22.01.2014 Views

PE EIE[R-Rg RESEARCH ON - HJ Andrews Experimental Forest

PE EIE[R-Rg RESEARCH ON - HJ Andrews Experimental Forest

PE EIE[R-Rg RESEARCH ON - HJ Andrews Experimental Forest

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

.0500<br />

.040 0<br />

z .030 0<br />

E<br />

L.)<br />

0 .020 0<br />

.0140<br />

I<br />

4 0 20 .0 40 .0 60 .0 80 . 0 100 . 0 120 . 0 146 . 0<br />

ELAPSED TIME . (MIN . ]<br />

Figure 4 . Precipitation (PI, observed soil water flow (F), and modele d<br />

soil water flow (M) at 11 cm . Lysimeter suction was 146 cm of water .<br />

tion provides a satisfactory description of th e<br />

flow of water in the upper rooting zone o f<br />

our Douglas-fir stand . Since the Everett<br />

gravelly sandy loam is extremely variable, our<br />

results probably should not be extrapolate d<br />

much beyond the local area in which the y<br />

were obtained .<br />

We have not been able to account for th e<br />

25 percent discrepancy between predicted<br />

and observed peak flows . A number of possible<br />

explanations have occurred to us . It can<br />

be argued that the lysimeter system is not a<br />

perfect device for measuring water flow in a<br />

vertical column of soil . For example, in the<br />

early stages of a flow experiment, acceleratio n<br />

of flow due to lysimeter suction may be<br />

greater than that due to gravity. Perhaps more<br />

significant may be variations in flow associated<br />

with the lack of homogeneity of an i n<br />

situ forest soil. We suspect that stones or<br />

roots in soil above the lysimeter plate diverte d<br />

water toward or away from the plate . Perhaps<br />

more important, our estimates of initial value s<br />

of 0 at several nodes are not accurate.<br />

It is probably more important to emphasiz e<br />

that the field experiments described here wer e<br />

conducted for purposes rather far removed<br />

from our present one of evaluating th e<br />

Richards equation as a possible component of<br />

a soil-plant-atmosphere model . We also wish<br />

to point out that the Richards equation has<br />

not received adequate evaluation in field situations,<br />

perhaps because the stringent under -<br />

lying assumptions are rarely satisfied . Th e<br />

rather close correspondence between model<br />

and observation that we have obtained suggests<br />

that the model may be more robust tha n<br />

has been generally believed .<br />

Acknowledgments<br />

The work reported in this paper was supported<br />

by National Science Foundation Grant<br />

No. GB-20963 to the Coniferous <strong>Forest</strong> Biome ,<br />

U .S. Analysis of Ecosystems, Internationa l<br />

Biological Program . This is Contribution No .<br />

27 to the Coniferous <strong>Forest</strong> Biome .<br />

100

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!