Seasonal and successional trends in streamflow and N after forest removal in small basins, eastern...

Seasonal and successional trends in streamflow and N after forest removal

in small basins, eastern and northwestern US

Julia Jones, Oregon State UniversityDavid Post, CSIRO, Townsville, Australia

Kate Lajtha, Oregon State University

Questions1. What are streamflow responses to forest removal and

regrowth across a range of sites?

2. What might be the implications for N fluxes of streamflow-forest interactions?

3. What are the special opportunities in hydrologic research for ecosystem informatics?

What are the streamflow responses to forest removal and regrowth as a function of

Dry/wet summersSnowpack presence/typeForest type – deciduous broadleaf/evergreen coniferTime since most recent disturbance

Andrews WS1,2 2001

•Even with a treated/control pair, weak causal inferences•Instrumented locations of questionable generality•Out of date treatments•Prediction in ungaged basins

•Long records•Treated/control pairs•Complementary information on ecological processes•Can pose mechanistic hypotheses to be checked by process studies and modeling

Andrews WS9, 2001

Limitations and potentials for “black-box” watershed studies

Questions – causes and consequences

Causes:Vegetation physiology Physical vegetation-atmosphere interactions SnowpackDrainage

Consequences:Water availability for plantsBiogeochemistryStream ecology

Andrews WS 10, 1968

Time scales of interest to ecologists and hydrologists

DiurnalStormSeasonalSuccessionalClimate changeEvolutionary

Andrews WS 10, 1977

Instrumented sites (red dots) used in this study–

eastern and western forests

Deciduous/conifer

Seasonal/transient/no snowpack

Types of treatments:

IntentionalVegetation manipulationDrainage manipulation

InadvertentNatural disturbanceClimate changeEdge effects

Andrews WS 1, 1966

Analysis of streamflow change in treated/control comparisons

•Essence of analysis - look at change over time in ratio of treated/control flows

•Examine daily flows for 5-yr periods, before and after forest removal

•Consider both absolute and relative changes and their consequences

•Absolutely large changes•Absolutely small, relatively large changes at key periods

•Consider whole set of basin pairs as ~multifactorial experiment

Site Andrews Coweeta Hubbard Brook

Natural Severe wildfire, 1500s; some wildfire, mid-1800s

Severe windthrow during 1835 hurricane

Severe windthrow during 1938 hurricane

Human Grazing, burning on non-forest meadows at high elevations, ~1900

Cherokee spring/fall burning, to 1837; Cultivation, grazing, annual burning 1850- ~1900;

Complete logging, 1919;

Chestnut blight, 1930s-40s;

Extensive logging, 1890-1920;

Salvage after 1938 hurricane

Pre-treatment disturbance histories of sites - state of “control” basins

Basin sizes and disturbance histories

10

100

1000

0 20 40 60 80 100

basin area (ha)

time since most recent forest disturbance (years)

conifer, transient/no snow, treated(Andrews 10; Coyote 3; Caspar C, E)

conifer, seasonal snow, treated(Andrews 1, 6)

deciduous, no snow, treated (Coweeta 7, 13 ,36; Fernow 1, 7)

deciduous, seasonal snow, treated(Hubbard Brook 2, 4, 5)

conifer, transient/no snow, control(Andrews 9; Caspar I; Coyote 4)

conifer, seasonal snow, control(Andrews 2, 8)

deciduous, no snow, control(Coweeta 2, 14, 18, 34, 36)

deciduous, seasonal snow, control(Hubbard Brook 3)

1930 1945 1960 1975 1990 2005

conifer, 150-450 yrs (Andrews 1/2)

conifer, 150-450 yrs (Andrews 6/8)

conifer, 150-450 yrs (Andrews 10/2, 10/9)

conifer, 150 yrs (Coyote 3/4)

conifer, 90 yrs (Caspar C/I)

conifer, 90 yrs (Caspar E/I)

deciduous, 12 yrs (Coweeta 13/14, 13/18, 13/2)

deciduous, 36 yrs (Coweeta 37/36)

deciduous, 36 yrs (Coweeta 7/34, 13/2)

deciduous, 50 yrs (Fernow 1/4)

deciduous, 56 yrs (Fernow 7/4)

deciduous, 27 yrs (Hubbard Brook 2/3)



Lengths of record in experimental basin pairs

Vertical lines are 100% clearcut treatments; HBR 2/3 and Fernow 7/4 had herbicide

Climates of the sites - Hubbard Brook

0123456789

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

streamflow, 58-02, (mm)

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

mintemp, 58-95 (C)maxtemp, 58-95 (C)

0

5

10

15

20

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

precip, 58-02 (mm)snow water equiv (cm)

Climates of Hubbard Brook vs. Andrews

0123456789

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0

5

10

15

20

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0123456789

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0

5

10

15

20

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0123456789

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

streamflow, 64-02 (mm)

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0

5

10

15

20

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0123456789

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


0

5

10

15

20

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


Hubbard Brook vs. Coweeta

Effect of climate, forest type on streamflow by season - Relative changes - Hubbard Brook 2/3

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

herbicide (65-69)1-5 yrs after (70-74)29-34 yrs after (98-02)plus25minus25

warm, moistsnowmelt

Rel

aati

ve c

hang

e (%

) in

str

eam

flow

Relative changes - Hubbard Brook vs. Andrews

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

herbicide (65-69)1-5 yrs after (70-74)29-34 yrs after (98-02)plus25minus25

warm, moistsnowmelt

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

1-5 yrs after (75-79)6-10 yrs after (80-84)24-28 yrs after (98-02)plus25minus25

warm, moistsnowmelt

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

1-5 yrs after, 67-716 to 10 yrs after, 72-7631-35 yrs after, 97-02plus25minus25

warm, moistsnowmelt

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

Rel

aati

ve c

hang

e (%

) in

str

eam

flow

Effect of climate, forest type on streamflow by season - Absolute changes - Hubbard Brook 2/3

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

herbicide (65-69)1-5 yrs after (70-74)29-34 yrs after (98-02)post stdevneg stdev

warm, moistsnowmelt

Abs

olut

e ch

ange

(m

m)

in s

trea

mfl

ow

Absolute changes - Hubbard Brook vs. Andrews

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

herbicide (65-69)1-5 yrs after (70-74)29-34 yrs after (98-02)post stdevneg stdev

warm, moistsnowmelt

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

1-5 yrs after (70-74)6-10 yrs after (75-79)29-33 yrs after (98-02)pos stdevneg stdev

warm, moistsnowmelt

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct

1-5 yrs after, 67-716 to 10 yrs after, 72-7631-35 yrs after, 97-02pos stdevneg stdev

warm, moistsnowmelt

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

1-Oct

31-Oct

1-Dec

31-Dec

31-Jan

1-Mar

1-Apr

1-May

1-Jun

1-Jul

1-Aug

31-Aug

1-Oct


warm, moistsnowmelt

Abs

olut

e ch

ange

(m

m)

in s

trea

mfl

ow

Effect of time since forest removal, by season

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

conifer, seasonal snow

conifer, transient/no snow

deciduous, seasonal snow

deciduous, transient snow

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Delayed August deficits

Persistent spring surpluses and deficits

5-yr post-treatment periods; periods 4-5 are 15-25 years after forest removal

Delayed summer deficits

Abs

olut

e ch

ange

(m

m)

in s

trea

mfl

ow

Effect of time since pre-treatment forest disturbance

-200-150-100

-500

50100150200250300350400450500

10 100 10000

50100150200250300350400450500550600650700

10 100 1000

conifers, seasonal snow

conifers, transient.no snow

deciduous, seasonal snow

deciduous, transient/no snow

1 to 5 yrs after 15 to 25 yrs after

y = 138Ln(x) - 332r2 = 0.45

y = 142Ln(x) - 524r2 = 0.71

Abs

olut

e ch

ange

(m

m)

in a

nnua

l str

eam

flow

•“out of controls?” The treated/control relationship in paired-basin experiments, rather than a black and white one, can be viewed as a function of continuous – and continuously changing – differences between basins in vegetation structure, composition, and climate.

•Time scales, scaling: Paired-basin records provide the opportunity to quantify and compare streamflow responses at multiple temporal scales, including storm events, seasons, successional periods, and decadal climate change.

•Regionalization: Small paired-basin experiments permit comparison (prediction?) of streamflow responses across vegetation types and treatments, climates, and basin scales.

General lessons about paired-basin studies

Hydrologic interactions with basin-scale N fluxes

•Concentration vs. flux

•Nitrate vs. dissolved organic N

Mechanisms:•Biologically controlled (uptake, retention, immobilization) vs.•Physically controlled (fast/slow flowpaths, water table variations) or •Biophysical interactions – spatial patterns of labile forms, changing flowpaths

•Three kinds of patterns

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1-Jan

31-Jan

2-Mar

1-Apr

2-May

1-Jun

2-Jul

1-Aug

1-Sep

1-Oct

1-Nov

1-Dec

1-Jan

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1-Jan

31-Jan

2-Mar

1-Apr

2-May

1-Jun

2-Jul

1-Aug

1-Sep

1-Oct

1-Nov

1-Dec

1-Jan

Coweeta 18

Coweeta 36

Coweeta 18

Coweeta 36D

isch

arge

(m

m)

Month (Jan-Dec) Month (Jan-Dec)

5

0

mg/

L

5

0

mg/

L

Nit

rate

con

cent

rati

on (

Swan

k et

al.,

199

7)Coweeta: Very low nitrate concentration, peaks during

summer

Andrews: DON concentration peaks in fall, as hydrograph rises

00.010.020.030.040.050.060.07

JulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJun

mg L-1

0510152025303540

cm

WS9

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04


mg L-1

-50510152025303540

cmDONStream discharge (cm)Precipitation (cm)Transpiration (cm)

WS2

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04


mg L-1

-50510152025303540

cm

WS8

Vanderbilt et al., 2002

DON precip discharge

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jan-64 Jan-65 Jan-66 Jan-67 Jan-68 Jan-69 Jan-70 Jan-71 Jan-72 Jan-73 Jan-74 Jan-75 Jan-76

Nitrate concentration (Likens, 1977)

Hubbard Brook: high N concentration, peaks during snowmelt

5

0

mg/

L

Discharge

Opportunities for eco-hydrology studies

•How does vegetation influence water fluxes to/from atmosphere?

•How does water use influence carbon, nitrogen fluxes?

Acknowledgements

•NSF Long-term studies

•NSF LTER grants to Andrews, Coweeta, Hubbard Brook

•USFS support of long-term monitoring at Andrews, Caspar Creek, Coweeta, Coyote Creek, Fernow, and Hubbard Brook Experimental Forests

•USFS support of Hydro DB•Data and expertise were provided by the following USDA Forest Service personnel: C. Creel, G. Downing, R. Fredriksen, D. Henshaw, A. Levno, G. Lienkaemper, J. Moreau, S. Remillard, (Andrews); J. Lewis (Caspar); N. Gardiner, W. Swank, L. Swift (Coweeta); M.B. Adams (Fernow); and J. Campbell, C. Cogbill, J. Hornbeck, W. Martin (Hubbard Brook). We would like to thank J.J. Major and F.J. Swanson for helpful discussions. J. Hornbeck, J. Lewis, J. McDonnell, L. Reid, W. Swank for reviews.

Date post:	15-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
View:	217 times
Download:	1 times

Seasonal and successional trends in streamflow and N after forest removal in small basins, eastern...

Documents