4.8 Article

Hydrological effects of forest transpiration loss in bark beetle-impacted watersheds

Journal

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
Volume 4, Issue 6, Pages 481-486

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2198

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [WSC-1204787]
  2. USGS-National Institute of Water Resources [2011CO245G, G-2914-1]
  3. Water, Energy, and Biogeochemical Budgets program
  4. USGS/NPS Partnership program
  5. Division Of Earth Sciences
  6. Directorate For Geosciences [1204787] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The recent climate-exacerbated mountain pine beetle infestation in the Rocky Mountains of North America has resulted in tree death that is unprecedented in recorded history. The spatial and temporal heterogeneity inherent in insect infestation creates a complex and often unpredictable watershed response, influencing the primary storage and flow components of the hydrologic cycle. Despite the increased vulnerability of forested ecosystems under changing climate(1), watershed-scale implications of interception, ground evaporation, and transpiration changes remain relatively unknown, with conflicting reports of streamflow perturbations across regions. Here, contributions to streamflow are analysed through time and space to investigate the potential for increased groundwater inputs resulting from hydrologic change after infestation. Results demonstrate that fractional late-summer groundwater contributions from impacted watersheds are 30 +/- 15% greater after infestation and when compared with a neighbouring watershed that experienced earlier and less-severe attack, albeit uncertainty propagations through time and space are considerable. Water budget analysis confirms that transpiration loss resulting from beetle kill can account for the relative increase in groundwater contributions to streams, often considered the sustainable flow fraction and critical to mountain water supplies and ecosystems.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available