皮德蒙特地区一个小叶松种植园中共生小叶松和短叶松的用水情况

IF 2.6 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL Journal of The American Water Resources Association Pub Date : 2024-06-14 DOI:10.1111/1752-1688.13218
Johnny Boggs, Ge Sun, Jean-Christophe Domec, Steve McNulty
{"title":"皮德蒙特地区一个小叶松种植园中共生小叶松和短叶松的用水情况","authors":"Johnny Boggs,&nbsp;Ge Sun,&nbsp;Jean-Christophe Domec,&nbsp;Steve McNulty","doi":"10.1111/1752-1688.13218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Measuring water use in co-occurring loblolly pine (<i>Pinus taeda</i> L.) and shortleaf pine (<i>Pinus echinata</i> Mill.) enhances our understanding of their competitive water use and aids in refining watershed water budget model parameters. This study was conducted in a 12-ha forested headwater catchment in the Piedmont of North Carolina, southeastern U.S., from 2018 to 2019 (pre-thinning) to 2020 (post-thinning). Sap flux density (<i>J</i>\n <sub>s</sub>), species-level transpiration (<i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub>), and watershed-level transpiration (<i>T</i>\n <sub>w</sub>) were quantified. Water use efficiency (WUE) in loblolly and shortleaf pines was compared, alongside an investigation into how both species' <i>J</i>\n <sub>s</sub> and <i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub> responded to atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD). Loblolly pine had 19%–36% higher <i>J</i>\n <sub>s</sub> than shortleaf pine. Daily <i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub> for loblolly pine ranged from 15.0 to 29.0 L/day while <i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub> in shortleaf pine ranged from 3.0 to 6.8 L/day. The <i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub> was significantly higher in loblolly pine when compared to shortleaf pine likely due to higher canopy position and higher growth rates of the former. WUE, defined by annual tree biomass growth per tree water use, was not significantly different between the two. Daily <i>J</i>\n <sub>s</sub> and <i>T</i>\n <sub>s</sub> in both species responded nonlinearly to VPD, with loblolly pine being more sensitive and variable. Species-specific water use should be considered when quantifying <i>T</i>\n <sub>w</sub> and developing reliable models to predict the effects of forest management practices on water resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":17234,"journal":{"name":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","volume":"60 4","pages":"897-911"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Water use of co-occurring loblolly (Pinus taeda) and shortleaf (Pinus echinata) in a loblolly pine plantation in the Piedmont\",\"authors\":\"Johnny Boggs,&nbsp;Ge Sun,&nbsp;Jean-Christophe Domec,&nbsp;Steve McNulty\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1752-1688.13218\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Measuring water use in co-occurring loblolly pine (<i>Pinus taeda</i> L.) and shortleaf pine (<i>Pinus echinata</i> Mill.) enhances our understanding of their competitive water use and aids in refining watershed water budget model parameters. This study was conducted in a 12-ha forested headwater catchment in the Piedmont of North Carolina, southeastern U.S., from 2018 to 2019 (pre-thinning) to 2020 (post-thinning). Sap flux density (<i>J</i>\\n <sub>s</sub>), species-level transpiration (<i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub>), and watershed-level transpiration (<i>T</i>\\n <sub>w</sub>) were quantified. Water use efficiency (WUE) in loblolly and shortleaf pines was compared, alongside an investigation into how both species' <i>J</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> and <i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> responded to atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD). Loblolly pine had 19%–36% higher <i>J</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> than shortleaf pine. Daily <i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> for loblolly pine ranged from 15.0 to 29.0 L/day while <i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> in shortleaf pine ranged from 3.0 to 6.8 L/day. The <i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> was significantly higher in loblolly pine when compared to shortleaf pine likely due to higher canopy position and higher growth rates of the former. WUE, defined by annual tree biomass growth per tree water use, was not significantly different between the two. Daily <i>J</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> and <i>T</i>\\n <sub>s</sub> in both species responded nonlinearly to VPD, with loblolly pine being more sensitive and variable. Species-specific water use should be considered when quantifying <i>T</i>\\n <sub>w</sub> and developing reliable models to predict the effects of forest management practices on water resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of The American Water Resources Association\",\"volume\":\"60 4\",\"pages\":\"897-911\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of The American Water Resources Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1752-1688.13218\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1752-1688.13218","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

测量共生的龙柏(Pinus taeda L.)和短叶松(Pinus echinata Mill.)的用水量可加深我们对其竞争性用水的了解,并有助于完善流域水预算模型参数。本研究于 2018 年至 2019 年(疏伐前)至 2020 年(疏伐后)在美国东南部北卡罗来纳州皮德蒙特的一个 12 公顷的森林源头集水区进行。对树液通量密度(Js)、物种水平蒸腾作用(Ts)和流域水平蒸腾作用(Tw)进行了量化。对小叶松和短叶松的水分利用效率(WUE)进行了比较,同时还调查了两种松树的 Js 和 Ts 如何对大气蒸气压差(VPD)做出响应。小叶松的 Js 比短叶松高 19%-36%。小叶松的日 Ts 为 15.0 至 29.0 升/天,而短叶松的 Ts 为 3.0 至 6.8 升/天。小叶松的 Ts 明显高于短叶松,这可能是由于小叶松的树冠位置更高,生长速度更快。WUE(根据每棵树的年生物量增长和每棵树的用水量定义)在两者之间没有显著差异。两种树种的日 Js 和 Ts 对 VPD 都呈非线性反应,其中小叶松更为敏感且变化更大。在量化 Tw 和开发可靠模型以预测森林管理措施对水资源的影响时,应考虑树种的具体用水量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Water use of co-occurring loblolly (Pinus taeda) and shortleaf (Pinus echinata) in a loblolly pine plantation in the Piedmont

Measuring water use in co-occurring loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) and shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata Mill.) enhances our understanding of their competitive water use and aids in refining watershed water budget model parameters. This study was conducted in a 12-ha forested headwater catchment in the Piedmont of North Carolina, southeastern U.S., from 2018 to 2019 (pre-thinning) to 2020 (post-thinning). Sap flux density (J s), species-level transpiration (T s), and watershed-level transpiration (T w) were quantified. Water use efficiency (WUE) in loblolly and shortleaf pines was compared, alongside an investigation into how both species' J s and T s responded to atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD). Loblolly pine had 19%–36% higher J s than shortleaf pine. Daily T s for loblolly pine ranged from 15.0 to 29.0 L/day while T s in shortleaf pine ranged from 3.0 to 6.8 L/day. The T s was significantly higher in loblolly pine when compared to shortleaf pine likely due to higher canopy position and higher growth rates of the former. WUE, defined by annual tree biomass growth per tree water use, was not significantly different between the two. Daily J s and T s in both species responded nonlinearly to VPD, with loblolly pine being more sensitive and variable. Species-specific water use should be considered when quantifying T w and developing reliable models to predict the effects of forest management practices on water resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of The American Water Resources Association
Journal of The American Water Resources Association 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: JAWRA seeks to be the preeminent scholarly publication on multidisciplinary water resources issues. JAWRA papers present ideas derived from multiple disciplines woven together to give insight into a critical water issue, or are based primarily upon a single discipline with important applications to other disciplines. Papers often cover the topics of recent AWRA conferences such as riparian ecology, geographic information systems, adaptive management, and water policy. JAWRA authors present work within their disciplinary fields to a broader audience. Our Associate Editors and reviewers reflect this diversity to ensure a knowledgeable and fair review of a broad range of topics. We particularly encourage submissions of papers which impart a ''take home message'' our readers can use.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Evaluation of reported and unreported water uses in various sectors of the Potomac basin for the year 2017 Rapid geomorphic assessment walkabouts as a tool for stream mitigation monitoring Sources of seasonal water supply forecast uncertainty during snow drought in the Sierra Nevada
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1