2010
DOI: 10.1080/15324981003762422
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Role of Litter in Rainfall Interception and Maintenance of Superficial Soil Water Content in an Arid Rangeland in Khabr National Park in South-Eastern Iran

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…8a). The rainfall interceptions of forest canopy and O horizon have been widely reported in previous studies, especially in arid and semi-arid areas (Sharafatmandrad et al, 2010;Schrumpf et al, 2011). In this study, this interception function was still observed in humid forest, especially in small and low intense rainfall events.…”
Section: Soil Moisture Response To Rainfall In Forest Land Usementioning
confidence: 50%
“…8a). The rainfall interceptions of forest canopy and O horizon have been widely reported in previous studies, especially in arid and semi-arid areas (Sharafatmandrad et al, 2010;Schrumpf et al, 2011). In this study, this interception function was still observed in humid forest, especially in small and low intense rainfall events.…”
Section: Soil Moisture Response To Rainfall In Forest Land Usementioning
confidence: 50%
“…En relación a la humedad del suelo, la tendencia registrada de mayores valores en las fajas (especialmente la de 8 m) respecto al testigo puede deberse a una reducción de la evaporación ya que la broza permite retener por un período mayor la humedad en el suelo. Efectos similares fueron reportados por Sharafatmandrad et al (2010) en ambientes áridos de Irán. Sin embargo, en estos ambientes áridos de estepa la precipitación se caracteriza por una elevada variabilidad interanual.…”
Section: Clima Y Suelosunclassified
“…The litter layer is far smaller in mass compared to canopy crown in many water‐limited ecosystems, and therefore, the litter layer's ability to intercept rainfall is small in the overall interception estimation (Gerrits, Pfister, & Savenije, ; Li, Niu, & Xie, ; Sharafatmandrad, Mesdaghi, Bahremand, & Barani, ). Litter interception is partially controlled by properties of the litter layer such as the depth, composition, and mass of litter (Putuhena & Cordery, ), which are determined primarily by vegetation type, species composition, season, and management practices, all which exhibit complicated spatio‐temporal variations (Putuhena & Cordery, ; Sayer, ; Sharafatmandrad et al, ). In addition, the evaporation of retained water in litter is affected by below canopy climatic drivers such as air temperature, wind velocity and water vapor pressure deficit (Helvey & Patric, ; Llorens, Poch, Latron, & Gallart, ) and therefore interception loss may vary for similar litter mass under different climates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Walsh & Voigt, ) of gross precipitation depending on the mean annual precipitation, litter mass, and leaf shape (Gerrits et al, ; Naeth, Bailey, Chanasyk, & Pluth, ; Walsh & Voigt, ). Litter interception is relatively negligible (less than 1% of precipitation) in some water‐limited regions (Sharafatmandrad et al, ) due to a smaller litter mass compared to canopy interception (Zou, Caterina, Will, Stebler, & Turton, ). However, litter interception can be substantial if a deep layer of litter builds up under the canopy, especially in semi‐arid regions where below canopy evaporative demand is high (Tsiko, Makurira, Gerrits, & Savenije, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%