skip to main content

Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Burke, S."

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract

    Arctic regions are experiencing rapid warming, leading to permafrost thaw and formation of numerous water bodies. Although small ponds in particular are considered hot spots for methane (CH4) release, long‐term studies of CH4efflux from these surfaces are rare. We have collected an extensive data set of CH4ebullition (bubbling) measurements from eight small thaw ponds (<0.001 km2) with different physical and hydrological characteristics over four summer seasons, the longest set of observations from thaw ponds to date. The measured fluxes were highly variable with an average of 20.0 mg CH4· m−2· day−1(median: 4.1 mg CH4· m−2· day−1,n= 2,063) which is higher than that of most nearby lakes. The ponds were categorized into four types based on clear and significant differences in bubble flux. We found that the amount of CH4released as bubbles from ponds was very weakly correlated with environmental variables, like air temperature and atmospheric pressure, and was potentially more related to differences in physical characteristics of the ponds. Using our measured average daily bubble flux plus the available literature, we estimate circumpolar thaw ponds <0.001 km2in size to emit between 0.2 and 1.0 Tg of CH4through ebullition. Our findings exemplify the importance of high‐frequency measurements over long study periods in order to adequately capture the variability of these water bodies. Through the expansion of current spatial and temporal monitoring efforts, we can increase our ability to estimate CH4emissions from permafrost pond ecosystems now and in the future.

    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    Two additions impacting tables 3 and 4 in ref. [1] are presented in the following. No significant impact is found for other results or figures in ref. [1]. 
    more » « less