Skip to main content
Log in

Air-Parcel Residence Times Within Forest Canopies

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Boundary-Layer Meteorology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present a theoretical model, based on a simple model of turbulent diffusion and first-order chemical kinetics, to determine air-parcel residence times and the out-of-canopy export of reactive gases emitted within forest canopies under neutral conditions. Theoretical predictions of the air-parcel residence time are compared to values derived from large-eddy simulation for a range of canopy architectures and turbulence levels under neutral stratification. Median air-parcel residence times range from a few sec in the upper canopy to approximately 30 min near the ground and the distribution of residence times is skewed towards longer times in the lower canopy. While the predicted probability density functions from the theoretical model and large-eddy simulation are in good agreement with each other, the theoretical model requires only information on canopy height and eddy diffusivities inside the canopy. The eddy-diffusivity model developed additionally requires the friction velocity at canopy top and a parametrized profile of the standard deviation of vertical velocity. The theoretical model of air-parcel residence times is extended to include first-order chemical reactions over a range of of Damköhler numbers (Da) characteristic of plant-emitted hydrocarbons. The resulting out-of-canopy export fractions range from near 1 for \(Da =10^{-3}\) to less than 0.3 at \(Da = 10\). These results highlight the necessity for dense and tall forests to include the impacts of air-parcel residence times when calculating the out-of-canopy export fraction for reactive trace gases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bailey BN, Stoll R (2013) Turbulence in sparse, organized vegetative canopies: a large-eddy simulation study. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 147(3):369–400. doi:10.1007/s10546-012-9796-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey BN, Stoll R, Pardyjak ER, Mahaffee WF (2014) Effect of vegetative canopy architecture on vertical transport of massless particles. Atmos Environ 95:480–489. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.06.058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bou-Zeid E, Meneveau C, Parlange M (2005) A scale-dependent Lagrangian dynamic model for large eddy simulation of complex turbulent flows. Phys Fluids 17(2):025,105. doi:10.1063/1.1839152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canuto C, Hussaini MY, Quarteroni AM, Zang TA Jr (2012) Spectral methods in fluid dynamics. Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht, 568 pp

  • Cescatti A, Marcolla B (2004) Drag coefficient and turbulence intensity in conifer canopies. Agric Forest Meteorol 121(3–4):197–206. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.08.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamecki M, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2008) A hybrid spectral/finite-volume algorithm for large-eddy simulation of scalars in the atmospheric boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 128(3):473–484. doi:10.1007/s10546-008-9302-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamecki M, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2009) Large eddy simulation of pollen transport in the atmospheric boundary layer. J Aerosol Sci 40(3):241–255. doi:10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coppin PA, Raupach MR, Legg BJ (1986) Experiments on scalar dispersion within a model plant canopy part II: An elevated plane source. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 35(1–2):167–191. doi:10.1007/BF00117307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox D, Miller H (1965) The theory of stochastic processes. Methuen’s monographs on applied probability and statistics. Methuen, London, 398 pp

  • Damköhler G (1940) Der Einfluss der Turbulenz auf die Flammengeschwindigkeit in Gasgemischen (in German). Z Electrochem Angewand Physikal Chem 46:601–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Dannon HV (2011) Power means calculus and fractional calculus. Gauge Institute, Minneapolis, 119 pp

  • Denmead OT, Bradley EF (1985) Flux-gradient relationships in a forest canopy. In: Hutchison BA, Hicks BB (eds) The Forest-Atmosphere Interaction. Springer, Netherlands pp 421–442, doi:10.1007/978-94-009-5305-5_27

  • Dupont S, Patton EG (2012) Influence of stability and seasonal canopy changes on micrometeorology within and above an orchard canopy: The CHATS experiment. Agric Forest Meteorol 157:11–29. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.01.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edburg SL, Stock D, Lamb BK, Patton EG (2012) The effect of the vertical source distribution on scalar statistics within and above a forest canopy. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 142(3):365–382. doi:10.1007/s10546-011-9686-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson-Pitts BJ (2000) Chemistry of the upper and lower atmosphere: theory, experiments, and applications. Academic Press, San Diego, 969 pp

  • Finnigan J (2000) Turbulence in plant canopies. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 32(1):519–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foken T, Göckede M, Mauder M, Mahrt L, Amiro B, Munger W (2004) Post-field data quality control. In: Lee X, Massman W, Law B (eds) Handbook of micrometeorology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 181–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire LS, Gerken T, Ruiz-Plancarte J, Wei D, Fuentes JD, Katul G, Dias N, Acevedo O, Chamecki M (2016) Turbulent mixing and removal of ozone within an Amazon rainforest canopy. J Geophys Res. doi:10.1002/2016JD026009

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes JD, Gu L, Lerdau M, Atkinson R, Baldocchi D, Bottenheim JW, Ciccioli P, Lamb B, Geron C, Guenther A, Sharkey TD, Stockwell W (2000) Biogenic hydrocarbons in the atmospheric boundary layer: a review. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 81(7):1537–1575. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(2000)081<1537:BHITAB>2.3.CO;2

  • Fuentes JD, Wang D, Bowling DR, Potosnak M, Monson RK, Goliff WS, Stockwell WR (2007) Biogenic hydrocarbon chemistry within and above a mixed deciduous forest. J Atmos Chem 56(2):165–185. doi:10.1007/s10874-006-9048-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes JD, Chamecki M, Nascimento dos Santos RM, Von Randow C, Stoy PC, Katul G, Fitzjarrald D, Manzi A, Gerken T, Trowbridge A, Freire LS, Ruiz-Plancarte J, Furtunato Maia JM, Tota J, Dias N, Fisch G, Schumacher C, Acevedo O, Mercer JR (2016) Linking meteorology, turbulence, and air chemistry in the Amazon rainforest. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 97:2329–2342. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00152.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenther A, Hewitt CN, Erickson D, Fall R, Geron C, Graedel T, Harley P, Klinger L, Lerdau M, Mckay WA, Pierce T, Scholes B, Steinbrecher R, Tallamraju R, Taylor J, Zimmerman P (1995) A global model of natural volatile organic compound emissions. J Geophys Res 100(D5):8873–8892. doi:10.1029/94JD02950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenther A, Karl T, Harley P, Wiedinmyer C, Palmer PI, Geron C (2006) Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature). Atmos Chem Phys 6(11):3181–3210. doi:10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenther AB, Jiang X, Heald CL, Sakulyanontvittaya T, Duhl T, Emmons LK, Wang X (2012) The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions. Geosci Model Dev 5(6):1471–1492. doi:10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamba F (1993) A modified K model for chemically reactive species in the planetary boundary layer. J Geophys Res Atmos 98(D3):5173–5182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horst T, Semmer S, Maclean G (2015) Correction of a non-orthogonal, three-component sonic anemometer for flow distortion by transducer shadowing. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 155(3):371–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwata H, Harazono Y, Ueyama M (2010) Influence of source/sink distributions on flux-gradient relationships in the roughness sublayer over an open forest canopy under unstable conditions. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 136(3):391–405. doi:10.1007/s10546-010-9513-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jardine K, Yañez Serrano A, Arneth A, Abrell L, Jardine A, van Haren J, Artaxo P, Rizzo LV, Ishida FY, Karl T, Kesselmeier J, Saleska S, Huxman T (2011) Within-canopy sesquiterpene ozonolysis in Amazonia. J Geophys Res 116(D19):301. doi:10.1029/2011JD016243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaimal JC, Finnigan JJ (1994) Atmospheric boundary layer flows: their structure and measurement. Oxford University Press, New York, 304 pp

  • Katul GG, Mahrt L, Poggi D, Sanz C (2004) One-and two-equation models for canopy turbulence. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 113(1):81–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katul GG, Poporato A, Nathan R, Siqueira M, Soons M, Poggi D, Horn H, Levin S (2005) Mechanistic analytical models for long-distance seed dispersal by wind. Am Natural 166(3):368–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Marques Filho AdO, Dallarosa RG, Pacheco VB (2005) Radiação solar e distribuição vertical de área foliar em floresta—Reserva Biológica do Cuieiras - ZF2, Manaus (in Portuguese). Acta Amazon 35(4):427–436

  • Massman W, Weil J (1999) An analytical one-dimensional second-order closure model of turbulence statistics and the lagrangian time scale within and above plant canopies of arbitrary structure. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 91(1):81–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam AL, Roberts J, Cabral O, Leitao M, De Costa A, Maitelli G, Zamparoni C (1993) Leaf area index and above-ground biomass of terra firme rain forest and adjacent clearings in Amazonia. Funct Ecol 7:310–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan Y, Chamecki M (2016) A scaling law for the shear-production range of second-order structure functions. J Fluid Mech 801:459–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan Y, Chamecki M, Isard SA (2014) Large-eddy simulation of turbulence and particle dispersion inside the canopy roughness sublayer. J Fluid Mech 753:499–534. doi:10.1017/jfm.2014.379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan Y, Follett E, Chamecki M, Nepf H (2014b) Strong and weak, unsteady reconfiguration and its impact on turbulence structure within plant canopies. Phys Fluids 26(10):105,102. doi:10.1063/1.4898395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton EG, Davis KJ, Barth MC, Sullivan PP (2001) Decaying scalars emitted by a forest canopy: a numerical study. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 100(1):91–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton EG, Sullivan PP, Shaw RH, Finnigan JJ, Weil JC (2016) Atmospheric stability influences on coupled boundary layer and canopy turbulence. J Atmos Sci 73(4):1621–1647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peyret R, Taylor TD (2012) Computational methods for fluid flow. Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 358 pp

  • Queck R, Bienert A, Maas HG, Harmansa S, Goldberg V, Bernhofer C (2011) Wind fields in heterogeneous conifer canopies: parameterisation of momentum absorption using high-resolution 3D vegetation scans. Eur J Forest Res 131(1):165–176. doi:10.1007/s10342-011-0550-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raupach M (1989) Applying lagrangian fluid mechanics to infer scalar source distributions from concentration profiles in plant canopies. Agric Forest Meteorol 47(2–4):85–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raupach MR, Finnigan JJ, Brunei Y (1996) Coherent eddies and turbulence in vegetation canopies: the mixing-layer analogy. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 78(3–4):351–382. doi:10.1007/BF00120941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redner S (2001) A guide to first passage processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 312 pp

  • Rinne J, Taipale R, Markkanen T, Ruuskanen TM, Hellen H, Kajos MK, Vesala T, Kulmala M (2007) Hydrocarbon fluxes above a Scots pine forest canopy: measurements and modeling. Atmos Chem Phys 7(12):3361–3372. doi:10.5194/acp-7-3361-2007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinne J, Markkanen T, Ruuskanen TM, Petäjä T, Keronen P, Tang M, Crowley JN, Rannik Ü, Vesala T (2012) Effect of chemical degradation on fluxes of reactive compounds—a study with a stochastic Lagrangian transport model. Atmos Chem Phys 12(11):4843–4854. doi:10.5194/acp-12-4843-2012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodean HC (1996) Stochastic Lagrangian models of turbulent diffusion, Meteorological Monographs, vol 48. American Meteorological Society, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schrödinger E (1915) Zur Theorie der Fall- und Steigversuche an Teilchen mit Brownscher Bewegung. Physikal Z 16:289–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw RH, Schumann U (1992) Large-eddy simulation of turbulent flow above and within a forest. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 61(1–2):47–64. doi:10.1007/BF02033994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong C, Fuentes JD, Baldocchi D (2004) Reactive hydrocarbon flux footprints during canopy senescence. Agric Forest Meteorol 127(3–4):159–173. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.07.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroud C, Makar P, Karl T, Guenther A, Geron C, Turnipseed A, Nemitz E, Baker B, Potosnak M, Fuentes JD (2005) Role of canopy-scale photochemistry in modifying biogenic-atmosphere exchange of reactive terpene species: Results from the CELTIC field study. J Geophys Res 110(D17):303. doi:10.1029/2005JD005775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor GI (1922) Diffusion by continuous movements. Proc Lond Math Soc 20(1):196–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson DJ (1987) Criteria for the selection of stochastic models of particle trajectories in turbulent flows. J Fluid Mech 180:529–556. doi:10.1017/S0022112087001940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tóta J, Fitzjarrald DR, da Silva Dias MAF (2012) Amazon rainforest exchange of carbon and subcanopy air flow: Manaus LBA Site—a complex terrain condition. Sci World J 2012:1–19. doi:10.1100/2012/165067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yee E, Wilson JD (2007) Instability in Lagrangian stochastic trajectory models, and a method for its cure. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 122:243–261. doi:10.1007/s10546-006-9111-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil JC, Sullivan PP, Moeng CH (2004) The use of large-eddy simulations in Lagrangian particle dispersion models. J Atmos Sci 61(23):2877–2887. doi:10.1175/JAS-3302.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge partial funding from DOE through the Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Atmospheric Systems Research (ASR) program (DE-SC0011075). We thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tobias Gerken.

Appendix 1: The First Passage Solution

Appendix 1: The First Passage Solution

If the turbulent transport of air parcels is assumed to be diffusive with a constant eddy diffusivity \(K_\mathrm{eq}\), then the time evolution of the particle position can be modelled by a Wiener process without mean drift

$$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{d}z=\sqrt{2K_\mathrm{eq}}\mathrm{d}W, \end{aligned}$$
(24)

where W is a Wiener process with independent Gaussian increments. Under these conditions, the time evolution of the probability density function (PDF) of the particle position satisfies the Fokker–Planck equation (Thomson 1987; Rodean 1996)

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\partial P(z,t;z_\mathrm{rel})}{\partial t}=K_\mathrm{eq}\frac{\partial ^2 P(z,t;z_\mathrm{rel})}{\partial z^2}, \end{aligned}$$
(25)

where \(P(z,t;z_\mathrm{rel})\) is the probability of a particle released at \(z=z_\mathrm{rel}\) at \(t=0\) to be found at z at a time t. Considering a semi-infinite domain (i.e., \(z<h_c\)), the first time a parcel crosses the boundary can be modelled by placing an absorbing boundary at \(z=h_c\). Thus, the two boundary conditions for Eq. 25 are given by \(P(z=h_c,t;z_\mathrm{rel})=0\) and \(P(z\rightarrow -\infty ,t;z_\mathrm{rel})=0\). Together with the initial condition \(P(z,t=0;z_\mathrm{rel})=\delta (z-z_\mathrm{rel})\), the solution is the well-known Gaussian function

$$\begin{aligned} P(z,t;z_\mathrm{rel})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi K_\mathrm{eq}}}t^{-1/2}\left\{ \exp {\left[ -\frac{(z-z_\mathrm{rel})^2}{4K_\mathrm{eq}t}\right] }-\exp {\left[ -\frac{(z-\left( 2h_c-z_\mathrm{rel}\right) )^2}{4K_\mathrm{eq}t}\right] }\right\} \end{aligned}$$
(26)

In the present case, the probability of an air parcel still being in the domain \(z<h_c\) (i.e., it has not crossed the boundary yet) is given by

$$\begin{aligned} F(t;z_\mathrm{rel})=\int _{z=0}^{\infty }{P(z,t;z_\mathrm{rel})\mathrm{d}z}=\mathrm{erf}\left( \frac{h_c-z_\mathrm{rel}}{\sqrt{4K_\mathrm{eq}t}}\right) \end{aligned}$$
(27)

The probability \(F(t;z_\mathrm{rel})\) is usually referred to as the survival probability. The rate of decrease in \(F(t;z_\mathrm{rel})\) at a given time \(\tau \) is equal to the probability of particles crossing the boundary at that time. Thus, the first-passage distribution for the present scenario is given by

$$\begin{aligned} p(\tau ;z_\mathrm{rel})=-\left. \frac{\partial F(t;z_\mathrm{rel})}{\partial t}\right| _{z=h_c,t=\tau }=\frac{(h_c-z_\mathrm{rel})}{\sqrt{4\pi K_\mathrm{eq}}}\tau ^{-3/2}\exp {\left[ -\frac{(h_c-z_\mathrm{rel})^2}{4K_\mathrm{eq}\tau }\right] }, \end{aligned}$$
(28)

which is identical to Eq. 1.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gerken, T., Chamecki, M. & Fuentes, J.D. Air-Parcel Residence Times Within Forest Canopies. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 165, 29–54 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-017-0269-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-017-0269-7

Keywords

Profiles

  1. Tobias Gerken