4.6 Article

Effect of forest on annual water yield in the mountains of an arid inland river basin: a case study in the Pailugou catchment on northwestern China's Qilian Mountains

Journal

HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 613-621

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hyp.8162

Keywords

arid inland river basin; Qilian Mountains; Picea crassifolia forest; annual water yield

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91025014, 30800147]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effect of forests on annual water yield is an unresolved central issue in forest hydrology despite years of study. There has been a particular shortage of research in the mountains of arid inland river basins. In the present study, we examined the effects of forests on hydrology using data on precipitation, evaporation, canopy interception, transpiration, and runoff from 1994 to 2008 for the Pailugou catchment of northwestern China's Qilian Mountains. We modelled the water balance to assess the contribution of different vegetation types to annual water yield. In our study area, Picea crassifolia forest covered 38.5% of the catchment area, but contributed little to annual water yield. For an annual average precipitation of 407.1 mm (from 2003 to 2008) at an elevation of 2700 m, the runoff depth from the forest was 11.6 mm, accounting for only 3.5% of total annual water yield of the catchment. For an annual average precipitation of 374.1 mm (from 1994 to 2002), the runoff depth from the forest was - 14.3 mm (i.e. 5.9% of total annual water yield of the catchment was consumed to sustain tree growth). This has significant implications, because forests are increasingly being planted in the Qilian Mountains, and this may decrease the downstream water supply. Thus, the relationship between the forest and water yield must be better understood to permit the establishment of an appropriate regional level of forest cover. Copyright (c) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available