Stable Isotopes and Plant Carbon-Water Relations 1993
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-08-091801-3.50042-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Source of Water Transpired by Eucalyptus camaldulensis: Soil, Groundwater, or Streams?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
42
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
42
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The formation of fog and its movement onshore is therefore a thermodynamic process (advection) and diers from other atmospheric aerosol formation (e.g., cloud formation) because it does not require condensation nuclei (sea salts or atmospheric dust) to catalyze its formation, while cloud water seeding does (McIlveen 1992). Fog water and cloud water inputs can therefore be very dierent in origin, duration, chemical and isotopic composition (see Kimball et al 1988;Fuzzi et al 1996;Vermeulen et al 1997 and references therein), yet they are frequently confused as being the same thing: they are not. At my site, fog was only collected, on average, during 476% of all the fog events which occurred during the study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The formation of fog and its movement onshore is therefore a thermodynamic process (advection) and diers from other atmospheric aerosol formation (e.g., cloud formation) because it does not require condensation nuclei (sea salts or atmospheric dust) to catalyze its formation, while cloud water seeding does (McIlveen 1992). Fog water and cloud water inputs can therefore be very dierent in origin, duration, chemical and isotopic composition (see Kimball et al 1988;Fuzzi et al 1996;Vermeulen et al 1997 and references therein), yet they are frequently confused as being the same thing: they are not. At my site, fog was only collected, on average, during 476% of all the fog events which occurred during the study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Fog can also be isotopically distinguished from water in the surface soil layers that comes from convective (colder) storm systems or has been subjected to marked evaporation (Allison et al 1983;Dawson and Ehleringer 1998;. While there are a large number of factors which can in¯uence the isotopic composition of water sources that might be used by plants, if the water sources are characterized along with the isotope values of water within the xylem tissues of plants, one can determine which and how much of each water source is being used by any plant species at a particular site (White et al 1985, Dawson andEhleringer 1991;Dawson 1993a;Thorburn and Walker 1993;Brunel et al 1995;Cramer et al, in press). Therefore, for the present investigation, the stable isotope composition of fog, rainfall, shallow and deep soil water, and xylem water was determined and this information used to calculate how much of these water sources were used by plants inhabiting coastal redwood forests over a 3-year period.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The relative importance of two distinctly different water sources has been evaluated in previous studies through implementation of a linear two-ended mixing model (Dawson and Ehleringer 1991;Flanagan et al 1992;Thorburn and Walker 1993;Brunel et al 1995;Dawson and Pate 1996). We have attempted to apply this compartmental approach for the first time to a system in which soil and underlying weathered granitic bedrock comprise the two end members.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Tree-rings are not a direct recorder of the isotopic composition of precipitation, since there are many steps along the path from source water to cellulose. In addition, the assumption that mean annual precipitation represents a correct, adequate descriptor of the water used by plants has been called into question by some studies (Dawson and Ehleringer 1991;Ehleringer et al 1991;Sternberg et al 1991;Busch et al 1992;Flanagan et al 1992; Thorburn and Walker 1993;Valentini et al 1992), because of both the biseasonal nature of precipitation in some ecosystems and differential root activities. White et al (1985) observed that pine trees from wet and dry microsites, which presumably receive similar precipitation inputs, exhibited differences in their cellulose δD values, suggesting that water stress and/or humidity differences may alter leaf water δD and thus treering cellulose δD.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%