3.9 Article

Assessment of the ecosystem service of water regulation under scenarios of conservation of native vegetation and expansion of forest plantations in south-central Chile

期刊

BOSQUE
卷 39, 期 2, 页码 277-289

出版社

UNIV AUSTRAL CHILE, FAC CIENCIAS FORESTALES
DOI: 10.4067/S0717-92002018000200277

关键词

socio-ecological systems; eco-hydrology; geographic information system (GIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Land use change (LUC) is one of the most conditioning biophysical factors in the hydric regulation although the magnitude of its effects has been little studied. The objective was to analyze the changes in the magnitude of the ecosystem service of water regulation under future scenarios of LUC at watershed scale, taking as case study the municipality of Panguipulli (Los Rios Region, Southern Chile). The methodology was based on the Curve Number method applied through the ECOSER mapping protocol, which estimates the ability to regulate rainfall considering the type of vegetation and the physical characteristics of the soil. Modeling results showed that under a scenario A of increased old-growth forest cover (64 %), watersheds increase their capacity to regulate between 0.4 % and 7.1 %, while in a scenario of increased industrial forest (88 %), watersheds reduced their capacity to regulate between 0.3 % and 0.9 %, considering a single precipitation event in 24 hours. The watersheds with the largest increase in regulation capacity ((x) over bar = 11.8 m(3) ha(-1)) had a low initial area of native forest ((x) over bar= 15 %), a large area of soil type A and B (40 %) and a smaller area of soil types C and D (21 %). The basins with the largest reduction in regulation capacity ((x) over bar= 4.4 m(3) ha(-1)) exhibited a low area of plantations ((x) over bar= 5 %), a low area of soil type A and B (32 %) and higher area of soil type C and D (45 %). This information supports the need to focus land use planning efforts on watersheds most exposed to the expansion of plantations.

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

3.9
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