1997
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1085(199709)11:11<1509::aid-hyp482>3.0.co;2-l
|Get access via publisher |Summarize |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts

A model to consider the spatial variability of rainfall partitioning within deciduous canopy. I. Model description

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
14
2
0
0

Citation Types

0
4
0
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
12
2
1
1

Relationship

1
15

Authors

Journals

citations

Cited by 16 publications

(4 citation statements)
references

References 29 publications

0
4
0
0
Order By: Relevance
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Measurement of representative throughfall fields in the presence of pour points is challenging, and likely requires deterministically sampling pour points, similarly to how stemflow is treated. Like stemflow, such measurements could then be used in physically based models (Davie & Durocher, 1997) to differentiate throughfall fluxes within the canopy and stemflow. However, optimal throughfall measurement designs where pour points occur need further investigation.…”
Section: Generalizing the Results
mentioning
confidence: 99%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Measurement of representative throughfall fields in the presence of pour points is challenging, and likely requires deterministically sampling pour points, similarly to how stemflow is treated. Like stemflow, such measurements could then be used in physically based models (Davie & Durocher, 1997) to differentiate throughfall fluxes within the canopy and stemflow. However, optimal throughfall measurement designs where pour points occur need further investigation.…”
Section: Generalizing the Results
mentioning
confidence: 99%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…The Rutter model treats the canopy as a single large leaf, although it has been adapted to provide a threedimensional canopy (e.g. Davie and Durocher, 1997) that can then be altered to allow for changes and growth in the canopy.…”
Section: Canopy Interception Loss Estimation
mentioning
confidence: 99%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Variables of forest canopy structure imply stand density, species composition, leaf traits, spatial distribution and density of foliage, branch architecture, bark texture, and the phenophase of deciduous trees (André et al, 2011;Sadeghi et al, 2020). Spatiotemporal variability of TF and its relation to forest structural variables have been reported for many tree species of various leaf traits and seasonal patterns (Chang and Matzner, 2000a;Kowalska et al, 2016;Loustau et al, 1992;Staelens et al, 2006b; and described in various models (André et al, 2011;Davie and Durocher, 1997a;Davie and Durocher, 1997b;Gerrits et al, 2010;Herbst et al, 2008;Loustau et al, 1992;van Dijk and Bruijnzeel, 2001a;van Dijk and Bruijnzeel, 2001b;Vrugt et al, 2003). Recent investigations documented correlations between SF volume and canopy structural traits like bark texture, diameter at breast height (DBH) and the height-to-width ratio of the as an indicator of the canopy geometry (Jiang et al, 2021;Tonello et al, 2021b;Van Stan et al, 2021) which might affect the TF due to lateral transport of precipitation.…”
Section: Introduction
mentioning
confidence: 99%