Ecosystems

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 569–581

Differential Snowpack Accumulation and Water Dynamics in Aspen and Conifer Communities: Implications for Water Yield and Ecosystem Function

Article

Abstract

Early succession aspen and late succession conifer forests have different architecture and physiology affecting hydrologic transfer processes. An evaluation of water pools and fluxes was used to determine differences in the hydrologic dynamics between stands of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) and associated stands of mixed conifer consisting of white fir (Abies concolor), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii). In 2005 and 2006, measurements of snow water accumulation, snow ablation (melt), soil water content, snowpack sublimation, and evapotranspiration (ET) were measured in adjacent aspen and conifer stands. Peak snow water equivalent (SWE) averaged 34–44% higher in aspen in 2005 (average snow fall) and 2006 (above average snow fall), respectively, whereas snow ablation rates were greater in aspen stands (21 mm day−1) compared to conifer stands (11 mm day−1). When changes in soil water content (due to over-winter snowmelt) were combined with peak snow accumulation in 2006, aspen had greater potential (42–83%) water yield for runoff and groundwater recharge. Snowpack sublimation during the ablation period was not significantly different between meadow, aspen, and conifer sites and comprised less than 5% of the winter precipitation. Extended conifer transpiration in spring and fall did not contribute to large differences in water yield (<28 mm y−1). Summertime ET rates were higher in aspen plots (3.6 mm day−1) than in conifer plots (2.7 mm day−1), and differences in net ET largely reflected soil column porosity. This study shows that the largest differences in annual water yield between aspen and conifer stands result from differences in SWE and net summertime ET. Although SWE and accumulation of water in soil was greater in aspen, it was partly offset by greater net annual ET losses in aspen.

Keywords

quaking aspen douglas-fir white fir subalpine fir water balance sap flux snow water equivalent evapotranspiration sublimation transpiration 

References

  1. Bartos DL. 2001. Landscape dynamics of aspen and conifer forests. Sustaining Aspen in Western Landscapes. In: Shepperd WD, Binkley D, Bartos DL, Stohltren TJ, Eskew LG, Eds. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RMRS-P-18. pp 5–14Google Scholar
  2. Bartos DL, Campbell RB Jr. 1998a. Decline of quaking aspen in the interior west—examples from Utah. Rangelands 20:17–24Google Scholar
  3. Bartos DL, Campbell RB Jr. 1998b. Water depletion and other ecosystem values forfeited when conifer forests displace aspen communities. Proceedings of the AWRA Specialty Conference. TPS-98-1. pp 427–34Google Scholar
  4. Bosch JM, Hewlett JD. 1982. A review of catchment experiments to determine the effects of vegetative changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. J Hydrol 55:3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown AE, Zhang L, McMahon TA, Western AW, Vertessy RA. 2005. A review of paired catchment studies for determining changes in water yield resulting from alterations in vegetation. J For Hydrol 310:28–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown K, Hansen AJ, Keane RE, Graumlich LJ. 2006. Complex interactions shaping aspen dynamics in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Landscape Ecol 21:933–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burt R. 2004. Soil survey laboratory methods manual. NRCS Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 42. p 735Google Scholar
  8. Chang M. 2006. Forest hydrology: an introduction to water and forests. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press, 373 pGoogle Scholar
  9. Debyle NV, Winokur RP, Eds. 1985. Aspen: ecology and management in the western United States. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-119Google Scholar
  10. Dingman SL. 2002. Physical hydrology. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall, 646 pGoogle Scholar
  11. Doty RD, Johnston RS. 1969. Comparison of gravimetric measurements and mass transfer computations of snow evaporation beneath selected vegetation canopies. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 57–62Google Scholar
  12. Douglass JE. 1983. The potential for water yield augmentation from forest management in the Eastern United States. Water Resour Bull 19:351–8Google Scholar
  13. Dunford EG, Niederhof CH. 1944. Influence of aspen, young lodgepole pine, and open grassland types upon factors affecting water yield. J Forest 42:673–7Google Scholar
  14. Dunne T, Leopold LB, Eds. 1978. Water in environmental planning. New York: W. H. Freeman and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  15. Gary HL. 1974. Snow accumulation and snowmelt as influenced by a small clearing in a lodgepole pine forest. Water Resour Res 10:348–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gary HL, Coltharp GB. 1967. Snow accumulation and disappearance by aspect and vegetation type in the Santa Fe Basin, New Mexico. USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-93Google Scholar
  17. Gary HL, Troendle CA. 1982. Snow accumulation and melt under various stand densities in lodgepole pine Wyoming and Colorado. USDA Forest Service Research Note RM-417Google Scholar
  18. Gelfan AN, Pomeroy JW, Kuchment LS. 2004. Modeling forest cover influences on snow accumulation, sublimation, and melt. J Hydrometeorol 5:785–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gifford GF, Humphries W, Jaynes RA. 1984. A preliminary quantification of the impacts of aspen to conifer succession on water yield within the Colorado River Basin II: modeling results. Water Resour Bull 20:181–6Google Scholar
  20. Granier A. 1985. Une nouvelle methode pour la mesure du flux de seve brute dans le tronc des arbres. Ann Sci Forest 42:81–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hardy JP, Hansen-Bristow KJ. 1990. Temporal accumulation and ablation patterns of the seasonal snow pack in forests representing varying stages of growth. Proceedings of the 58th Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 23–24Google Scholar
  22. Hibbert AR. 1979. Managing vegetation to increase flow in the Colorado River Basin. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-66Google Scholar
  23. Hiemstra CA, Liston GE, Reiners WA. 2006. Observing, modelling, and validating snow redistribution by wind in a Wyoming upper treeline landscape. Ecol Modell 197(1–2):35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hogg EH, Price DT, Black TA. 2000. Postulated feedbacks of deciduous forest phenology on seasonal climate patterns in the western Canadian interior. J Clim 13:4229–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hood EM, Williams M, Cline D. 1999. Sublimation from a seasonal snowpack at a continental, mid-latitude alpine site. Hydrol Process 13:1781–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoover MD, Leaf CF. 1967. Process and significance of interception in Colorado sub-alpine forest. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Forest Hydrology. pp 213–24Google Scholar
  27. Jaynes RA. 1978. A hydrologic model of aspen conifer succession in the Western United States. USDA Forest Service Research Paper INT-213Google Scholar
  28. Jones HG. 1999. The ecology of snow-covered systems: a brief overview of nutrient cycling and life in the cold. Hydrol Process 13:2135–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jones HG, Roberge J. 1992. Nitrogen dynamics and sub-ice meltwater patterns in a small boreal lake during snowmelt. Proceedings of the 49th annual Eastern Snow Conference. pp 169–80Google Scholar
  30. Kay CE. 1997. Is aspen doomed? J Forest 95:4–11Google Scholar
  31. Lundberg A, Eriksson M, Halldin S, Kellner E, Seibert J. 1997. New approach to the measurement of interception evaporation. J Atmos Ocean Technol 14:1023–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lundberg A, Halldin S. 2001. Snow interception evaporation: review of measurement techniques, processes and models. Theor Appl Climatol 70:117–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miller DH. 1962. Snow in the trees: where does it go? Proceedings of the 30th Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 21–29Google Scholar
  34. Montesi J, Elder K, Schmidt RA, Davis RE. 2004. Sublimation of intercepted snow within a subalpine forest canopy at two elevations. J Hydrometeorol 5:763–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moore CA, McCaughey WW. 1997. Snow accumulation under various forest stand densities at Tenderfoot Creek Experimental Forest, Montana, USA. Proceedings of the 65th Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 42–51Google Scholar
  36. Pataki DP, Oren R, Smith WK. 2000. Sap flux of co-occurring species in a Western subalpine forest during seasonal soil drought. Ecology 81:2557–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ping LU, Laurent U, Ping Z. 2004. Granier’s thermal dissipation probe (TDP) method for measuring sap flow in trees: theory and practice. Acta Bot Sin 46:631–46Google Scholar
  38. Pomeroy JW, Grey DM. 1995. Snowcover accumulation, relocation, and management. Saskatoon, Sask., Canada: National Hydrology Research Institute, p 144Google Scholar
  39. Pomeroy JW, Parviainen J, Hedstrom N, Gray DM. 1998. Coupled modeling of forest snow interception and sublimation. Hydrol Process 12:2317–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pomeroy JW, Schmidt RA. 1993. The use of fractal geometry in modeling intercepted snow accumulation and sublimation. Proceedings of the 50th Eastern Snow Conference. pp 1–10Google Scholar
  41. Ponton S, Flanagan LB, Alstad KP, Johnson BG, Morgentstern K, Kljun N, Black TA, Barr AG. 2006. Comparison of ecosystem water-use efficiency among Douglas-fir forest, aspen forest and grassland using eddy covariance and carbon isotope techniques. Glob Chang Biol 12:294–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richardson AE, Ashcroft GL, Westbrook JK. 1989. Precipitation. In: Johnson KL. Ed. Rangeland resources of Utah. Logan: Utah State University press, pp 12–3Google Scholar
  43. Shepperd WD, Rogers PC, Burton D, Bartos DL. 2006. Ecology, biodiversity, management, and restoration of aspen in the Sierra Nevada. USDA Rocky Mountain Research Station GTR-178Google Scholar
  44. Skidmore P, Hansen K, Quimby W. 1994. Snow accumulation and ablation under fire altered lodgepole pine forest canopies. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 43–52Google Scholar
  45. Stork P, Lettenmaier DP. 2002. Measurement of snow interception and canopy effects on snow accumulation and melt in a mountainous maritime climate, Oregon, United States. Water Resour Res 38:5.1–5.15Google Scholar
  46. Swank WT, Douglass JE. 1974. Stream flow greatly reduced by converting deciduous hardwood stands to pine. Science 185:855–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Swank WT, Swift JR, Douglass JE. 1987. Stream changes associated with forest cutting species conversions, and natural disturbances. In: Swank WT, Crossley DA, Eds. Forest hydrology and ecology at Coweeta. New York: Springer-Verlag. pp 297–312Google Scholar
  48. Swanson RH, Stevenson DR. 1971. Managing snow accumulation and melt under leafless aspen to enhance watershed value. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 63–9Google Scholar
  49. Tranter M. 1991. Controls on the composition of snowmelt. Proceedings of the NATO advanced research workshop on processes of chemical change in snowpacks. pp 241–72Google Scholar
  50. Troendle CA, Schmidt RA, Martinez MH. 1993. Partitioning the deposition of winter snowfall as a function of aspect on forested slopes. Proceedings of the 61st Annual Western Snow Conference. pp 373–9Google Scholar
  51. Urie DH. 1967. Pattern of soil moisture depletion varies between red pine and oak stands in Michigan. USDA Lake States Forest Experiment Station Technical Note 564Google Scholar
  52. White CA, Olmsted CE, Kay CE. 1998. Aspen, elk, and fire in the Rocky Mountain national parks of North America. Wildl Soc Bull 26:449–62Google Scholar
  53. Williams MW. 1993. Snowpack storage and release of nitrogen in the Emerald Lake watershed. Proceedings of the 50th annual Eastern Snow Conference. pp 239–46Google Scholar
  54. Woods SW, Ahl R, Sappington J, McCaughey W. 2006. Snow accumulation in thinned lodgepole pine stands, Montana, USA. For Ecol Manage 235:202–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wildland ResourcesUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations