4.7 Article

Reversibility of forest conversion impacts on water budgets in tropical karst terrain

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 224, 期 1-2, 页码 95-103

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.010

关键词

hydrological balance; bedrock; baseflow; bulk density; hydrologic pathways

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A conceptual model of the control of tropical land use and vegetative cover on bedrock recharge is developed for highly permeable geologic substrates. A case study of water budgets is then developed from field data and simple modeling for upland sites with three different vegetative covers (cropland, intensively grazed pasture and forest regrowth) in Leyte, Philippines. Water budget model results show that annual precipitation is divided primarily between evapotranspiration and overland flow for the pasture, but apportioned more to evapotranspiration and inputs to bedrock storage for the crop and forest sites. Modeled evapotranspiration from the forest (1906 mm) was not sufficiently greater than that for either the crop (1661 mm) or pasture (1476 mm) sites to offset the greater overland flow from those sites. The differences in overland flow are related to depth profiles of soil bulk density, which decreased between crop and forest and increased between crop and pasture, and drainable porosity, which increased between crop and forest and decreased between crop and pasture. Dry season streamflow is assumed to be primarily base flow and dependent on wet season bedrock recharge, which was dramatically lower for the pasture (106 mm) than for the crop (1134 mm) or forest covers (1320 mm), for 2946 mm of rainfall. The results support the premise that for landscapes with adequate storage in bedrock fractures, forest regrowth can increase recharge to perched aquifers, and hence dry season baseflow, relative to cropping and that dramatic reductions in overland flow and increases in dry season baseflow may be achieved by reforestation of compacted pastures. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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