Pürüzsüz ve pürüzlü kabuk yapısına sahip ağaçlarda gövdeden akışın karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Giriş ve Hedefler Hidrolojik döngünün önemli bir parçası olan intersepsiyon üzerinde açık alana düşen toplam yağış, orman altı yağış ve gövdeden akış bileşenleri belirleyicidir. Bu bileşenlerden biri olan gövdeden akışı etkileyen birçok etmen bulunmaktadır. Bunlardan bir tanesi de kabuk özellikleridir. Özellikle pürüzsüz ve pürüzlü kabuklar yağmurun gövdeden akarak yere ulaşmasında belirleyici olabilmektedir. Bu çalışmada pürüzsüz (Carpinus betulus L.) ve pürüzlü (Quercus cerris L.) gövde kabuğuna sahip ağaçların gövdeden akış değerlerinin belirlenmesi ve sonuçların karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Yöntemler Gövdeden akış, birey ağaçların gövdesine sarmal şekilde yerleştirilen plastik oluklardan gelen yağmurun, ağzı kapalı bir toplama tankında biriktirilmesiyle tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma alanına düşen toplam yağmur miktarının belirlenmesinde orman içinde uygun bir açıklığa tesis edilen yağışölçer kullanılmıştır. Bulgular Çalışma süresince gövdeden akış üreten sekiz yağış sonrasında toplam 175,4 mm yağmur düşmüştür. Toplam on ağaçtan sekiz yağmur olayı sonrasında elde edilen veriler, kabuk pürüzlülüğünün gövdeden akışa etki ettiğini ortaya koymuştur (p<0,05). Açık alana düşen yağışla karşılaştırıldığında gürgen ve meşe ağaçlarında sırasıyla ortalama %2,36 ve %1,35 oranında gövdeden akış gerçekleşmiştir. Sonuçlar Bu sonuç pürüzlü ağaç kabuklarının gövdeden akış üzerinde belirleyici bir öğe olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışmanın gürgen ve meşe meşcerelerinde hektarda meydana gelen gövdeden akışın belirlenmesine katkı sağlayabileceği öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

• Bartın
• Carpinus betulus L.
• intersepsiyon
• Quercus cerris L.
• yağış

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK

Project Number

1919B012109760

Thanks

Bu çalışma 1919B012109760 başvuru numaralı TÜBİTAK 2209 projesi kapsamında desteklenmiştir.

Comparison of stemflow in trees with smooth and rough bark structure

Abstract

Background and aims Precipitation, throughfall and stemflow are significative on interception, which is an important part of the hydrological cycle. Many factors affect the stemflow, which is a component of interception. One of the factors affecting the stemflow is the bark characteristics. Especially smooth and rough bark characteristics can be decisive in the stemflow. In this study, stemflow yield of trees with smooth (Carpinus betulus L.) and rough (Quercus cerris L.) bark were determined, and the results were compared. Methods Stemflow was determined by collecting the precipitation coming from plastic gutters placed spirally on the trunks of individual trees in a closed collection tank. A precipitation gauge installed in a suitable clearing in the forest was used to determine the total amount of rain falling in the study area. Results After eight rainfall events that produced stemflow, the total amount of precipitation recorded as 175.4 mm during the study period. The data obtained after eight rainfall events on a total of ten individual trees revealed that the bark roughness affected the stemflow (p<0.05). Compared to the precipitation in the open field, an average of 2.36% and 1.35% of stemflow occurred in hornbeam and oak trees, respectively. Conclusions This result reveals that the roughness of the barks is a determining factor on the stemflow. It is anticipated that the study may contribute to the determination of stemflow per hectare in hornbeam and oak stands.

Keywords

• Bartın
• Carpinus betulus L.
• interception
• Quercus cerris L.
• precipitation

Project Number

1919B012109760

References

1. Ahmadi, M.T., Attarod, P., Marvi Mohadjer, M.R., Rahmani, R., Fathi, J., 2009. Partitioning rainfall into throughfall, stemflow, and interception loss in an oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) forest during the growing season. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 33, 557-568.
2. Andre, F., Jonard, M., Ponette, Q., 2008. Influence of species and rain event characteristics on stemflow volume in a temperate mixed oak–beech stand. Hydrological Processes, 22, 4455-4466.
3. Bellot, J., Escarre, A., 1998. Stemflow and throughfall determination in a resprouted Mediterranean holm-oak forest. Annals of Forest Sciences, 55, 847-865.
4. Carlyle-Moses, D.E., 2004. Throughfall, stemflow, and canopy interception loss fluxes in a semi-arid Sierra Madre Oriental matorral community. Journal of Arid Environments, 58, 181-202.
5. Cayuela, C., Llorens, P., Sanchez-Costa, E., Levia, D.F., Latron, J., 2018. Effect of biotic and abiotic factors on inter- and intra-event variability in stemflow rates in oak and pine stands in a Mediterranean mountain area. Journal of Hydrology, 560, 396-406.
6. Chen, N., Zhang, Y., Zhao, C., 2021. On the importance of stemflow to the woody plants in drylands: Individual vs. ecosystem scales. Journal of Hydrology, 601, 126591.
7. Crockford, R.H., Richardson, D.P., 2000. Partitioning of rainfall into throughfall, stemflow and interception: effect of forest type, ground cover and climate. Hydrological Processes, 14, 2903-2920.
8. Cruz-Garcia, F., Gonzalez, J.C.M., Tecle, A., Wehenkel, C., Perez-Verdin, G., 2020. Effects of stand variables on stemflow and surface runoff in pine-oak forests in northern Mexico. Plos One, 0235320.

9. Çepel, N. 1993. Toprak Su Bitki İlişkileri, İÜ Yayın No 3794, 236 sayfa, İstanbul.
10. Dezhban, A., Attarod, P., Amiri, G.Z., Pypker, T.G., Nanko, K., 2020. The variability of stemflow generation in a natural beech stand (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) in relation to rainfall and tree traits, Ecohydrology, 13(3), e2198.
11. Fan, J., Oestergaard, K.T., Guyot, A., Jensen, D.G, Lockington, D.A., 2015. Spatial variability of throughfall and stemflow in an exotic pine plantation of subtropical coastal Australia. Hydrological Processes, 29, 793-804.
12. Gonzalez-Martinez, T.M., Williams-Linera, G., Holwerda, F., 2022. Interactive effects of functional traits and rainfall event size on stemflow in a tropical montane cloud forest, Ecohydrology, 15(8), e2466.
13. Gonzalez-Ollauri, A., Stokes, A., Mickovski, S.B., 2020. A novel framework to study the effect of tree architectural traits on stemflow yield and its consequences for soil-water dynamics. Journal of Hydrology, 582, 124448.
14. Gotsch, S.G., Draguljic, D., Williams, C.J., 2018. Evaluating the effectiveness of urban trees tomitigate storm water runoff via transpiration and stemflow. Urban Ecosystems, 21, 183-195.
15. Honda, E.A., Mendonça, A.H., Durigan, G., 2015. Factors affecting the stemflow of trees in the Brazilian Cerrado. Ecohydrology, 8, 1351-1362.
16. Ilek, A., Van Stan, J.T., Morkisz, K., Kucza, J., 2021. Vertical variability in bark hydrology for two coniferous tree species, Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 4, 687907.
17. Kramer, I., Hölscher, D., 2009. Rainfall partitioning along a tree diversity gradient in a deciduous old-growth forest in Central Germany. Ecohydrology, 2, 102-114.
18. Levia Jr., D.F., Frost, E.E., 2003. A review and evaluation of stemflow literature in the hydrologic and biogeochemical cycles of forested and agricultural ecosystems. Journal of Hydrology, 274, 1-29.
19. Levia, D.F., Herwitz, S.R., 2005. Interspecific variation of bark water storage capacity of three deciduous tree species in relation to stemflow yield and solute flux to forest soils. Catena, 64, 117-137.
20. Levia Jr., D.F., Frost, E.E., 2006. Variability of throughfall volume and solute inputs in wooded ecosystems. Progress in Physical Geography, 30(5), 605-632.
21. Levia, D.F., Van Stan II, J.T., Mage, S.M., Kelley-Hauske, P.W., 2010. Temporal variability of stemflow volume in a beech-yellow poplar forest in relation to tree species and size. Journal of Hydrology, 380, 112-120.
22. Levia, D.F., Michalzik, B., Nathe, K., Bischoff, S., Richter, S., Legates, D.R., 2015. Differential stemflow yield from European beech saplings: the role of individual canopy structure metrics. Hydrological Processes, 29, 43–51.
23. Limin, S.G., Oue, H., Sato, Y., Budiasa, I.W., Setiawan, B.I., 2015. Partitioning rainfall into throughfall, stemflow, and interception loss in clove (Syzygium aromaticum) plantation in Upstream Saba River Basin, Bali, Procedia Environmental Sciences, 28: 280-285.
24. Livesley, S.J., Baudinette, B., Glover, D., 2014. Rainfall interception and stemflow by eucalypt street trees–The impacts of canopy density and bark type. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13, 192-197.
25. Magliano, P.N., Whitworth-Hulse, J.I., Baldi, G., 2019. Interception, throughfall and stemflow partition in drylands: Global synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Hydrology, 568, 638-645.
26. Navar, J.,1993. The causes of stemflow variation in three semi-arid growing species of northeastern Mexico. Journal of Hydrology, 145, 175-190.
27. Navar, J., 2011. Stemflow variation in Mexico’s northeastern forest communities: Its contribution to soil moisture content and aquifer recharge. Journal of Hydrology, 408 (1-2), 35-42.
28. Nytch, C.J., Melendez-Ackerman, E.J., Perez, M.E., Ortiz-Zayas, J.R., 2019. Rainfall interception by six urban trees in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Urban Ecosystems, 22, 103-115.
29. Oka, A., Takahashi, J., Endoh, Y., Seino, T., 2021. Bark effects on stemflow chemistry in a Japanese Temperate Forest I. The Role of Bark Surface Morphology. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 4, 654375.
30. Özhan, S., 1982. Belgrad Ormanındaki bazı meşcerelerde evapotranspirasyonun deneysel olarak saptanması ve sonuçlarının ampirik modellerle karşılaştırılması, İÜ Yayın No 2906, 183 sayfa, İstanbul.
31. Özhan, S., 2004. Havza Amenajmanı, İÜ Yayın No 4510, 384 sayfa, İstanbul.
32. Park, H., Hattori, S., Kang, H., 2000. Seasonal and inter-plot variations of stemflow, throughfall and interception loss in two deciduous broad-leaved forests. Journal of Japan Society of Hydrology and Water Resources, 13(1), 17-30.
33. Park, A., Cameron, J.L., 2008. The influence of canopy traits on throughfall and stemflow in five tropical trees growing in a Panamanian plantation. Forest Ecology and Management 255, 1915-1925.
34. Schooling, J.T., Carlyle-Moses, D.E., 2015. The influence of rainfall depth class and deciduous tree traits on stemflow production in an urban park. Urban Ecosystems, 18, 1261-1284.
35. Siegert, C., Ilek, A., Wade, A., Schweitzer, C., 2023. Changes in bark properties and hydrology following prescribed fire in Pinus taeda and Quercus montana, Hydrological Processes, 37(1), e14799.
36. Silva, I.C., Okumura, T., 1996. Throughfall, stemflow and interception loss in a mixed white oak forest (Quercus serrata Thunb.). Journal of Forest Research, 1, 123–129.
37. SPSS v.22.0, 2015. Guide to Data Analysis.
38. Sraj, M., Brilly, M., Mikos, M., 2008. Rainfall interception by two deciduous Mediterranean forests of contrasting stature in Slovenia. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 148(1), 121-134.
39. Staelens, J., De Schrijver, A., Verheyen, K., Verhoest, N.E.C., 2008. Rainfall partitioning into throughfall, stemflow, and interception within a single beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) canopy: influence of foliation, rain event characteristics, and meteorology. Hydrological Processes 22, 33-45.
40. Şensoy, H., 2010. Yamaç şekillerinin toprak erozyonuna etkilerinin araştırılması, Doktora Tezi, Bartın Üniversitesi FBE, 163 s. Bartın.
41. Şensoy, H., Ateşoğlu, A., 2018. Bartın yöresinde iklim tipi değişikliğine yönelik bir değerlendirme. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(3), 576-582.
42. Şensoy, H., Tanyel, M., 2021. Effects of heavy rainfall on stemflow generation in some individual trees. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 30(06B), 7579-7595.
43. Şensoy, H., Tanyel, M., 2022, Effect of heavy rain conditions on throughfall in evergreens and conifers in urban settings, Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 31(1), 271-279.
44. Van Stan, II J.T., Levia Jr., D.F., 2010. Inter- and intraspecific variation of stemflow production from Fagus grandifolia Ehrh. (American beech) and Liriodendron tulipifera L. (yellow poplar) in relation to bark microrelief in the eastern United States. Ecohydrology, 3, 11-19.
45. Van Stan, J.T., Siegert, C.M., Levia, D.F. Jr., Scheick, C.E., 2011. Effects of wind-driven rainfall on stemflow generation between codominant tree species with differing crown characteristics. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 151(9), 1277-1286.
46. Van Stan, J.T., Lewis, E.S., Hildebrandt, A., Rebmann, C., Friesen, J., 2016. Impact of interacting bark structure and rainfall conditions on stemflow variability in a temperate beech-oak forest, central Germany. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 61(11), 2071-2083.
47. Van Stan, J.T., Gordon, D.A., 2018. Mini-review: stemflow as a resource limitation to near-stem soils. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9, 248.
48. Xiao, Q., McPherson, E.G., Ustin, S.L., Grismer, M.E., 2000. A new approach to modeling tree rainfall interception. Journal of Geophysical Research, 105(23), 29173-29188.
49. Zabret, K., Rakovec, J., Sraj, M., 2018. Influence of meteorological variables on rainfall partitioning for deciduous and coniferous tree species in urban area. Journal of Hydrology, 558, 29-41.
50. Zhang, Y., Yuan, C., Chen, N., Levia, D.F., 2023. Rainfall partitioning by vegetation in China: A quantitative synthesis, Journal of Hydrology, 617(A), 128946.