Canopy Storage Implications on Interception Loss Modeling - American Journal of Plant Sciences

AJPS > Vol.5 No.20, September 2014

Canopy Storage Implications on Interception Loss Modeling ()

HTML

Download as PDF (Size: 5484KB) PP. 3032-3048

DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2014.520320 4,631 Downloads 6,508 Views Citations

Author(s)

Cesar Véliz-Chávez¹, Carlos Alberto Mastachi-Loza², Enrique González-Sosa^3*, Rocio Becerril-Piña², Norma Maricela Ramos-Salinas⁴

Affiliation(s)

¹Facultad de Ingeniería, Centro Universitario S/N, Cerro de las Campanas, Santiago de Querétaro, Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Querétaro, México.
²Centro Interamericano de Recursos del Agua, Facultad de Ingeniería Cerro de Coatepec, Ciudad Universitaria, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México Toluca, Toluca de Lerdo, México.
³Departamento de Tecnología Ciencia Arte y Humanidades, Blvd Villas del Meson No. 1000 col. Provincia Juriquilla, Santiago de Querétaro, Universidad del Valle de México Campus Querétaro, Querétaro, México.
⁴División de Estudios de Posgrado, Facultad de Contabilidad y Administración, Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Cerro de las Campanas S/N Centro, Querétaro, México.

ABSTRACT

A rainfall interception methodology was implemented in a deciduous Ficus benjamina (L.) tree to evaluate the interception loss, as well as the dynamics on canopy storage capacity (S) and free through fall (ρ). Measurements of gross precipitation (P_g), through fall and meteorological data were recorded every 5 minutes. Nineteen individual storms from summer to autumn 2005, and twenty one in spring to autumn, 2006 were analyzed. For the studied period, 151.59 mm and 203.35 mm of rainfall occurred on 2005 and 2006 respectively. Canopy interception was 59.46% and 70.98% of P_g for the first and second year. Throughfall data recorded during 2005 were 38.14% (of P_g) and 27.21% (of P_g) for 2006. The throughfall and gross precipitation relationship yielded S = 1.50 mm for the 2005 data. In 2006 storms were analyzed in detail, where ρ and S varied in a range from 0.10 to 0.64 and from 1.00 to 2.03 mm, respectively. Moreover, application of the Rutter and Gash models with two years of rainfall data (2005-2006) from the study area indicated an underestimation and overestimation of 69% and 88%, respectively. The slightly best prediction of the interception loss was obtained with the Gash model. Yet S and ρ change significantly due to wind speed, temperature, rainfall intensity and seasonal vegetation development.

KEYWORDS

Interception, Storage Capacity, Throughfall, Gash Model

Share and Cite:

Véliz-Chávez, C. , Mastachi-Loza, C. , González-Sosa, E. , Becerril-Piña, R. and Ramos-Salinas, N. (2014) Canopy Storage Implications on Interception Loss Modeling. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 5, 3032-3048. doi: 10.4236/ajps.2014.520320.

Journals Menu

Follow SCIRP

	+1 323-425-8868
	customer@scirp.org
	+86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
	1655362766

	Paper Publishing WeChat

Journals Menu

Home

About SCIRP

Service

Policies