Throughfall partitioning by trees. Issue 12 (5th April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Levia, Delphis F.; Nanko, Kazuki; Amasaki, Hiromasa; Giambelluca, Thomas W.; Hotta, Norifumi; Iida, Shin'ichi; Mudd, Ryan G.; Nullet, Michael A.; Sakai, Naoki; Shinohara, Yoshinori; Sun, Xinchao; Suzuki, Masakazu; Tanaka, Nobuaki; Tantasirin, Chatchai; Yamada, Kozo
• Is Part Of: Hydrological processes. Volume 33:Issue 12(2019)
• Page Start: 1698
• Page End: 1708
• Publication Date: 2019-04-05
• Subjects: interception -- precipitation partitioning -- throughfall drop‐size distribution -- throughfall; Hydrology -- Periodicals; Hydrology -- Research -- Periodicals; Hydrologic models -- Periodicals; Hydrological forecasting -- Periodicals; 631.432
• DOI: 10.1002/hyp.13432
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0885-6087

Abstract

Abstract: Although we know that rainfall interception (the rain caught, stored, and evaporated from aboveground vegetative surfaces and ground litter) is affected by rain and throughfall drop size, what was unknown until now is the relative proportion of each throughfall type (free throughfall, splash throughfall, canopy drip) beneath coniferous and broadleaved trees. Based on a multinational data set of >120 million throughfall drops, we found that the type, number, and volume of throughfall drops are different between coniferous and broadleaved tree species, leaf states, and timing within rain events. Compared with leafed broadleaved trees, conifers had a lower percentage of canopy drip (51% vs. 69% with respect to total throughfall volume) and slightly smaller diameter splash throughfall and canopy drip. Canopy drip from leafless broadleaved trees consisted of fewer and smaller diameter drops ( D 50_DR, 50th cumulative drop volume percentile for canopy drip, of 2.24 mm) than leafed broadleaved trees ( D 50_DR of 4.32 mm). Canopy drip was much larger in diameter under woody drip points ( D 50_DR of 5.92 mm) than leafed broadleaved trees. Based on throughfall volume, the percentage of canopy drip was significantly different between conifers, leafed broadleaved trees, leafless broadleaved trees, and woody surface drip points ( p ranged from <0.001 to 0.005). These findings are partly attributable to differences in canopy structure and plant surface characteristics between plant functional types and canopy state (leaf, leafless), among other factors. Hence, our results demonstrating the importance of drop‐size‐dependent partitioning between coniferous and broadleaved tree species could be useful to those requiring more detailed information on throughfall fluxes to the forest floor.