4.7 Review

Forest canopy effects on snow accumulation and ablation: An integrative review of empirical results

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
Volume 392, Issue 3-4, Pages 219-233

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.08.009

Keywords

Snow processes; Forest structure; Forest cover; Snow models; Empirical studies; Snow hydrology

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council [Y09-2171]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The past century has seen significant research comparing snow accumulation and ablation in forested and open sites. In this review we compile and standardize the results of previous empirical studies to generate statistical relations between changes in forest cover and the associated changes in snow accumulation and ablation rate. The analysis drew upon 33 articles documenting these relationships at 65 individual sites in North America and Europe from the 1930s to present. Changes in forest cover explained 57% and 72% of the variance of relative changes in snow accumulation and ablation, respectively. The incorporation of geographic and average historic climatic information did not significantly improve the ability to predict changes in snow processes, mainly because most of the studies did not provide enough information on site characteristics such as slope and aspect or meteorological conditions taking place during the experiments. Two simple linear models using forest cover as the sole predictor of changes in snow accumulation and ablation are provided, as well as a review of the main sources of variation that prevent the elaboration of more accurate multiple regression models. Further studies should provide detailed information regarding the main sources of variation influencing snow processes including the effect of year-to-year changes in weather variables during the monitoring period. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available