovesan & Adams have not been able to show any major conflicts between our findings and ecosystem or atmospheric-transport theories.
Carbon balance gradient in European forests: Should we doubt 'surprising' results? A reply to Piovesan & Adams
Matteucci G.
;
2001
Abstract
This paper responds to the Forum contribution by Piovesan & Adams (2000) who criticized the results obtained by the EUROFLUX network on carbon fluxes of several European forests. The major point of criticism was that the data provided by EUROFLUX are inconsistent with current scientific understanding. It is argued that understanding the terrestrial global carbon cycle requires more than simply restating what was known previously, and that Piovesan & Adams have not been able to show any major conflicts between our findings and ecosystem or atmospheric-transport theories.File in questo prodotto:
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
JVS_12.145-150.pdf
solo utenti autorizzati
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
33.84 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
33.84 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


