Measurement and modelling of rainfall interception by three semi-arid canopies

Measurement and modelling of rainfall interception by three semi-arid canopies The main aims of this study were, firstly, to adapt the rainfall interception model of Rutter et al. (Agric. Meterology, 1971, 9, 367–384) to individual plants of two semiarid shrubs ( Anthyllis cytisoides L. and Retama sphaerocarpa (L.) Boiss.) and a tussock grass ( Stipa tenacissima L.) and secondly, to understand how the different canopy structures influence rainfall partitioning by individual plants. The selected species represent contrasting canopy types typical of vegetation of semiarid areas. Free throughfall coefficients were estimated from field measurements of low volume rainfall events and vertical photographs taken beneath the plant canopy. Canopy drainage curves were measured by continuous weighing of wetted plants. Canopy boundary layer conductances were calculated by measuring the evaporation of water from wet canopies. Field measurements of gross rainfall, throughfall and stemflow were taken for each rainfall event for A. cytisoides and R. sphaerocarpa . The Rutter type model of rainfall interception was adapted for individual shrubs and tested with measured rainfall events showing a good agreement between observed and predicted values for R. sphaerocarpa and for A. cytisoides . The interception model was then run to simulate interception loss during actual rainfall events, using atmospheric conditions measured every 5 s. The results from this simulation showed significant differences in interception loss between species, which can be explained by differences in canopy drainage and boundary layer conductance, and are caused primarily by the structural differences in their canopies. R. sphaerocarpa gave lower interception than the other two species, S. tenacissima gave higher interception, while A. cytisoides had an intermediate value. The low interception loss by R. sphaerocarpa can be explained by its low total area index, thus, high free throughfall and high canopy drainage rate per unit projected canopy area. On the other hand, S. tenacissima and A. cytisoides , show a low free throughfall and drainage rate per unit projected canopy area because of their higher aerial biomass density. The ecological implications of these adaptations are discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Elsevier

Measurement and modelling of rainfall interception by three semi-arid canopies

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/measurement-and-modelling-of-rainfall-interception-by-three-semi-arid-dbRAVPwftq
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 Elsevier Science B.V.
ISSN
0168-1923
D.O.I.
10.1016/S0168-1923(98)00068-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The main aims of this study were, firstly, to adapt the rainfall interception model of Rutter et al. (Agric. Meterology, 1971, 9, 367–384) to individual plants of two semiarid shrubs ( Anthyllis cytisoides L. and Retama sphaerocarpa (L.) Boiss.) and a tussock grass ( Stipa tenacissima L.) and secondly, to understand how the different canopy structures influence rainfall partitioning by individual plants. The selected species represent contrasting canopy types typical of vegetation of semiarid areas. Free throughfall coefficients were estimated from field measurements of low volume rainfall events and vertical photographs taken beneath the plant canopy. Canopy drainage curves were measured by continuous weighing of wetted plants. Canopy boundary layer conductances were calculated by measuring the evaporation of water from wet canopies. Field measurements of gross rainfall, throughfall and stemflow were taken for each rainfall event for A. cytisoides and R. sphaerocarpa . The Rutter type model of rainfall interception was adapted for individual shrubs and tested with measured rainfall events showing a good agreement between observed and predicted values for R. sphaerocarpa and for A. cytisoides . The interception model was then run to simulate interception loss during actual rainfall events, using atmospheric conditions measured every 5 s. The results from this simulation showed significant differences in interception loss between species, which can be explained by differences in canopy drainage and boundary layer conductance, and are caused primarily by the structural differences in their canopies. R. sphaerocarpa gave lower interception than the other two species, S. tenacissima gave higher interception, while A. cytisoides had an intermediate value. The low interception loss by R. sphaerocarpa can be explained by its low total area index, thus, high free throughfall and high canopy drainage rate per unit projected canopy area. On the other hand, S. tenacissima and A. cytisoides , show a low free throughfall and drainage rate per unit projected canopy area because of their higher aerial biomass density. The ecological implications of these adaptations are discussed.

Journal

Agricultural and Forest MeteorologyElsevier

Published: Jun 1, 1998

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off