2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2015.05.022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water repellency under coniferous and deciduous forest — Experimental assessment and impact on overland flow

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
24
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
5
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, SWR intensity (EPT) in the topsoil that developed under pinewood was severe and significantly higher than under beech cover, which showed slight intensity. Similar results were reported by Butzen et al [31], who pointed out that soils developed under coniferous species are generally more water-repellent than those below broadleaf forests and could be due to, among other factors, the higher lipid content [32], as was observed in the Moncayo Natural Park pine litter [33].…”
Section: Soil Physical Propertiessupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, SWR intensity (EPT) in the topsoil that developed under pinewood was severe and significantly higher than under beech cover, which showed slight intensity. Similar results were reported by Butzen et al [31], who pointed out that soils developed under coniferous species are generally more water-repellent than those below broadleaf forests and could be due to, among other factors, the higher lipid content [32], as was observed in the Moncayo Natural Park pine litter [33].…”
Section: Soil Physical Propertiessupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Although the differences in SWR persistence between forest types were not statistically significant, a trend toward extreme SWR was observed in the pinewood. This variability was also reported by Buczko et al [30] and Butzen et al [31] for soils developed under Fagus sylvatica and Pinus sylvestris forests. However, SWR intensity (EPT) in the topsoil that developed under pinewood was severe and significantly higher than under beech cover, which showed slight intensity.…”
Section: Soil Physical Propertiessupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Moreover, the rapid and complete rewetting of the soil by water extraction in so‐called “batch” laboratory studies (extraction of soil with large water/soil ratios and by shaking), with abrupt changes in soil water potential, poses a strong osmotic stress to soil microorganisms ( Schimel et al, ), which under field conditions is rarely reached. Because of the hydrophobicity of surfaces and the formation of preferential flow paths, the rewetting of soils under field conditions often proceeds slower and less complete than in laboratory experiments, which holds true especially for organic forest floor layers with pronounced hydrophobicity ( Bogner et al, ; Butzen et al, ). In fact, field experiments on the rewetting of forest floors indicated only minor effects on the solute fluxes of N ( Chen et al, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Butzen et al, 2015;Iserloh et al, 2013bIserloh et al, , 2013cIserloh et al, , 2012Keesstra et al, 2016;Montenegro et al, 2013;Peter et al, 2014;Prosdocimi et al, 2016;Ries et al, 2013Ries et al, , 2009Rodrigo Comino et al, 2016;Vermang et al, 2015;Wirtz et al, 2012) and wind (e.g. Fister and Ries, 2009;Funk and Engel, 2015;Goossens, 2000;McKenna Neuman et al, 2005;Youssef et al, 2012;Zhang et al, 2014;Zobeck et al, 2013), few focused on wind-driven rain (Cornelis et al, 2004;De Lima et al, 1992;Iserloh et al, 2013a;Ries et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%