Snow ablation in an open field and larch forest of the southern mountainous region of eastern Siberia

Abstract

The southern mountainous taiga region of eastern Siberia is the runoff source area of the basins of the rivers Lena and Amur, where snowmelt discharge is an important hydrological process. To evaluate the effect of the sparse larch forest canopy on snow ablation and energy balance in the snowpack, meteorological conditions and snow ablation were observed in a larch forest (LF) and an open field (OP). At the beginning of snowmelt, the snow water equivalent was 54.4 and 95.5 mm at OP and LF, respectively. The snow disappeared at LF three days later than at OP. Sublimation accounted for about 8% of snow ablation at both sites from 1 April to 5 May 2002, the snowmelt period. The energy balance of the snowpack at the two sites was dominated by the net all-wave radiation onto the snow surface. The difference in snowmelt between the sites was primarily caused by a difference in the net all-wave radiation. Snow surface albedo correlated with snow surface density for densities from 150 to 350 kg m -3 at both sites. Ablation de la neige à découvert et sous mélézin dans la région montagneuse sud de la Sibérie orientaleRésumé La région de taïga montagneuse méridionale de la Sibérie orientale est la zone d'origine des écoulements des bassins des Fleuves Lena et Amour, zone dans laquelle le débit de fonte des neiges est un processus hydrologique important. Pour évaluer les effets du maigre couvert de mélèze sur l'ablation de la neige et sur le bilan énergétique dans le couvert neigeux, les conditions météorologiques et l'ablation de la neige ont été observées dans une forêt de mélèzes (FM) et hors forêt (HF). Au début de la fonte des neiges, l'équivalent en eau était respectivement de 54.4 et 95.5 mm en HF et FM. La neige a disparu en FM trois jours plus tard qu'en HF. Entre le 1er avril et le 5 mai 2002, période de la fonte des neiges, la sublimation a représenté environ 8% de l'ablation de la neige. Le bilan énergétique du couvert neigeux a été dominé, dans les deux sites, par le rayonnement net total à la surface de la neige. La différence de fonte entre les sites a été principalement causée par une différence de rayonnement net total. L'albédo de la surface de la neige a été corrélé avec la densité de la surface de la neige, pour des densités variant entre 150 et 350 kg m -3 , pour les deux sites.

Increasing water losses from snow captured in the canopy of boreal forests: A case study using a 30 year data set

“…Additionally, reduced differences in SWE between the two sites (i.e., lower SIL) could be the result of potentially dissimilar evaporation rates from snow on the ground in the open and forested sites due to different wind speeds (Bernier & Swanson, 1993) and energy balances (Suzuki et al, 2006). Although it was beyond the scope of this study, further studies using stable isotopes would be useful to disentangle the effect of snow redistribution on SIL (Koeniger, Hubbart, Link, & Marshall, 2008).…”

On the usefulness of remote sensing input data for spatially distributed hydrological modelling: case of the Tarim River basin in China

“…Besides, the model structure of the spatially distributed model also could not entirely represent the realities, e.g. MIKE‐SHE uses a simplified snow melting module, which does not consider many physical factors, such as the processes of soil freezing/thawing (Suzuki et al , 2006), soil over‐saturation (Koren, 2006), the cranny due to frost heave (Michalowski and Zhu, 2006), ice vein (Kasper and Allard, 2001) and so on. It is expected that surface runoff under those conditions will have inaccuracies as well.…”

Spatial variation of snowmelt and sublimation in a high‐elevation semi‐desert basin of western Canada

“…Overall, the net vapour flux at the snow surface was negative, as sublimation events were more frequent and of higher magnitude than condensation events. This relationship between the relative magnitudes of the important energy fluxes has been noted in previous studies of snowmelt energy balance (Granger and Male, 1978;Suzuki et al, 2006).…”