Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem
Recent field observations indicate that in many forest ecosystems, plants use water that may be isotopically distinct from soil water that ultimately contributes to streamflow. Such an assertion has been met with varied reactions. Of the outstanding questions, we examine whether ecohydrological sepa...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Water resources research 2019-04, Vol.55 (4), p.3307-3327 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 3327 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 3307 |
container_title | Water resources research |
container_volume | 55 |
creator | Evaristo, Jaivime Kim, Minseok Haren, Joost Pangle, Luke A. Harman, Ciaran J. Troch, Peter A. McDonnell, Jeffrey J. |
description | Recent field observations indicate that in many forest ecosystems, plants use water that may be isotopically distinct from soil water that ultimately contributes to streamflow. Such an assertion has been met with varied reactions. Of the outstanding questions, we examine whether ecohydrological separation of water between trees and streams results from a separation in time, or in space. Here we present results from a 9‐month drought and rewetting experiment at the 26,700‐m3 mesocosm, Biosphere 2‐Tropical Rainforest biome. We test the null hypothesis that transpiration and groundwater recharge water are sampled from the same soil volume without preference for old nor young water. After a 10‐week drought, we added 66 mm of labeled rainfall with 152‰ δ2H distributed over four events, followed by background rainfall (−60‰ δ2H) distributed over 13 events. Our results show that mean transit times through groundwater recharge and plant transpiration were markedly different: groundwater recharge was 2–7 times faster (~9 days) than transpired water (range 17–62 days). The “age” of transpired water showed strong dependence on species and was linked to the difference between midday leaf water potential and soil matric potential. Moreover, our results show that trees used soil water (89% ±6) and not the “more mobile” (represented by “zero tension” seepage) water (11% ±6). The finding, which rejects our null hypothesis, is novel in that this partitioning is established based on soil water residence times. Our study quantifies mean transit times for transpiration and seepage flows under dynamic conditions.
Plain Language Summary
Recent studies suggest that plants use a type of water that is different to the water that recharges the ground, a phenomenon described as the two water worlds. It is unclear, however, whether these waters are segregated in space or in time. That is, do plants draw water from parts of the soil different to groundwater recharge, or do plant water withdrawals happen at a different time from groundwater recharge? Evidence from well‐controlled experiments is badly needed because the two water worlds, if true, means that our understanding of the water cycle is incomplete. Here we perform a 9‐month drought and rainfall experiment, taking fingerprints of the water molecule, to follow a raindrop from the moment it enters the ground through to its exit via plants or groundwater recharge. Results point to two main discoveries: (1) the travel time of water |
doi_str_mv | 10.1029/2018WR023265 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2228726444</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2228726444</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3687-1d9162cca19cc3aec5279065613a00692b73e303b23a18975fcab91bae95709d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AURQdRsFZ3_oABt43OR5LJLEvaqlBRaqXL8DKZtFPSTJxJ0Qr-d1Or4MrV5cE578JF6JKSa0qYvGGEJosZYZzF0RHqURmGgZCCH6MeISEPKJfiFJ15vyaEhlEseugzXYED1WpnPky9xO1K40m1fdceQ13g4VLjkfGtM_m2NbbGtsTP1lR4AZ0ywE8V1O3vsRdGWjf4STtlK_gWTI0BP9hCV3jubGMUVHisrN_5Vm_O0UkJldcXP9lHL5PxPL0Lpo-39-lwGgCPExHQQtKYKQVUKsVBq4gJSeIophwIiSXLBdec8JxxoIkUUakglzQHLSNBZMH76Orwt3H2dat9m63t1tVdZcYYSwSLwzDsqMGBUs5673SZNc5swO0ySrL9wNnfgTucH_A3U-ndv2y2mKUzxiUV_AsCMXvp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2228726444</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library</source><creator>Evaristo, Jaivime ; Kim, Minseok ; Haren, Joost ; Pangle, Luke A. ; Harman, Ciaran J. ; Troch, Peter A. ; McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Evaristo, Jaivime ; Kim, Minseok ; Haren, Joost ; Pangle, Luke A. ; Harman, Ciaran J. ; Troch, Peter A. ; McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</creatorcontrib><description>Recent field observations indicate that in many forest ecosystems, plants use water that may be isotopically distinct from soil water that ultimately contributes to streamflow. Such an assertion has been met with varied reactions. Of the outstanding questions, we examine whether ecohydrological separation of water between trees and streams results from a separation in time, or in space. Here we present results from a 9‐month drought and rewetting experiment at the 26,700‐m3 mesocosm, Biosphere 2‐Tropical Rainforest biome. We test the null hypothesis that transpiration and groundwater recharge water are sampled from the same soil volume without preference for old nor young water. After a 10‐week drought, we added 66 mm of labeled rainfall with 152‰ δ2H distributed over four events, followed by background rainfall (−60‰ δ2H) distributed over 13 events. Our results show that mean transit times through groundwater recharge and plant transpiration were markedly different: groundwater recharge was 2–7 times faster (~9 days) than transpired water (range 17–62 days). The “age” of transpired water showed strong dependence on species and was linked to the difference between midday leaf water potential and soil matric potential. Moreover, our results show that trees used soil water (89% ±6) and not the “more mobile” (represented by “zero tension” seepage) water (11% ±6). The finding, which rejects our null hypothesis, is novel in that this partitioning is established based on soil water residence times. Our study quantifies mean transit times for transpiration and seepage flows under dynamic conditions.
Plain Language Summary
Recent studies suggest that plants use a type of water that is different to the water that recharges the ground, a phenomenon described as the two water worlds. It is unclear, however, whether these waters are segregated in space or in time. That is, do plants draw water from parts of the soil different to groundwater recharge, or do plant water withdrawals happen at a different time from groundwater recharge? Evidence from well‐controlled experiments is badly needed because the two water worlds, if true, means that our understanding of the water cycle is incomplete. Here we perform a 9‐month drought and rainfall experiment, taking fingerprints of the water molecule, to follow a raindrop from the moment it enters the ground through to its exit via plants or groundwater recharge. Results point to two main discoveries: (1) the travel time of water via root water uptake is much longer than the travel time of water leading to groundwater recharge and (2) the water taken by tree roots comes from parts of the soil that are different to the water leading to groundwater recharge. These discoveries show the segregation of these two components of the water cycle in space and in time.
Key Points
Root water uptake is derived from the less mobile water in the soil matrix, different to the more mobile water component in soils. The transit times (“ages”) of water taken by roots are older than seepage (“groundwater recharge”) water by a factor of 2 to 7
Ecohydrological separation suggests that time‐sensitive sampling and modeling techniques are critical for understanding the water cycle
Species‐specific differences in root water uptake transit times suggest that trees should not be treated as simple transport vessels (or “straws”) in land surface models</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1397</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7973</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2018WR023265</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Age composition ; Biosphere ; critical zone ; Deep percolation ; Dependence ; Drought ; ecohydrological separation ; Ecohydrology ; Ecosystems ; Fluxes ; Forest ecosystems ; Groundwater ; Groundwater recharge ; Hydrologic cycle ; Hydrological cycle ; Hypotheses ; Leaf water potential ; Leaves ; Mesocosms ; Moisture content ; Null hypothesis ; Percolation ; Plant water ; Rain ; Raindrops ; Rainfall ; Rainforests ; Seepage ; Segregation ; Separation ; Soil ; Soil water ; stable isotopes ; Stream discharge ; Stream flow ; Streams ; Terrestrial ecosystems ; tracer ; transit times ; Transpiration ; Travel ; Travel time ; Trees ; Tropical climate ; two water worlds ; Uptake ; Water chemistry ; Water potential ; Water seepage ; Water uptake</subject><ispartof>Water resources research, 2019-04, Vol.55 (4), p.3307-3327</ispartof><rights>2019. The Authors.</rights><rights>2019. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3687-1d9162cca19cc3aec5279065613a00692b73e303b23a18975fcab91bae95709d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3687-1d9162cca19cc3aec5279065613a00692b73e303b23a18975fcab91bae95709d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3185-002X ; 0000-0001-7879-5972 ; 0000-0003-1387-229X ; 0000-0002-3291-5729 ; 0000-0001-9275-1546 ; 0000-0003-3484-5741</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2018WR023265$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2018WR023265$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1414,11501,27911,27912,45561,45562,46455,46879</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Evaristo, Jaivime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Minseok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haren, Joost</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pangle, Luke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harman, Ciaran J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troch, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</creatorcontrib><title>Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem</title><title>Water resources research</title><description>Recent field observations indicate that in many forest ecosystems, plants use water that may be isotopically distinct from soil water that ultimately contributes to streamflow. Such an assertion has been met with varied reactions. Of the outstanding questions, we examine whether ecohydrological separation of water between trees and streams results from a separation in time, or in space. Here we present results from a 9‐month drought and rewetting experiment at the 26,700‐m3 mesocosm, Biosphere 2‐Tropical Rainforest biome. We test the null hypothesis that transpiration and groundwater recharge water are sampled from the same soil volume without preference for old nor young water. After a 10‐week drought, we added 66 mm of labeled rainfall with 152‰ δ2H distributed over four events, followed by background rainfall (−60‰ δ2H) distributed over 13 events. Our results show that mean transit times through groundwater recharge and plant transpiration were markedly different: groundwater recharge was 2–7 times faster (~9 days) than transpired water (range 17–62 days). The “age” of transpired water showed strong dependence on species and was linked to the difference between midday leaf water potential and soil matric potential. Moreover, our results show that trees used soil water (89% ±6) and not the “more mobile” (represented by “zero tension” seepage) water (11% ±6). The finding, which rejects our null hypothesis, is novel in that this partitioning is established based on soil water residence times. Our study quantifies mean transit times for transpiration and seepage flows under dynamic conditions.
Plain Language Summary
Recent studies suggest that plants use a type of water that is different to the water that recharges the ground, a phenomenon described as the two water worlds. It is unclear, however, whether these waters are segregated in space or in time. That is, do plants draw water from parts of the soil different to groundwater recharge, or do plant water withdrawals happen at a different time from groundwater recharge? Evidence from well‐controlled experiments is badly needed because the two water worlds, if true, means that our understanding of the water cycle is incomplete. Here we perform a 9‐month drought and rainfall experiment, taking fingerprints of the water molecule, to follow a raindrop from the moment it enters the ground through to its exit via plants or groundwater recharge. Results point to two main discoveries: (1) the travel time of water via root water uptake is much longer than the travel time of water leading to groundwater recharge and (2) the water taken by tree roots comes from parts of the soil that are different to the water leading to groundwater recharge. These discoveries show the segregation of these two components of the water cycle in space and in time.
Key Points
Root water uptake is derived from the less mobile water in the soil matrix, different to the more mobile water component in soils. The transit times (“ages”) of water taken by roots are older than seepage (“groundwater recharge”) water by a factor of 2 to 7
Ecohydrological separation suggests that time‐sensitive sampling and modeling techniques are critical for understanding the water cycle
Species‐specific differences in root water uptake transit times suggest that trees should not be treated as simple transport vessels (or “straws”) in land surface models</description><subject>Age composition</subject><subject>Biosphere</subject><subject>critical zone</subject><subject>Deep percolation</subject><subject>Dependence</subject><subject>Drought</subject><subject>ecohydrological separation</subject><subject>Ecohydrology</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Fluxes</subject><subject>Forest ecosystems</subject><subject>Groundwater</subject><subject>Groundwater recharge</subject><subject>Hydrologic cycle</subject><subject>Hydrological cycle</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Leaf water potential</subject><subject>Leaves</subject><subject>Mesocosms</subject><subject>Moisture content</subject><subject>Null hypothesis</subject><subject>Percolation</subject><subject>Plant water</subject><subject>Rain</subject><subject>Raindrops</subject><subject>Rainfall</subject><subject>Rainforests</subject><subject>Seepage</subject><subject>Segregation</subject><subject>Separation</subject><subject>Soil</subject><subject>Soil water</subject><subject>stable isotopes</subject><subject>Stream discharge</subject><subject>Stream flow</subject><subject>Streams</subject><subject>Terrestrial ecosystems</subject><subject>tracer</subject><subject>transit times</subject><subject>Transpiration</subject><subject>Travel</subject><subject>Travel time</subject><subject>Trees</subject><subject>Tropical climate</subject><subject>two water worlds</subject><subject>Uptake</subject><subject>Water chemistry</subject><subject>Water potential</subject><subject>Water seepage</subject><subject>Water uptake</subject><issn>0043-1397</issn><issn>1944-7973</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AURQdRsFZ3_oABt43OR5LJLEvaqlBRaqXL8DKZtFPSTJxJ0Qr-d1Or4MrV5cE578JF6JKSa0qYvGGEJosZYZzF0RHqURmGgZCCH6MeISEPKJfiFJ15vyaEhlEseugzXYED1WpnPky9xO1K40m1fdceQ13g4VLjkfGtM_m2NbbGtsTP1lR4AZ0ywE8V1O3vsRdGWjf4STtlK_gWTI0BP9hCV3jubGMUVHisrN_5Vm_O0UkJldcXP9lHL5PxPL0Lpo-39-lwGgCPExHQQtKYKQVUKsVBq4gJSeIophwIiSXLBdec8JxxoIkUUakglzQHLSNBZMH76Orwt3H2dat9m63t1tVdZcYYSwSLwzDsqMGBUs5673SZNc5swO0ySrL9wNnfgTucH_A3U-ndv2y2mKUzxiUV_AsCMXvp</recordid><startdate>201904</startdate><enddate>201904</enddate><creator>Evaristo, Jaivime</creator><creator>Kim, Minseok</creator><creator>Haren, Joost</creator><creator>Pangle, Luke A.</creator><creator>Harman, Ciaran J.</creator><creator>Troch, Peter A.</creator><creator>McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3185-002X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7879-5972</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1387-229X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3291-5729</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9275-1546</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3484-5741</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201904</creationdate><title>Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem</title><author>Evaristo, Jaivime ; Kim, Minseok ; Haren, Joost ; Pangle, Luke A. ; Harman, Ciaran J. ; Troch, Peter A. ; McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3687-1d9162cca19cc3aec5279065613a00692b73e303b23a18975fcab91bae95709d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Age composition</topic><topic>Biosphere</topic><topic>critical zone</topic><topic>Deep percolation</topic><topic>Dependence</topic><topic>Drought</topic><topic>ecohydrological separation</topic><topic>Ecohydrology</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Fluxes</topic><topic>Forest ecosystems</topic><topic>Groundwater</topic><topic>Groundwater recharge</topic><topic>Hydrologic cycle</topic><topic>Hydrological cycle</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Leaf water potential</topic><topic>Leaves</topic><topic>Mesocosms</topic><topic>Moisture content</topic><topic>Null hypothesis</topic><topic>Percolation</topic><topic>Plant water</topic><topic>Rain</topic><topic>Raindrops</topic><topic>Rainfall</topic><topic>Rainforests</topic><topic>Seepage</topic><topic>Segregation</topic><topic>Separation</topic><topic>Soil</topic><topic>Soil water</topic><topic>stable isotopes</topic><topic>Stream discharge</topic><topic>Stream flow</topic><topic>Streams</topic><topic>Terrestrial ecosystems</topic><topic>tracer</topic><topic>transit times</topic><topic>Transpiration</topic><topic>Travel</topic><topic>Travel time</topic><topic>Trees</topic><topic>Tropical climate</topic><topic>two water worlds</topic><topic>Uptake</topic><topic>Water chemistry</topic><topic>Water potential</topic><topic>Water seepage</topic><topic>Water uptake</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Evaristo, Jaivime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Minseok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haren, Joost</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pangle, Luke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harman, Ciaran J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troch, Peter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Evaristo, Jaivime</au><au>Kim, Minseok</au><au>Haren, Joost</au><au>Pangle, Luke A.</au><au>Harman, Ciaran J.</au><au>Troch, Peter A.</au><au>McDonnell, Jeffrey J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem</atitle><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle><date>2019-04</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>3307</spage><epage>3327</epage><pages>3307-3327</pages><issn>0043-1397</issn><eissn>1944-7973</eissn><abstract>Recent field observations indicate that in many forest ecosystems, plants use water that may be isotopically distinct from soil water that ultimately contributes to streamflow. Such an assertion has been met with varied reactions. Of the outstanding questions, we examine whether ecohydrological separation of water between trees and streams results from a separation in time, or in space. Here we present results from a 9‐month drought and rewetting experiment at the 26,700‐m3 mesocosm, Biosphere 2‐Tropical Rainforest biome. We test the null hypothesis that transpiration and groundwater recharge water are sampled from the same soil volume without preference for old nor young water. After a 10‐week drought, we added 66 mm of labeled rainfall with 152‰ δ2H distributed over four events, followed by background rainfall (−60‰ δ2H) distributed over 13 events. Our results show that mean transit times through groundwater recharge and plant transpiration were markedly different: groundwater recharge was 2–7 times faster (~9 days) than transpired water (range 17–62 days). The “age” of transpired water showed strong dependence on species and was linked to the difference between midday leaf water potential and soil matric potential. Moreover, our results show that trees used soil water (89% ±6) and not the “more mobile” (represented by “zero tension” seepage) water (11% ±6). The finding, which rejects our null hypothesis, is novel in that this partitioning is established based on soil water residence times. Our study quantifies mean transit times for transpiration and seepage flows under dynamic conditions.
Plain Language Summary
Recent studies suggest that plants use a type of water that is different to the water that recharges the ground, a phenomenon described as the two water worlds. It is unclear, however, whether these waters are segregated in space or in time. That is, do plants draw water from parts of the soil different to groundwater recharge, or do plant water withdrawals happen at a different time from groundwater recharge? Evidence from well‐controlled experiments is badly needed because the two water worlds, if true, means that our understanding of the water cycle is incomplete. Here we perform a 9‐month drought and rainfall experiment, taking fingerprints of the water molecule, to follow a raindrop from the moment it enters the ground through to its exit via plants or groundwater recharge. Results point to two main discoveries: (1) the travel time of water via root water uptake is much longer than the travel time of water leading to groundwater recharge and (2) the water taken by tree roots comes from parts of the soil that are different to the water leading to groundwater recharge. These discoveries show the segregation of these two components of the water cycle in space and in time.
Key Points
Root water uptake is derived from the less mobile water in the soil matrix, different to the more mobile water component in soils. The transit times (“ages”) of water taken by roots are older than seepage (“groundwater recharge”) water by a factor of 2 to 7
Ecohydrological separation suggests that time‐sensitive sampling and modeling techniques are critical for understanding the water cycle
Species‐specific differences in root water uptake transit times suggest that trees should not be treated as simple transport vessels (or “straws”) in land surface models</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1029/2018WR023265</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3185-002X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7879-5972</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1387-229X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3291-5729</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9275-1546</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3484-5741</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0043-1397 |
ispartof | Water resources research, 2019-04, Vol.55 (4), p.3307-3327 |
issn | 0043-1397 1944-7973 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2228726444 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library |
subjects | Age composition Biosphere critical zone Deep percolation Dependence Drought ecohydrological separation Ecohydrology Ecosystems Fluxes Forest ecosystems Groundwater Groundwater recharge Hydrologic cycle Hydrological cycle Hypotheses Leaf water potential Leaves Mesocosms Moisture content Null hypothesis Percolation Plant water Rain Raindrops Rainfall Rainforests Seepage Segregation Separation Soil Soil water stable isotopes Stream discharge Stream flow Streams Terrestrial ecosystems tracer transit times Transpiration Travel Travel time Trees Tropical climate two water worlds Uptake Water chemistry Water potential Water seepage Water uptake |
title | Characterizing the Fluxes and Age Distribution of Soil Water, Plant Water, and Deep Percolation in a Model Tropical Ecosystem |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T00%3A35%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Characterizing%20the%20Fluxes%20and%20Age%20Distribution%20of%20Soil%20Water,%20Plant%20Water,%20and%20Deep%20Percolation%20in%20a%20Model%20Tropical%20Ecosystem&rft.jtitle=Water%20resources%20research&rft.au=Evaristo,%20Jaivime&rft.date=2019-04&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=3307&rft.epage=3327&rft.pages=3307-3327&rft.issn=0043-1397&rft.eissn=1944-7973&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2018WR023265&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2228726444%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2228726444&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |