اندازه‌گیری و سهم ساقاب تولیدی درتک درختان بلندمازو و پلت درناحیه رویشی جنگل‌های هیرکانی
محورهای موضوعی : جنگلداری
سیوان نیکخواه
1
(دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه جنگلداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، نور، ایران)
سید محسن حسینی
2
(استاد، گروه جنگلداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، نور، ایران)
عبدالواحد خالدی درویشان
3
(استادیار، گروه آبخیزداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، نور، ایران)
امید فتحی زاده
4
(دانشجوی دکتری، گروه جنگلداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، نور، ایران)
کلید واژه: بلندمازو, پلت, ساقاب, ضریب زبری پوست,
چکیده مقاله :
پژوهش حاضر با هدف برآورد میزان ساقاب تک درختان بلندمازو Quercus castaneifolia C.A.M)) و پلت (Acer velutinum Boiss) طی دوره قبل خزان و خزان در دانشکده منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس شهرستان نور مازندران انجام شد. ساقاب با استفاده از جمع‌آوری کننده‌های مارپیچی که در ارتفاع برابر سینه درختان نمونه ساقاب نصب شده بود جمع‌آوری و مقدار بارندگی کل نیز با استفاده از 5 جمع‌آوری‌کننده باران در نزدیک‌ترین فضای باز نسبت به درختان اندازه‌گیری شد. اندازه‌گیری بارندگی و ساق‌آب در 4 بارندگی دوره قبل خزان مجموع 114 میلی‌متر و 7 بارندگی دوره خزان مجموع 119 میلی‌متر انجام شد. متوسط ساقاب درختان بلندمازو و پلت به‌ترتیب 62/0 و 7/5 درصد بارندگی کل دوره قبل خزان و 64/0 و 65/7 درصد بارندگی کل دوره خزان بدست آمد. نتایج نشان داد طی دوره مطالعه، بین ساقاب و مقدار بارندگی کل رابطه مثبت و معنی‌داری وجود داشت. همچنین بر طبق نتایج پژوهش حاضر رابطه بین نسبت ساقاب به بارندگی کل گونه بلندمازو دوره خزان (85/0=2R) قوی‌تر از دوره قبل خزان (35/0=2R) بود حال آن‌که گونه پلت تقریباً در هر دو دوره قبل خزان (92/0=2R) و خزان (67/0=2R) رابطه نسبتاً قوی بین نسبت ساقاب به بارندگی مشاهده شد. به‌طور کلی بر طبق نتایج پژوهش حاضر گونه بلندمازو به‌دلیل داشتن پوست شیاردار و زبر ، سهم ساقاب از بارندگی به‌طور متوسط 9 برابر بیش‌تر از گونه پلت بود. این مطالعه نشان داد که پلت ساقاب بیشتری نسبت به بلندمازو تولید می‌کند و دلیل آن پوست صاف پلت و وجود ظرفیت نگهداری آب پوست کم پلت است.
In this paper amounts of stemflow for the Quercus castaneifolia C.A.M and Acer velutinum Boiss trees were investigated during the leafy and leafless period in the campus of the faculty of Natural Resources of Tarbiat Modares University, in Mazandaran province Noor city. Stemflow was collected by spiral pipes installed at the breast height and amount of total rainfall was measured using 5 rainfall collectors at the nearest open space. Measurement of rainfall and steamflow for 4 times at leafy period with total of 114 mm and for 7 times at leafless period with total of 119 mm performed. Average amount of stemflow for the Oak and maple trees were 0.64 and 5.7 percent of total rainfall respectively for the leafy period and for the leafless period 0.62 and 7.65 percent of total rainfall measured. The results showed that in both periods and both species, there was a significant positive correlation between the stemflow and the amount of rainfall. Also, according to the results of this study relationship between stemflow over rainfall for the:Oak in leafless period (R2=0.85) is stronger than leafy period (R2=0.35), whereas for the maple both period of leafless (R2=0.67) and leafy (R2=0.92) period relatively strong relationship between the rainfall over stemflow observed. Generally, according to this paper for the:Oak, due to the grooved and rough skin, stemflow share of rainfall averagely 9 times more than maple obtained. Although the study indicated that maple is more than that of oak produced Stemflow because was found to be highly correlated with higher bark water storage capacity as well as higher bark roughness of the oak trees.
References
1) Ahmadi, M.T., P. Attarod, M.R. MarviMohadjer, R. Rahmani, & J. Fathi, 2009. Partitioning rainfall into throughfall, stemflow, and interception loss in an oriental beech (Fagusorientalis Lipsky) forest during growing season. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 33:557-568.
2) Brauman, K.A., D.L. Freyberg, & G.C. Daily, 2010. Forest structure influences on rainfall partitioning and cloud interception: A comparison of nativeforest sites in Kona, Hawaii. Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 150(2): 265-275.
3) Bryant, M.L., S. Bhat, & J.M. Jacobs, 2005. Measurements and modeling of throughfall variability for five forest communities in the southeastern US. Journal of Hydrology 312(1): 95-108.
4) Carlyle-Moses, D.E., J.S. Flores-Laureano, & A.G. Price, 2004. Throughfall and throughfall spatial variability in Mediterranean oak forest communities of northeastern Mexico. Journal of Hydrology 297: 124 – 135.
5) Crockford, R.H., & D.P. Richardson, 2000. Partitioning of rainfall into throughfall, stemflow and interception effect of forest type, ground cover and climate. Hydrological Processes 14: 2903-2920.
6) Deguchi, A., S. Hattori, & H. Park, 2006. The influence of seasonal changes in canopy structure on interception loss: application of the revised Gash model, Journal of Hydrology 319(1): 80-102.
7) Fleischbein, K., W. Wilcke, R. Goller, J. Boy, C. Valarezo, W. Zech, & K. Knoblich, 2005. Rainfall interception in lower mountain forest in Ecuador.effects of canopyproperties, Journal of Hydrological Processes 19(17): 1355-1371.
8) Gash, J.H.C, & A.J. Morton, 1978. An application of the Rutter model to the estimation of the Interception loss from Thetford Forest. Journal of hydrology 38: 49-58.
9) Ghorbani, S, & R. Rahmani, 2008. Estimating of interception loss, stemflow and throughfall in a natural stand of oriental Beech (Shastkalateh forest).Iranian journal of Rangelands and forests Plant Breeding and Genetic Research 16(4): 638-648.
10) Giacomin, A, & P. Trucchi, 1992. Rainfall interception in a beech coppice (Acquerino, Italy). Journal of Hydrology 137: 141–147.
11) Gomez, J.A., J.V. Giraldez, & E. Fereres, 2001. Rainfall interception by olive trees in relation to leaf area, Journal of Agricultural Water Management 49(1): 65-76.
12) Granier, A., P. Biron, & D. Lemoine, 2000. Water balance, transpiration and canopy conductance in two beech stands. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 100: 291–308.
13) Hanchi, A, & M. Rapp, 1997. Stemflow determination in forest stands, Journal of Forest Ecology and Management 97(3): 231-235.
14) Haworth, K, & G.R. Mcpherson, 1995. Effects of Quercus emoryi trees on precipitation distribution and microclimate in a semi-arid savanna, Journal of Arid environment 31(2): 153-170.
15) Hossein Ghaleh Bahmani, S. M., P. Attarod, H. Bagheri, V. Bayramzadeh, H.S. Mariv, & M.J. Babaei, 2011. Stemflow generations in a pure oak forest stand within the growing season. Research Journal of Forest Science and Engineering 1(1): 25-33.
16) Herbst, M., J.M. Roberts, P.T. Rosier, & D.J. Gowing, 2006. Measuring and modeling the rainfall interception loss by hedgerows in southern England, Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 141(2): 244-256.
17) Keim, R.F., A.E. Skaugset, & M. Weiler, 2005.Temporal persistence of spatial patterns in through fall, Journal of Hydrology 314(1): 263–274.
18) Kuraji, K., T. Yuri, T. Nobuaki, & K. Isamu, 2001. Generation of stemflow and chemistry in a mature Japanese cypress forest, Journal of Hydrological Processes 15: 1967-1978.
19) Levia, D.F, 2004. Differential winter stemflow generation under contrasting storm conditions in a southern New England broad-leaved deciduous forest. Hydrological Processes18: 1105-1112.
20) Levia, D.F, & E.F. Ethan, 2003. A review and evaluation of stemflow literature in the hydrologic and biogeochemical cycles of forested and agricultural ecosystems. Journal of Hydrology 274: 1-29.
21) Levia, D.F, & S.R. Herwitz, 2005. Interspecific variation of bark water storage capacity of three deciduous tree species in relation to stemflow yield and solute flux to forest soils, Catena 64: 117–137.
22) Levia, D.F., J.T. Vanstan, S.M. Mage, & P.W. Kelley-Hauske, 2010. Temporal variability of stemflowvolum in a beechyellow poplar forest in relation to tree species and size, Journal of Hydrology 380: 112 –120.
23) Pypker, T.G., B.J. Bond, T.E. Link, D. Marks, & M.H. Unsworth, 2005. The importance of canopy structure in controlling the interception loss of rainfall: Examples from a young and old-growth Douglas-fir forest, Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 130(1): 113-129.
24) Sabeti, H, 2008. Trees and shrubs in Iran. Yazd university, 886p
25) Shachnovich, Y., P. Berniler, & P. Bar, 2008. Rainfall interception and spatial distribution of troughfall in a pine forest planted in an arid zone, Journal of Hydrology 349: 168– 177.
26) Sraj, M., M. Brilly, & M. Mikos, 2008. Rainfall interception by two deciduous Mediterranean forests of contrasting stature in Slovenia, Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 148(1): 121-134.
27) Staelens, J., A.D. Schrijver, K. Verheyen1, & N. Verhoest, 2008. Rainfall partitioning into throughfall, stemflow, and interception within a single beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) canopy: influence of foliation, rain event characteristics, and meteorology, Journal of Hydrological Processes 22: 33-45.
