Divergence in Quantifying ET with Independent Methods in a Primary Karst Forest under Complex Terrain

Author:

Li Qingyun123,Liu Wenjie14,Zheng Lu35,Liu Shengyuan6,Zhang Ang2ORCID,Wang Peng1,Jin Yan7ORCID,Liu Qian1,Song Bo1

Affiliation:

1. Key Laboratory of Agro-Forestry Environmental Processes and Ecological Regulation of Hainan Province, College of Ecology and Environment, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China

2. Institute of Spice and Beverage Research, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences, Wangning 571533, China

3. Guangxi Youyiguan Forest Ecosystem Research Station, Youyiguan Forest Ecosystem Observation and Research Station of Guangxi, Pingxiang 532600, China

4. Sanya Tropical Ecosystem Carbon Source and Sink Field Scientific Observation and Research Station, Sanya 572022, China

5. Tropical Forestry Experimental Center, Chinese Academy of Forestry Sciences, Pingxiang 610100, China

6. Administration of Nonggang National Nature Reserve of Guangxi, Longzhou 532400, China

7. School of Ecology and Environment Science, Yunnan University, Kunming 650504, China

Abstract

A multi-technology study of evapotranspiration was conducted on the tropical seasonal forest in Nonggang Karst of Guangxi. From January 2019 to June 2020, three independent methods, including the eddy covariance method (EC), resistance method and Penman–Monteith method (PM), were used to estimate the annual evapotranspiration (ET). We found that the estimated annual ET varied dramatically: with values of 456.66 mm (EC), 292.24 mm (resistance method) and 699.59 mm (PM), respectively. The values were all lower than the reference evapotranspiration (853.26 mm year−1) and potential evapotranspiration (1030.61 mm year−1). The EC method had an energy imbalance problem, with an annual energy closure of 46% at the annual scale. The annual estimate of evapotranspiration after a 100% energy closure correction was 915.03 mm, which was higher than the reference evapotranspiration (853.26 mm), so the corrected annual estimates were considered to be unreasonable. Comparing the resistance method with the EC method, it was found that not only is the annual evapotranspiration (ET) lower in the EC method, but the sensible heat flux is also lower, indicating that the resistivity method has lower energy closure than the EC method, suggesting that this method is not suitable for use in karst forests. When comparing the PM method with the EC method, surface conductivity is the most critical parameter. As the most difficult parameter to quantify in the Penman–Monteith equation, the key influencing factor, maximum stomatal conductance, was carefully explored. In the selection of maximum stomatal conductance, the sensitivity of annual evapotranspiration to maximum stomatal conductance values was first analyzed. It was found that the sensitivity is strong before 0.018 m s−1. When gsmax is 0.0025 m s−1, the annual evapotranspiration (456 mm) is equivalent to that of the EC method, and it slowly decreases after reaching 0.018 ms−1. This indicates that when gsmax is 0.0025 m s−1, the annual evapotranspiration is lower or higher than the critical value of the EC method. Therefore, different maximum stomatal conductance values will result in annual evapotranspiration based on the PM method being higher or lower than the annual evapotranspiration measured by the EC method. In order to obtain a more accurate maximum stomatal conductance, the surface conductance was calculated based on the PM equation, using the maximum stomatal conductance of four key tree species in the study area. The FAO universal fixed surface conductance of 1/70 m s−1 was used to constrain the calculation. The reason for this treatment is that the reference underlying surface of FAO is a uniformly flat and well-watered grassland, with a larger surface conductance than forests. The results showed that the selected maximum stomatal conductance values were all within a reasonable range, and the calculated annual evapotranspiration values were 267.28 mm, 596.42 mm, 699.59 mm and 736.90 mm, respectively. Considering the EC method as the lower limit (456.66 mm), the reference evapotranspiration as the upper limit (853.26 mm) and the specific vegetation in the study area, the estimated annual evapotranspiration of the primary forest in the Nonggang karst area of Guangxi (PM method) falls within the range of 596.42 mm to 736.90 mm, which is relatively reasonable.

Funder

scientific research capacity building project for the Youyiguan Forest Ecosystem Observation and Research Station of Guangxi

Guangxi Science and Technology Base and Talent Project

Key Research and Development Project of Hainan Province

National Natural Science Foundation of China

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Water Science and Technology,Aquatic Science,Geography, Planning and Development,Biochemistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3