4.4 Article

Rainfall Interception in a Robinia pseudoacacia Forest Stand: Estimates Using Gash's Analytical Model

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages 474-479

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000640

Keywords

Interception loss; Gross rainfall; Throughfall; Robinia pseudoacacia forest; Mean evaporation rate; Canopy storage capacity

Funding

  1. CAS Action-plan for Western Development
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [2007YB02]
  3. CAS/SAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams-Process simulation of soil and water of a watershed

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The authors have studied the principal components of rainfall interception loss in a planted forest stand of Robinia pseudoacacia on the Loess Plateau. The purpose was to provide new information about the applicability of the original Gash analytical model to a new geographic location and to one of the primary species being used in the region's reforestation program. The authors estimated forest structure parameters, including the mean evaporation rate, canopy storage capacity at saturation, free throughfall coefficient, rainfall fraction diverted to the trunks, and trunk storage capacity by using the intercepts and slopes obtained from regression analyses of the measured interception loss, throughfall, and stemflow versus gross rainfall. The interception and components of interception loss for trees in a Robinia pseudoacacia forest located on a south-facing slope were calculated using Gash's analytical model. The total estimated interception loss during the period of observation was 10.8% greater than that calculated on the basis of measurements of the gross rainfall, throughfall, and stemflow. The good agreement between the estimated and measured values indicates that Gash's analytical model is suitable for estimating interception loss in forests on the Loess Plateau of China. DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000640. (C) 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available