Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:37:49.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

31 - The wet-canopy water balance of a Costa Rican cloud forest during the dry season

from Part III - Hydrometeorology of tropical montane cloud forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2011

S. Schmid
Affiliation:
University of Bern, Switzerland
R. Burkard
Affiliation:
University of Bern, Switzerland
K. F. A. Frumau
Affiliation:
VU University, Netherlands
C. Tobón
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia
L.A. Bruijnzeel
Affiliation:
VU University, Netherlands
R. Siegwolf
Affiliation:
Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
W. Eugster
Affiliation:
ETH Zurich, Switzerland
L. A. Bruijnzeel
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
F. N. Scatena
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
L. S. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

ABSTRACT

Fog deposition, precipitation, throughfall, and stemflow were measured in a windward tropical montane cloud forest near Monteverde, Costa Rica, for a 65-day period during the dry season of 2003. Net fog deposition was measured directly with the eddy covariance method and amounted to 1.2 ± 0.1 mm day−1 (mean ± standard error). Fog water deposition was 4–7% of incident rainfall for the entire period. Stable isotope concentrations (δ18O and δ 2H) were determined in a large number of samples of each water component. Comparisons between direct fog deposition measurements and the results of a mass-balance model using the stable isotopes as tracers indicated that the latter might be a good tool to estimate fog deposition in the absence of direct measurement under many (but not all) conditions. At 506 mm, measured water inputs over the 65 days (fog plus rain) fell short by 46 mm compared to the canopy output of 552 mm (throughfall, stemflow, and evaporation). The discrepancy is attributed to underestimation of rainfall during conditions of high wind.

INTRODUCTION

Montane cloud forests are widely believed to receive significant extra amounts of water to the water budget by the capture of water from passing fog and low cloud.

Type
Chapter
Information
Tropical Montane Cloud Forests
Science for Conservation and Management
, pp. 302 - 308
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beiderwieden, E., Wolff, V., Hsia, Y. J., and Klemm, O. (2008). It goes both ways: measurements of simultaneous evapotranspiration and fog droplet deposition at a montane cloud forest. Hydrological Processes 22: 4181–4189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beswick, K. M., Hargreaves, K. J., Gallagher, M. W., Choularton, T., and Fowler, D. (1991). Size-resolved measurements of cloud droplet deposition velocity to a forest canopy using an eddy correlation technique. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 117: 623–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M. B., Roca, I., Vallejo, A., et al. (1996). A Valuation Analysis of the Role of Cloud Forests in Watershed Protection: Sierra de las Minas Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala and Cusuco N.P., Honduras. Philadelphia, PA: RARE Center for Tropical Conservation.Google Scholar
Bruijnzeel, L. A. (2005). Tropical montane cloud forests: a unique hydrological case. In Forests, Water and People in the Humid Tropics, eds. Bonell, M. and Bruijnzeel, L. A., pp. 462–483. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruijnzeel, L. A., and Proctor, J. (1995). Hydrology and biogeochemistry of tropical montane cloud forests: what do we really know? In Tropical Montane Cloud Forests, eds. Hamilton, L. S., Juvik, J. O., and Scatena, F. N., pp. 38–78. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruijnzeel, L. A., Eugster, W., and Burkard, R. (2005). Fog as a hydrological input. In Encyclopaedia of Hydrological Sciences, ed. Anderson, M. G., pp. 559–582. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Brunel, J. -P., Walker, G. K., and Kenneth-Smith, A. K. (1995). Field validation of isotopic procedures for determining sources of water used by plants in a semi-arid environment. Journal of Hydrology 167: 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkard, R., Bützberger, P., and Eugster, W. (2003). Vertical fogwater flux measurement above an elevated forest canopy at the Lägeren research site, Switzerland. Atmospheric Environment 37: 2979–2990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, K. L., Nadkarni, N. M., Schaeffer, D., and Gholz, H. L. (1998). Atmospheric deposition and net retention of ions by the canopy in a tropical montane forest, Monteverde, Costa Rica. Journal of Tropical Ecology 14: 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, K. L., Lawton, R. O., and Butler, P. R. (2000). The physical environment. In Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest, eds. Nadkarni, N. M. and Wheelwright, N. T., pp. 15–34. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Demoz, B. B., Collett, J. L., and Daube, B. C. (1996). On the Caltech Active Strand Cloudwater Collectors. Atmospheric Research 41: 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eugster, W., Burkard, R., Holwerda, F., Scatena, F. N., and Bruijnzeel, L. A. (2006). Characteristics of fog and fog-water fluxes in a Puerto Rican elfin cloud forest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139: 288–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Førland, E. J., Allerup, P., Dahlström, B., et al. (1996). Manual for Operational Correction of Nordic Precipitation Data. Oslo, Norway: Norwegian Meteorological Institute.Google Scholar
Goodman, J. (1985). The collection of fog drip. Water Resources Research 21: 392–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guswa, A. J., Rhodes, A. L., and Newell, S. E. (2007). Importance of orographic precipitation to the water resources of Monteverde, Costa Rica. Advances in Water Resources 30: 2098–2112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafkenscheid, R. L. L. J., Bruijnzeel, L. A., Jeu, R. A. M., and Bink, N. J. (2002). Water budgets of two upper montane rain forests of contrasting stature in the Blue Mountains, Jamaica. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Colloquium on Hydrology and Water Management in the Humid Tropics, Technical Documents in Hydrology No. 52, ed. Gladwell, J. S., pp. 399–424. Paris: IHP-UNESCO, and Panama City: CATHALAC.Google Scholar
Harr, R. D. (1982). Fog drip in the Bull Run municipal watershed, Oregon. Water Resources Bulletin 18: 785–789.Google Scholar
Holder, C. D. (2003). Fog precipitation in the Sierra de las Minas Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. Hydrological Processes 17: 2001–2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holwerda, F., Burkard, R., Eugster, W., et al. (2006a). Estimating fog deposition at a Puerto Rican elfin cloud forest site: comparison of the water-budget and eddy covariance methods. Hydrological Processes 20: 2669–2692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holwerda, F., Scatena, F. N., and Bruijnzeel, L. A. (2006b). Throughfall in a Puerto Rican lower montane rain forest: a comparison of sampling strategies. Journal of Hydrology 327: 592–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,IAEA (2002). Special issue on the global network of isotopes in precipitation. Water and Environment Newsletter 16: 5.
Juvik, J. O., and Ekern, P. C. (1978). A Climatology of Mountain Fog on Mauna Loa, Hawaii Island, Technical Report No. 118. Honolulu, HI: Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawai'i.Google Scholar
Köhler, L., Tobón, C., Frumau, K. F. A., and Bruijnzeel, L. A. (2007). Biomass and water storage of epiphytes in old-growth and secondary montane rain forest stands in Costa Rica. Plant Ecology 193: 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, C. R., and Marques, A. O. (1988). Spatial variability of throughfall and stemflow measurements in Amazonian rain forest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 43: 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M. (1984). Rates and mechanisms of cloud water deposition to a subalpine balsam fir forest. Atmospheric Environment 18: 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McJannet, D., Wallace, J. S., and Reddell, P. (2007). Precipitation interception in Australian tropical rainforests. II. Altitudinal gradients of cloud interception, stemflow, throughfall and interception. Hydrological Processes 21: 1703–1718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteith, J. L. (1965). Evaporation and the environment. Symposium of the Society for Experimental Biology 19: 205–234.Google ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, A. L., Guswa, A. J., and Newell, S. E. (2006). Seasonal variation in the stable isotopic composition of precipitation in the tropical montane forests of Monteverde, Costa Rica. Water Resources Research 42, W11402, doi:10.1029/2005WR004535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, A., Regalado, C. M., and Aschan, G. (2008). Fog water collection in a subtropical elfin laurel forest of the Garajonay National Park (Canary Islands): a combined approach using artificial fog catchers and a physically based impaction model. Journal of Hydrometeorology 9: 920–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharon, D. (1980). The distribution of hydrologically effective rainfall incident on sloping ground. Journal of Hydrology 46: 165–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigmon, J. T., Gilliam, F. G., and Partin, M. E. (1989). Precipitation and throughfall chemistry for a montane hardwood ecosystem: potential contributions from cloud water. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 19: 1240–1247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slinn, W. G. N. (1982). Predictions for particle deposition to vegetative canopies. Atmospheric Environment 16: 1785–1794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thalmann, E., Burkard, R., Wrzesinsky, T., Eugster, W., and Klemm, O. (2002). Ion fluxes from fog and rain to an agricultural and a forest ecosystem in Europe. Atmospheric Research 64: 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeulen, A. T., Wyers, G. P., Römer, F. G., et al. (1997). Fog deposition on a coniferous forest in the Netherlands. Atmospheric Environment 31: 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vong, R. J., and Kowalski, A. S. (1995). Eddy correlation measurements of size dependent cloud droplet turbulent fluxes to complex terrain. Tellus Series B 47: 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walmsley, J. L., Schemenauer, R. S., and Bridgman, H. A. (1996). A method for estimating the hydrological input from fog in mountainous terrain. Journal of Applied Meteorology 35: 2237–2249.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, X. W., and Arp, P. A. (1994). Fog contributions to the water budget of forested watersheds in the Canadian Maritime Provinces: a generalized algorithm for low elevations. Atmosphere–Ocean 32: 553–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zadroga, F. (1981). The hydrological importance of a montane cloud forest area of Costa Rica. In Tropical Agricultural Hydrology, eds. Lal, R. and Russell, E. W., pp. 59–73. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×