Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen

Dr. Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 December 2014 in Nature Geoscience
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CJChristian Juncher Jørgensen
Christian Juncher Jørgensen
KJKatrine Maria Lund Johansen
Katrine Maria Lund Johansen
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
BEBo Elberling
Bo Elberling

5 October 2017 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MBMette Bendixen
Mette Bendixen
LILars Lønsmann Iversen
Lars Lønsmann Iversen
ABAnders Bjork
Anders Bjork
BEBo Elberling
Bo Elberling
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
AKAart Kroon
Aart Kroon

15 July 2016 in Global Change Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LDLudovica D'Imperio
Ludovica D'Imperio
CNCecilie Skov Nielsen
Cecilie Skov Nielsen
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
AMAnders Michelsen
Anders Michelsen
BEBo Elberling
Bo Elberling
Arctic ecosystems are characterized by a wide range of soil moisture conditions and thermal regimes and contribute differently to the net methane (CH4) budget. Yet, it is unclear how climate change will affect the capacity of those systems to act as a net source or sink of CH4. Here, we present results of in situ CH4 flux measurements made during the growing season 2014 on Disko Island (west Greenland) and quantify the contribution of contrasting soil and landscape types to the net CH4 budget and responses to summer warming. We compared gas flux measurements from a bare soil and a dry heath, at ambient conditions and increased air temperature, using open‐top chambers (OTCs). Throughout the growing season, bare soil consumed 0.22 ± 0.03 g CH4‐C m−2 (8.1 ± 1.2 g CO2‐eq m−2) at ambient conditions, while the dry heath consumed 0.10 ± 0.02 g CH4‐C m−2 (3.9 ± 0.6 g CO2‐eq m−2). These uptake rates were subsequently scaled to the entire study area of 0.15 km2, a landscape also consisting of wetlands with a seasonally integrated methane release of 0.10 ± 0.01 g CH4‐C m−2 (3.7 ± 1.2 g CO2‐eq m−2). The result was a net landscape sink of 12.71 kg CH4‐C (0.48 tonne CO2‐eq) during the growing season. A nonsignificant trend was noticed in seasonal CH4 uptake rates with experimental warming, corresponding to a 2% reduction at the bare soil, and 33% increase at the dry heath. This was due to the indirect effect of OTCs on soil moisture, which exerted the main control on CH4 fluxes. Overall, the net landscape sink of CH4 tended to increase by 20% with OTCs. Bare and dry tundra ecosystems should be considered in the net CH4 budget of the Arctic due to their potential role in counterbalancing CH4 emissions from wetlands – not the least when taking the future climatic scenarios of the Arctic into account.

1 December 2013 in ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
MLMagnus Lund
Magnus Lund
BHBirger Ulf Hansen
Birger Ulf Hansen
MTMikkel Peter Tamstorf
Mikkel Peter Tamstorf

11 October 2017 in Biogeosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ELEfrén López-Blanco
Efrén López-Blanco
MLMagnus Lund
Magnus Lund
MWMathew Williams
Mathew Williams
MTMikkel P. Tamstorf
Mikkel P. Tamstorf
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
TCTorben R. Christensen
Torben R. Christensen
An improvement in our process-based understanding of carbon (C) exchange in the Arctic and its climate sensitivity is critically needed for understanding the response of tundra ecosystems to a changing climate. In this context, we analysed the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of CO2 in West Greenland tundra (64° N) across eight snow-free periods in 8 consecutive years, and characterized the key processes of net ecosystem exchange and its two main modulating components: gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (Reco). Overall, the ecosystem acted as a consistent sink of CO2, accumulating −30 g C m−2 on average (range of −17 to −41 g C m−2) during the years 2008–2015, except 2011 (source of 41 g C m−2), which was associated with a major pest outbreak. The results do not reveal a marked meteorological effect on the net CO2 uptake despite the high interannual variability in the timing of snowmelt and the start and duration of the growing season. The ranges in annual GPP (−182 to −316 g C m−2) and Reco (144 to 279 g C m−2) were > 5 fold larger than the range in NEE. Gross fluxes were also more variable (coefficients of variation are 3.6 and 4.1 % respectively) than for NEE (0.7 %). GPP and Reco were sensitive to insolation and temperature, and there was a tendency towards larger GPP and Reco during warmer and wetter years. The relative lack of sensitivity of NEE to meteorology was a result of the correlated response of GPP and Reco. During the snow-free season of the anomalous year of 2011, a biological disturbance related to a larvae outbreak reduced GPP more strongly than Reco. With continued warming temperatures and longer growing seasons, tundra systems will increase rates of C cycling. However, shifts in sink strength will likely be triggered by factors such as biological disturbances, events that will challenge our forecasting of C states.

1 March 2019 in Science of The Total Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RFRasmus Fenger-Nielsen
Rasmus Fenger-Nielsen
JHJørgen Hollesen
Jørgen Hollesen
HMHenning Matthiesen
Henning Matthiesen
EAEmil Alexander Sherman Andersen
Emil Alexander Sherman Andersen
AWAndreas Westergaard-Nielsen
Andreas Westergaard-Nielsen
BEBo Elberling
Bo Elberling