Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts
The reliance of 10 Utah (USA) aspen forests on direct infiltration of growing season rain versus an additional subsurface water subsidy was determined from a trait‐ and process‐based model of stomatal control. The model simulated the relationship between water supply to the root zone versus canopy t...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Water resources research 2019-03, Vol.55 (3), p.1833-1848 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1848 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 1833 |
| container_title | Water resources research |
| container_volume | 55 |
| creator | Love, D. M. Venturas, M. D. Sperry, J. S. Brooks, P. D. Pettit, J. L. Wang, Y. Anderegg, W. R. L. Tai, X. Mackay, D. S. |
| description | The reliance of 10 Utah (USA) aspen forests on direct infiltration of growing season rain versus an additional subsurface water subsidy was determined from a trait‐ and process‐based model of stomatal control. The model simulated the relationship between water supply to the root zone versus canopy transpiration and assimilation over a growing season. Canopy flux thresholds were identified that distinguished nonstressed, stressed, and dying stands. We found growing season rain and local soil moisture were insufficient for the survival of 5 of 10 stands. Six stands required a substantial subsidy (31–80% of potential seasonal transpiration) to avoid water stress and maximize photosynthetic potential. Subsidy dependence increased with stand hydraulic conductance. Four of the six “subsidized” stands were predicted to be stressed during the survey year owing to a subsidy shortfall. Since winter snowpack is closely related to groundwater recharge in the region, we compared winter precipitation with tree‐ring chronologies. Consistent with model predictions, chronologies were more sensitive to snowpack in subsidized stands than in nonsubsidized ones. The results imply that aspen stand health in the region is more coupled to winter snowpack than to growing season water supply. Winters are predicted to have less precipitation as snow, indicating a stressful future for the region's aspen forests.
Key Points
Most aspen stands in Utah cannot survive on growing season rain and local soil moisture as their only water supply
Aspen stands in Utah are highly dependent on a groundwater subsidy and vulnerable to any subsidy shortfall
Aspen stand health in Utah will be threatened by diminished winter snowpack |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1029/2018WR023468 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2986736339</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2209655202</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3632-480687969a7aeaf37118513533a62ef314f21fb3b670b87f674e8e694ad0b3953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqWw8QEssTAQsH2OHbNV4V-lSkgtqGPkJDakSp1iJ0L99riUATEwne7eT3fvHkLnlFxTwtQNIzRbzgkDLrIDNKKK80QqCYdoRAiHhIKSx-gkhBUhlKdCjpC-MxvjauMqgzuLJyF2eNFrVwfcOazxYijD4K2O-lL3xn8Pmnp7i6frTdtUum86F7DtPM7bZh0RnL9r92Z2uq76cIqOrG6DOfupY_T6cP-SPyWz58dpPpklGgSwhGdEZFIJpaU22oKkNEsppABaMGOBcsuoLaEUkpSZtEJykxmhuK5JCSqFMbrc79347mMwoS_WTahM22pnuiEUTGVCxlOgInrxB111g3fRXcEYUSJNWQxxjK72VOW7ELyxxcbHB_22oKTY5V38zjvisMc_m9Zs_2WL5TyfM5Apgy-U2H9h</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2209655202</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Love, D. M. ; Venturas, M. D. ; Sperry, J. S. ; Brooks, P. D. ; Pettit, J. L. ; Wang, Y. ; Anderegg, W. R. L. ; Tai, X. ; Mackay, D. S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Love, D. M. ; Venturas, M. D. ; Sperry, J. S. ; Brooks, P. D. ; Pettit, J. L. ; Wang, Y. ; Anderegg, W. R. L. ; Tai, X. ; Mackay, D. S.</creatorcontrib><description>The reliance of 10 Utah (USA) aspen forests on direct infiltration of growing season rain versus an additional subsurface water subsidy was determined from a trait‐ and process‐based model of stomatal control. The model simulated the relationship between water supply to the root zone versus canopy transpiration and assimilation over a growing season. Canopy flux thresholds were identified that distinguished nonstressed, stressed, and dying stands. We found growing season rain and local soil moisture were insufficient for the survival of 5 of 10 stands. Six stands required a substantial subsidy (31–80% of potential seasonal transpiration) to avoid water stress and maximize photosynthetic potential. Subsidy dependence increased with stand hydraulic conductance. Four of the six “subsidized” stands were predicted to be stressed during the survey year owing to a subsidy shortfall. Since winter snowpack is closely related to groundwater recharge in the region, we compared winter precipitation with tree‐ring chronologies. Consistent with model predictions, chronologies were more sensitive to snowpack in subsidized stands than in nonsubsidized ones. The results imply that aspen stand health in the region is more coupled to winter snowpack than to growing season water supply. Winters are predicted to have less precipitation as snow, indicating a stressful future for the region's aspen forests.
Key Points
Most aspen stands in Utah cannot survive on growing season rain and local soil moisture as their only water supply
Aspen stands in Utah are highly dependent on a groundwater subsidy and vulnerable to any subsidy shortfall
Aspen stand health in Utah will be threatened by diminished winter snowpack</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1397</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7973</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2018WR023468</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Atmospheric precipitations ; Canopies ; Canopy ; Climate change ; Computer simulation ; Conductance ; Dependence ; Environmental impact ; Forests ; Groundwater ; Groundwater recharge ; Growing season ; growth rings ; hydraulic conductivity ; Infiltration ; Mathematical models ; Photosynthesis ; plant hydraulics ; Precipitation ; Predictions ; Rain ; Resistance ; rhizosphere ; Root zone ; Seasons ; snow ; Snowpack ; Soil ; Soil moisture ; soil water ; Stomata ; Subsidies ; Subsurface water ; subsurface water subsidy ; Surveying ; surveys ; Survival ; Transpiration ; tree mortality ; Utah ; Water shortages ; Water stress ; Water supply ; Winter ; Winter precipitation ; xylem</subject><ispartof>Water resources research, 2019-03, Vol.55 (3), p.1833-1848</ispartof><rights>2018. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><rights>2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3632-480687969a7aeaf37118513533a62ef314f21fb3b670b87f674e8e694ad0b3953</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3632-480687969a7aeaf37118513533a62ef314f21fb3b670b87f674e8e694ad0b3953</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3729-2743 ; 0000-0002-0582-6990 ; 0000-0001-7881-7393 ; 0000-0003-0477-9755 ; 0000-0001-9201-1062 ; 0000-0001-5972-9064 ; 0000-0002-3040-3121</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%2F2018WR023468$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2018WR023468$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,11493,27901,27902,45550,45551,46443,46867</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Love, D. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venturas, M. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sperry, J. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, P. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pettit, J. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderegg, W. R. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tai, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackay, D. S.</creatorcontrib><title>Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts</title><title>Water resources research</title><description>The reliance of 10 Utah (USA) aspen forests on direct infiltration of growing season rain versus an additional subsurface water subsidy was determined from a trait‐ and process‐based model of stomatal control. The model simulated the relationship between water supply to the root zone versus canopy transpiration and assimilation over a growing season. Canopy flux thresholds were identified that distinguished nonstressed, stressed, and dying stands. We found growing season rain and local soil moisture were insufficient for the survival of 5 of 10 stands. Six stands required a substantial subsidy (31–80% of potential seasonal transpiration) to avoid water stress and maximize photosynthetic potential. Subsidy dependence increased with stand hydraulic conductance. Four of the six “subsidized” stands were predicted to be stressed during the survey year owing to a subsidy shortfall. Since winter snowpack is closely related to groundwater recharge in the region, we compared winter precipitation with tree‐ring chronologies. Consistent with model predictions, chronologies were more sensitive to snowpack in subsidized stands than in nonsubsidized ones. The results imply that aspen stand health in the region is more coupled to winter snowpack than to growing season water supply. Winters are predicted to have less precipitation as snow, indicating a stressful future for the region's aspen forests.
Key Points
Most aspen stands in Utah cannot survive on growing season rain and local soil moisture as their only water supply
Aspen stands in Utah are highly dependent on a groundwater subsidy and vulnerable to any subsidy shortfall
Aspen stand health in Utah will be threatened by diminished winter snowpack</description><subject>Atmospheric precipitations</subject><subject>Canopies</subject><subject>Canopy</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Conductance</subject><subject>Dependence</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Groundwater</subject><subject>Groundwater recharge</subject><subject>Growing season</subject><subject>growth rings</subject><subject>hydraulic conductivity</subject><subject>Infiltration</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Photosynthesis</subject><subject>plant hydraulics</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Rain</subject><subject>Resistance</subject><subject>rhizosphere</subject><subject>Root zone</subject><subject>Seasons</subject><subject>snow</subject><subject>Snowpack</subject><subject>Soil</subject><subject>Soil moisture</subject><subject>soil water</subject><subject>Stomata</subject><subject>Subsidies</subject><subject>Subsurface water</subject><subject>subsurface water subsidy</subject><subject>Surveying</subject><subject>surveys</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Transpiration</subject><subject>tree mortality</subject><subject>Utah</subject><subject>Water shortages</subject><subject>Water stress</subject><subject>Water supply</subject><subject>Winter</subject><subject>Winter precipitation</subject><subject>xylem</subject><issn>0043-1397</issn><issn>1944-7973</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqWw8QEssTAQsH2OHbNV4V-lSkgtqGPkJDakSp1iJ0L99riUATEwne7eT3fvHkLnlFxTwtQNIzRbzgkDLrIDNKKK80QqCYdoRAiHhIKSx-gkhBUhlKdCjpC-MxvjauMqgzuLJyF2eNFrVwfcOazxYijD4K2O-lL3xn8Pmnp7i6frTdtUum86F7DtPM7bZh0RnL9r92Z2uq76cIqOrG6DOfupY_T6cP-SPyWz58dpPpklGgSwhGdEZFIJpaU22oKkNEsppABaMGOBcsuoLaEUkpSZtEJykxmhuK5JCSqFMbrc79347mMwoS_WTahM22pnuiEUTGVCxlOgInrxB111g3fRXcEYUSJNWQxxjK72VOW7ELyxxcbHB_22oKTY5V38zjvisMc_m9Zs_2WL5TyfM5Apgy-U2H9h</recordid><startdate>201903</startdate><enddate>201903</enddate><creator>Love, D. M.</creator><creator>Venturas, M. D.</creator><creator>Sperry, J. S.</creator><creator>Brooks, P. D.</creator><creator>Pettit, J. L.</creator><creator>Wang, Y.</creator><creator>Anderegg, W. R. L.</creator><creator>Tai, X.</creator><creator>Mackay, D. S.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><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><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3729-2743</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0582-6990</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-7393</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0477-9755</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9201-1062</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5972-9064</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3040-3121</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201903</creationdate><title>Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts</title><author>Love, D. M. ; Venturas, M. D. ; Sperry, J. S. ; Brooks, P. D. ; Pettit, J. L. ; Wang, Y. ; Anderegg, W. R. L. ; Tai, X. ; Mackay, D. S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3632-480687969a7aeaf37118513533a62ef314f21fb3b670b87f674e8e694ad0b3953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Atmospheric precipitations</topic><topic>Canopies</topic><topic>Canopy</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Conductance</topic><topic>Dependence</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Groundwater</topic><topic>Groundwater recharge</topic><topic>Growing season</topic><topic>growth rings</topic><topic>hydraulic conductivity</topic><topic>Infiltration</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Photosynthesis</topic><topic>plant hydraulics</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Rain</topic><topic>Resistance</topic><topic>rhizosphere</topic><topic>Root zone</topic><topic>Seasons</topic><topic>snow</topic><topic>Snowpack</topic><topic>Soil</topic><topic>Soil moisture</topic><topic>soil water</topic><topic>Stomata</topic><topic>Subsidies</topic><topic>Subsurface water</topic><topic>subsurface water subsidy</topic><topic>Surveying</topic><topic>surveys</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Transpiration</topic><topic>tree mortality</topic><topic>Utah</topic><topic>Water shortages</topic><topic>Water stress</topic><topic>Water supply</topic><topic>Winter</topic><topic>Winter precipitation</topic><topic>xylem</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Love, D. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venturas, M. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sperry, J. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, P. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pettit, J. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderegg, W. R. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tai, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackay, D. S.</creatorcontrib><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><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Love, D. M.</au><au>Venturas, M. D.</au><au>Sperry, J. S.</au><au>Brooks, P. D.</au><au>Pettit, J. L.</au><au>Wang, Y.</au><au>Anderegg, W. R. L.</au><au>Tai, X.</au><au>Mackay, D. S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts</atitle><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle><date>2019-03</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1833</spage><epage>1848</epage><pages>1833-1848</pages><issn>0043-1397</issn><eissn>1944-7973</eissn><abstract>The reliance of 10 Utah (USA) aspen forests on direct infiltration of growing season rain versus an additional subsurface water subsidy was determined from a trait‐ and process‐based model of stomatal control. The model simulated the relationship between water supply to the root zone versus canopy transpiration and assimilation over a growing season. Canopy flux thresholds were identified that distinguished nonstressed, stressed, and dying stands. We found growing season rain and local soil moisture were insufficient for the survival of 5 of 10 stands. Six stands required a substantial subsidy (31–80% of potential seasonal transpiration) to avoid water stress and maximize photosynthetic potential. Subsidy dependence increased with stand hydraulic conductance. Four of the six “subsidized” stands were predicted to be stressed during the survey year owing to a subsidy shortfall. Since winter snowpack is closely related to groundwater recharge in the region, we compared winter precipitation with tree‐ring chronologies. Consistent with model predictions, chronologies were more sensitive to snowpack in subsidized stands than in nonsubsidized ones. The results imply that aspen stand health in the region is more coupled to winter snowpack than to growing season water supply. Winters are predicted to have less precipitation as snow, indicating a stressful future for the region's aspen forests.
Key Points
Most aspen stands in Utah cannot survive on growing season rain and local soil moisture as their only water supply
Aspen stands in Utah are highly dependent on a groundwater subsidy and vulnerable to any subsidy shortfall
Aspen stand health in Utah will be threatened by diminished winter snowpack</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1029/2018WR023468</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3729-2743</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0582-6990</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-7393</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0477-9755</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9201-1062</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5972-9064</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3040-3121</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0043-1397 |
| ispartof | Water resources research, 2019-03, Vol.55 (3), p.1833-1848 |
| issn | 0043-1397 1944-7973 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2986736339 |
| source | Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Atmospheric precipitations Canopies Canopy Climate change Computer simulation Conductance Dependence Environmental impact Forests Groundwater Groundwater recharge Growing season growth rings hydraulic conductivity Infiltration Mathematical models Photosynthesis plant hydraulics Precipitation Predictions Rain Resistance rhizosphere Root zone Seasons snow Snowpack Soil Soil moisture soil water Stomata Subsidies Subsurface water subsurface water subsidy Surveying surveys Survival Transpiration tree mortality Utah Water shortages Water stress Water supply Winter Winter precipitation xylem |
| title | Dependence of Aspen Stands on a Subsurface Water Subsidy: Implications for Climate Change Impacts |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T11%3A01%3A40IST&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=Dependence%20of%20Aspen%20Stands%20on%20a%20Subsurface%20Water%20Subsidy:%20Implications%20for%20Climate%20Change%20Impacts&rft.jtitle=Water%20resources%20research&rft.au=Love,%20D.%20M.&rft.date=2019-03&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1833&rft.epage=1848&rft.pages=1833-1848&rft.issn=0043-1397&rft.eissn=1944-7973&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2018WR023468&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2209655202%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=2209655202&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |