Di Wang , Guangyao Gao , Jinxia An , Yiming Shao , Yihe Lü , Bojie Fu
{"title":"Comparisons of three scaling up methods to estimate stand transpiration of a xerophytic shrub (Salix psammophila) in northern China","authors":"Di Wang , Guangyao Gao , Jinxia An , Yiming Shao , Yihe Lü , Bojie Fu","doi":"10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Transpiration (T) is a key hydrological process, delivering water essential for plant metabolism and thus affecting productivity. A major challenge in estimating stand T is how to accurately scale sap flow data from individual trees to the stand. In shrub ecosystems, various scaling up methods have been used to extrapolate tree-level sap flow measurements to stand-level T, these include leaf area, cross-sectional area and number of branches. However, the performances of different scaling up methods have not been fully explored for shrubs. In this study, we measured sap flow of a xerophytic shrub (<em>Salix psammophila</em><span>) and scaled up using measures of leaf area, cross-sectional area and numbers of branches in order to estimate stand T during the rainy seasons in 2019 and 2020 on the northern Loess Plateau, China. In addition, we measured precipitation, throughfall<span>, stemflow<span>, soil evaporation, surface runoff and 0–200 cm soil water content<span> to calculate actual stand T on the basis of soil water balance method. The results revealed that daily stand T differed according to the scaling up methods used for the estimation. Daily estimated stand T based on measures of leaf area (0.1–13.1 mm d</span></span></span></span><sup>−1</sup>) was consistently higher than those based on cross-sectional area (0.2–8.6 mm d<sup>−1</sup>) and number of branches (0.4–8.9 mm d<sup>−1</sup>) (<em>p</em> < 0.05). During the two rainy seasons, the actual daily mean stand T (2.5 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 1.6 mm d<sup>−1</sup>) was significantly lower than the estimation by the three scaling up methods (<em>p</em><span> < 0.05). The method based on cross-sectional area appeared to be most suitable for scaling up because it had the lowest root mean square error and bias values (0.939 mm d</span><sup>−1</sup> and 0.633 mm d<sup>−1</sup>, respectively). This study highlights the wide variations of stand T upon which scaling up method was chosen, and these differences need to be considered when converting tree-level sap flow to stand-level T in shrub and other ecosystems.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hydrology","volume":"608 ","pages":"Article 127593"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hydrology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169422001688","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Transpiration (T) is a key hydrological process, delivering water essential for plant metabolism and thus affecting productivity. A major challenge in estimating stand T is how to accurately scale sap flow data from individual trees to the stand. In shrub ecosystems, various scaling up methods have been used to extrapolate tree-level sap flow measurements to stand-level T, these include leaf area, cross-sectional area and number of branches. However, the performances of different scaling up methods have not been fully explored for shrubs. In this study, we measured sap flow of a xerophytic shrub (Salix psammophila) and scaled up using measures of leaf area, cross-sectional area and numbers of branches in order to estimate stand T during the rainy seasons in 2019 and 2020 on the northern Loess Plateau, China. In addition, we measured precipitation, throughfall, stemflow, soil evaporation, surface runoff and 0–200 cm soil water content to calculate actual stand T on the basis of soil water balance method. The results revealed that daily stand T differed according to the scaling up methods used for the estimation. Daily estimated stand T based on measures of leaf area (0.1–13.1 mm d−1) was consistently higher than those based on cross-sectional area (0.2–8.6 mm d−1) and number of branches (0.4–8.9 mm d−1) (p < 0.05). During the two rainy seasons, the actual daily mean stand T (2.5 1.6 mm d−1) was significantly lower than the estimation by the three scaling up methods (p < 0.05). The method based on cross-sectional area appeared to be most suitable for scaling up because it had the lowest root mean square error and bias values (0.939 mm d−1 and 0.633 mm d−1, respectively). This study highlights the wide variations of stand T upon which scaling up method was chosen, and these differences need to be considered when converting tree-level sap flow to stand-level T in shrub and other ecosystems.
蒸腾(T)是一个关键的水文过程,提供植物代谢所必需的水分,从而影响生产力。估算林分T的一个主要挑战是如何准确地将树液流数据从单个树到林分。在灌木生态系统中,各种放大方法已被用于将树水平的液流测量外推到林分水平T,这些方法包括叶面积、横截面积和枝数。然而,不同的放大方法对灌木的放大效果还没有得到充分的研究。在本研究中,我们测量了黄土高原北部旱生灌木沙柳(Salix psammophila)的液流,并利用叶面积、横截面积和枝数进行了放大,以估计2019年和2020年雨季林分T的变化。此外,基于土壤水分平衡法,通过测量降水量、通流、茎流、土壤蒸发、地表径流和0 ~ 200 cm土壤含水量来计算实际林分T。结果表明,根据比例放大方法的不同,日林分T值存在差异。基于叶面积(0.1-13.1 mm d - 1)的日估算林分T始终高于基于横截面积(0.2-8.6 mm d - 1)和分枝数(0.4-8.9 mm d - 1)的估算林分T (p <0.05)。在两个雨季,实际日平均林分T(2.5±1.6 mm d - 1)显著低于三种按比例放大方法估算的值(p <0.05)。基于横截面积的方法具有最小的均方根误差和偏差值(分别为0.939 mm d - 1和0.633 mm d - 1),因此最适合放大。本研究强调了林分T的广泛变化,在选择按比例放大方法的基础上,这些差异需要在灌木和其他生态系统中将树级液流转换为林分T时加以考虑。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Hydrology publishes original research papers and comprehensive reviews in all the subfields of the hydrological sciences including water based management and policy issues that impact on economics and society. These comprise, but are not limited to the physical, chemical, biogeochemical, stochastic and systems aspects of surface and groundwater hydrology, hydrometeorology and hydrogeology. Relevant topics incorporating the insights and methodologies of disciplines such as climatology, water resource systems, hydraulics, agrohydrology, geomorphology, soil science, instrumentation and remote sensing, civil and environmental engineering are included. Social science perspectives on hydrological problems such as resource and ecological economics, environmental sociology, psychology and behavioural science, management and policy analysis are also invited. Multi-and interdisciplinary analyses of hydrological problems are within scope. The science published in the Journal of Hydrology is relevant to catchment scales rather than exclusively to a local scale or site.