4.3 Article

Evapotranspiration along an elevation gradient in California's Sierra Nevada

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2012JG002027

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation, through the Southern Sierra Critical Zone Observatory [EAR-0725097, EAR-0619947]
  2. U.S. Department of Energy
  3. Directorate For Geosciences [1239521] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences [1239521] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We combined observations from four eddy covariance towers with remote sensing to better understand the altitudinal patterns of climate, plant phenology, Gross Ecosystem CO2 Uptake, and Evapotranspiration (ET) around the Upper Kings River basin in the southern Sierra Nevada Mountains. Precipitation (P) increased with elevation to similar to 500 m, and more gradually at higher elevations, while vegetation graded from savanna at 405 m to evergreen oak and pine forest to mid-montane forest to subalpine forest at 2700 m. CO2 uptake and transpiration at 405 m peaked in spring (March to May) and declined in summer; gas exchange at 1160 and 2015 m continued year-round; gas exchange at 2700 m peaked in summer and ceased in winter. A phenological threshold occurred between 2015 and 2700 m, associated with the development of winter dormancy. Annual ET and Gross Primary Production were greatest at 1160 and 2015 m and reduced at 405 m coincident with less P, and at 2700 m coincident with colder temperatures. The large decline in ET above 2015 m raises the possibility that an upslope redistribution of vegetation with climate change could cause a large increase in upper elevation ET. We extrapolated ET to the entire basin using remote sensing. The 2003-11 P for the entire Upper Kings River basin was 984 mm y(-1) and the ET was 429 mm y(-1), yielding a P-ET of 554 mm y(-1), which agrees well with the observed Kings River flow of 563 mm y(-1). ET averaged across the entire basin was nearly constant from year to year.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据