Wikipedia

User:Numaiya Hasan/Forest floor interception

< User:Numaiya Hasan

Forest floor interception[1] is the part of the (net) precipitation or throughfall that is temporarily stored in the top layer of the forest floor and successively evaporated within a few hours or days during and after the rainfall event. The forest floor can consist of bare soil, short vegetation (like grasses, mosses, creeping vegetation, etc.) or litter (i.e. leaves, twigs, or small branches). [1] As a hydrological process it is crucial for water resource management and climate change.[2]

Influencing Factors edit

Vegetation Characteristics edit

There are variations in storage capacity based on forest floor types, species of vegetation such as needles and leaves have different capacities.[1] The thickness of the layer of vegetation can be a contributing factor as thicker layers have a greater capacity for storing water.[1]

There is an observable seasonal response throughout the year. In Fall, leaf fall accumulates on the forest floor to increase the thickness that then slowly decomposes.[1] In the presence of snow, the layer of vegetation is compressed, reducing the storage capacity.[1]

Precipitation Characteristics edit

The frequency of throughfall events, whether continuous or at irregular intervals, has a significant impact on water interception.[1] Even if they are of equal throughfall, the latter has intervals of time that allow for partial evaporation creating more available storage.[1] The intensity of throughfall is a crucial factor in storage, as high intensities are consistent with increased storage capacities.[1]

Evaporative Demand edit

High potential evaporation expedites the evaporation of intercepted water, two facilitators of evaporation are wind and radiation.[1] Wind is a significant part of moisture removal and tends to remain low at the ground level contributing to a higher vapid deficit.[1] Radiation penetration through the canopy allows more radiation to reach the forest floor in the winter than in the summer, creating variation in seasonal evaporation rates.[1]

Interception Loss edit

 
Definition of canopy and forest floor interception

Interception loss is the portion of rainfall intercepted by the canopy and evaporated back into the atmosphere and calculated as the difference of gross rainfall and the net rainfall (sum of throughfall and stemflow) at the ground floor.[3] The overall loss for a vegetation cover relies on the evaporation rate of wet canopy and the duration of the canopy's wetness.[3] Seemingly a minor process, but its frequency can impede the process of rainfall recharging soil moisture and generating runoff ultimately impacting the water balance.[1] This is especially true for forest stands that have an annual interception loss of a quarter or more of the gross rainfall.[2] Tall vegetation experience significant evaporation rates of intercepted water that exceed the transpiration rates as opposed to short vegetation.[2]

Measurement edit

There is a lack of research on forest floor interception but it is quantifiable by lab or field methods. In lab methods, samples are observed under controlled conditions within a laboratory, however at the risk of disturbing the samples.[1] Field methods are experiments done on-site thus minimizing disturbance of the samples.[1]

Rutter-type models are the more frequent techniques in modeling the interception process. It is depicted by a balance of rainfall input, storage, and output through drainage and evaporation.[2]

See also edit

References edit

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Gerrits, A.M.J., Savenije, H.H.G. (2011). Forest Floor Interception. In: Levia, D., Carlyle-Moses, D., Tanaka, T. (eds) Forest Hydrology and Biogeochemistry. Ecological Studies, vol 216. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1363-5_22
  2. ^ a b c d Muzylo, A.; Llorens, P.; Valente, F.; Keizer, J. J.; Domingo, F.; Gash, J. H. C. (2009-05-30). "A review of rainfall interception modelling". Journal of Hydrology. 370 (1): 191–206. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.02.058. ISSN 0022-1694.
  3. ^ a b Anderson, Malcolm G.; McDonnell, Jeffrey J., eds. (2005-10-21). Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (1 ed.). Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470848944.hsa046. ISBN 978-0-471-49103-3.

Further reading edit

Category:Hydrology Category:Forest ecology


 

This article about atmospheric science is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

 

This article about forestry is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.



Article Evaluation edit

Content edit

The article provides a concise definition of forest floor interception however it lacks further elaboration on the subject. They could have addressed more scientific evidence and observations that could demand more quantitative data regarding this process. The article links to other relevant Wikipedia articles that provide definitions or sources for users to explore more, but it is missing some necessary citations.

Tone edit

It maintains its neutral tone without introducing any biased positions. As the content is limited to the definition no viewpoints are underrepresented or overrepresented.

Sources edit

The source originates from a cumulative Ecological Studies Series that references an extensive list of studies throughout the years, which retains their neutrality in delivering scientific conclusions. There are no dead links but as stated before there are some missing citations.

Talk Page edit

As of yet, there are no conversations in the talk page to note. The article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale but is regarded as a stub under the Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignments.

Peer-Review (Liz) edit

  1. The lead sentence concisely defines the term air stagnation and contributing factors which are the basic foundational information for readers to understand the outline of the article. It goes on to describe its relevance to the world which gives weight to the importance of this event.
  2. The information in the section has a clear line of reasoning but I feel like you could elaborate certain parts more in subsections. There could be one for the major sources or contributors to air stagnation in which you can describe the sources that facilitate or reduce accumulation of particles in the air. You could also include a subsection for the aftermath or implications of air stagnation as its effect on human health and overall trajectory for cities and industries, maybe even a section on urban areas. There could be a section detailing acts, initiatives, or policies made by countries or the US to regulate this phenomena, for instance the Air Stagnation Advisory mentioned in the leading section was not elaborated further in the passage.
  3. The article has a balanced coverage of its sources and does not assume any singular viewpoint. There may be some sections that could be further elaborated on but the information and statements presented do not undermine the purpose of the text.
  4. The article maintains its neutrality and does not make assumptions about its topics nor includes opinions favoring a specific viewpoint. Most of the information quoted in the text are factually backed by the many sources, and given equivalent exposure.
  5. Your reference materials seem very credible with a wide mixture of journals, case studies, and scientific article. The sections also don't rely on a singular source which further supports your neutrality by considering numerous view points. I will say that your source 5 has a dead link.

Overall, the information presented and references sourced are really good but they could be presented in a more organized manner under specifically designated sections of their own, this will also help with users readability if they wish to skim the article. I do admire the attention to its relevance in the world and hope to find the intersectionality of my own topic in the bigger context of the real world.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Numaiya_Hasan/Forest_floor_interception&oldid=1187210027"