TY - JOUR
T1 - Differences in sap flux-based stand transpiration between upper and lower slope positions in a Japanese cypress plantation watershed
AU - Kume, Tomonori
AU - Tsuruta, Kenji
AU - Komatsu, Hikaru
AU - Shinohara, Yoshinori
AU - Katayama, Ayumi
AU - Ide, Junichiro
AU - Otsuki, Kyoichi
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, and partly by grants from the National Science Council of the Republic of China (MOST; 100-2313-B-002-033-MY3 and 103-2313-B-002-009-MY3). We sincerely thank Dr Naoko Higashi, Dr Tsutomu Enoki, and Mr Kohei Kuramoto (Kyushu University) for their help and cooperation with our work in the OEW. Fruitful discussion with Dr Tomo'omi Kumagai (Nagoya University) is also appreciated.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
PY - 2016/9/1
Y1 - 2016/9/1
N2 - This study investigated the difference in stand transpiration (E) between upper (UP) and lower (LP) slope plots of a Japanese cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa) watershed to obtain catchment-scale E estimates. Sap flux-based stand-scale E estimates were conducted on the UP and LP, which had contrasting stand structures (diameter at breast height and tree height) despite being the same age. The plant area index was similar in the UP and LP, while the total sapwood area (AS_stand) and the mean sap flux density (JS) in the UP were 23% and ~30% lower, respectively, than those of the LP. Stand-scale E is the product of the AS_stand and JS in a stand. As a result, E in the UP was ~50% lower than that in the LP. This ratio was relatively constant throughout the year, which was supported by a similar decline in E, which resulted from soil water decline in the UP and LP. Canopy conductance (GC) in the UP was ~50% smaller than that of the LP. In contrast to previous studies that showed a consistent JS along a slope, the differences in E between the UP and LP were caused by differences in AS_stand and JS, probably because the UP exhibited a lower GC per unit leaf area than the LP. Additionally, evapotranspiration (ET), the sum of sap flux-scaled E plus rainfall interception, was 8–14% lower than the catchment water balance ET (precipitation minus runoff), which suggests the feasibility of calculating sap flux-scaled E for the two slope positions.
AB - This study investigated the difference in stand transpiration (E) between upper (UP) and lower (LP) slope plots of a Japanese cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa) watershed to obtain catchment-scale E estimates. Sap flux-based stand-scale E estimates were conducted on the UP and LP, which had contrasting stand structures (diameter at breast height and tree height) despite being the same age. The plant area index was similar in the UP and LP, while the total sapwood area (AS_stand) and the mean sap flux density (JS) in the UP were 23% and ~30% lower, respectively, than those of the LP. Stand-scale E is the product of the AS_stand and JS in a stand. As a result, E in the UP was ~50% lower than that in the LP. This ratio was relatively constant throughout the year, which was supported by a similar decline in E, which resulted from soil water decline in the UP and LP. Canopy conductance (GC) in the UP was ~50% smaller than that of the LP. In contrast to previous studies that showed a consistent JS along a slope, the differences in E between the UP and LP were caused by differences in AS_stand and JS, probably because the UP exhibited a lower GC per unit leaf area than the LP. Additionally, evapotranspiration (ET), the sum of sap flux-scaled E plus rainfall interception, was 8–14% lower than the catchment water balance ET (precipitation minus runoff), which suggests the feasibility of calculating sap flux-scaled E for the two slope positions.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84952705975&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84952705975&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/eco.1709
DO - 10.1002/eco.1709
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84952705975
SN - 1936-0584
VL - 9
SP - 1105
EP - 1116
JO - Ecohydrology
JF - Ecohydrology
IS - 6
ER -