2003
DOI: 10.1002/env.603
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stemflow estimation in a redwood forest using model‐based stratified random sampling

Abstract: SUMMARYModel-based stratified sampling is illustrated by a case study of stemflow volume in a redwood forest. The approach is actually a model-assisted sampling design in which auxiliary information (tree diameter) is utilized in the design of stratum boundaries to optimize the efficiency of a regression or ratio estimator. The auxiliary information is utilized in both the design and estimation phases. Stemflow and its variance were modelled as powers of diameter and a generalized non-linear least squares mode… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A careful analysis of both gaseous and particulate compounds in the air (samples taken at a height of 3.5 m), in rainwater (pH bulk at a height of 1.5 m, throughfall in shielded 5 l funnels and stemflow in 5 l spiral type collectors), and in living and dead leaves/needles has been performed from 1993 onwards. Rainwater samples were collected every 14 days in a model-based stratified random sampling design (Lewis, 2003) of 20 trees in a 1-ha stand (10 oaks and 10 pines). Next to the precipitation volume, conductivity and pH, Cd and Cu are measured by graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS), and Zn by inductive coupled plasma atomic absorption spectrometry (ICPAAS).…”
Section: Laboratory Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A careful analysis of both gaseous and particulate compounds in the air (samples taken at a height of 3.5 m), in rainwater (pH bulk at a height of 1.5 m, throughfall in shielded 5 l funnels and stemflow in 5 l spiral type collectors), and in living and dead leaves/needles has been performed from 1993 onwards. Rainwater samples were collected every 14 days in a model-based stratified random sampling design (Lewis, 2003) of 20 trees in a 1-ha stand (10 oaks and 10 pines). Next to the precipitation volume, conductivity and pH, Cd and Cu are measured by graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS), and Zn by inductive coupled plasma atomic absorption spectrometry (ICPAAS).…”
Section: Laboratory Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Annual throughfall ranged from 78 to 72 percent over three years of measurement at IVE and averaged 75.1 percent. Lewis (2003) found that stemflow at IVE accounts for 2.5 percent of annual rainfall, leaving 22.3 percent to be trapped by foliage interception. For each species, event-based stemflow data show linear relations between event size and stemflow volumes, and this information was combined with Lewis' (2003) relations between tree diameter and annual stemflow to estimate stemflow for the plot for each event.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We implemented a study at the Caspar Creek Experimental Watersheds to measure interception in a 120-year old redwood forest, and to determine whether the process might be capable of influencing peakflow discharges and landsliding. The study is described in more detail by Lewis (2003), Reid and Lewis (in review), and Steinbuck (2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While we do not directly measure evapotranspiration (ET), it is reasonable to assume that due to the stark differences in vegetation average ET rates are lower for LS than for VH, which further contribute to wetter conditions observed year round at LS. Another vegetation‐related hydrologic process that we were not able to consider is stemflow, which is very difficult to measure (Lewis, ). However, it is recognized that relative to direct precipitation reaching the land surface, stemflow is both slower and more gradual, yet because of direct connectivity with preferential flow paths along root systems and macropores, stemflow can also result in deeper infiltration and better drainage (Band et al, ; Ghestem et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%