{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02646868947708199, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003873466752743706, 'mean_word_length': 5.7685589519650655, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessing canopy performance using carbonyl sulfide measurements

Carbonyl sulfide (COS) is a tracer of ecosystem photosynthesis that can advance carbon cycle research from leaf to global scales; however, a range of newly reported caveats related to sink/source strength of various ecosystem components hinder its application. Using comprehensive eddy‐covariance and chamber measurements, we systematically measure ecosystem contributions from leaf, stem, soil, and litter and were able to close the ecosystem COS budget. The relative contributions of nonphotosynthetic components to the overall canopy‐scale flux are relatively small (~4% during peak activity season) and can be independently estimated based on their responses to temperature and humidity. Converting COS to photosynthetic CO2 fluxes based on the leaf relative uptake of COS/CO2, faces challenges due to observed daily and seasonal changes. Yet, this ratio converges around a constant value (~1.6), and the variations, dominated by light intensity, were found unimportant on a flux‐weighted daily time‐scale, indicating a mean ratio of daytime gross‐to‐net primary productivity of ~2 in our ecosystem. The seasonal changes in the leaf relative uptake ratio may indicate a reduction in mesophyll conductance in winter, and COS‐derived canopy conductance permitted canopy temperature estimate consistent with radiative skin temperature. These results support the feasibility of using COS as a powerful and much‐needed means of assessing ecosystem function and its response to change.