2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.proenv.2013.02.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Selective Logging Methods on Runoff Characteristics in Paired Small Headwater Catchment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
4

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
3
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In the forest catchment, the hydrograph shows a delayed response suggesting that subsurface flow and subsequent overland flow on saturated areas were important processes. As explained by Suryatmojo et al (2013), physical catchment parameters such as slope, shape, main-stream slope and drainage density affect stream flow and influence the shape of the hydrograph through catchment storage, runoff speed, infiltration and soil water content. Although the study catchments display similar patterns, when the flows begin to decline with the onset of the dry season, the flow of forest catchment decreases first.…”
Section: Soil Moisture Variationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the forest catchment, the hydrograph shows a delayed response suggesting that subsurface flow and subsequent overland flow on saturated areas were important processes. As explained by Suryatmojo et al (2013), physical catchment parameters such as slope, shape, main-stream slope and drainage density affect stream flow and influence the shape of the hydrograph through catchment storage, runoff speed, infiltration and soil water content. Although the study catchments display similar patterns, when the flows begin to decline with the onset of the dry season, the flow of forest catchment decreases first.…”
Section: Soil Moisture Variationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This indicates that forest interception (include canopy interception and forest floor interception) in the VF site contributed to reducing the peak discharge (Qp) in Figure 12. In the VF site, the average canopy interception was 23.8% of rainfall and the average forest interception was 91.7% [46].…”
Section: Effectiveness Of a River Buffer On Surface Runoff Flowmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Di antara hasil-hasil penelitian tersebut adalah dampak pembukaan hutan dalam meningkatkan hasil air untuk kurun waktu tertentu (Pudjiharta, 2008;Nobrega et al, 2010;Zegree, 2011;Khanal & Parajuli, 2013), meningkatkan erosi dan sedimentasi di badan air (Hidayat et al, 2008;Khanal & Parajuli, 2013), menurunkan kualitas air sungai (Palmer, 2011;Kastendick et al, 2012;Kebede et al, 2014), serta memengaruhi karakteristik hidrograf aliran (Wenjie et al, 2011;Kuras et al, 2012;Suryatmojo et al, 2013).…”
Section: Pendahuluanunclassified