Hydraulic conductivity in a piñon-juniper woodland: Influence of vegetation

Soil Science Society of America Journal

Volumn 67, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 1243-1249

  Wilcox, Bradford P ^a   Breshears, David D ^b   Turin, H J ^b  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; POROSITY; RUNOFF; SOILS; SURFACES; VEGETATION;

SURFACE RUNOFF;

SOIL TESTING;

FOREST; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; SOIL-WATER INTERACTION; VEGETATION;

FOREST SOIL; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; INFILTROMETER; SOIL WATER; VEGETATION DYNAMICS;

JUNIPERUS; JUNIPERUS MONOSPERMA; PINUS EDULIS; TILLANDSIA LINEATISPICA;

EID: 0042129927     PISSN: 03615995     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2003.1243     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Ankeny, M.D. 1992. Methods and theory for unconfined infiltration measurements, p. 123-141. In G.C. Topp et al. (ed.) Advances in measurement of soil physical properties: Bringing theory into practice. SSSA Spec. Pub. 30. SSSA, Madison, WI.
2. Ankeny, M.D., T.C. Kaspar, and R. Horton. 1990. Characterization of tillage and traffic effects on unconfined infiltration measurements. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54:837-840.
3. Ankeny, M.D., M. Ahmed, T.C. Kaspar, and R. Horton. 1991. A simple method for determining unsaturated hydraulic conductivity. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 55:467-470.
4. Belnap, J., and O.L. Lange. (ed.) 2001. Biological soil crusts: Structure, function, and management, Vol. 150. Springer, Berlin.
5. Blackburn, W.H. 1975. Factors influencing infiltration and sediment production of semiarid rangelands in Nevada. Water Resour. Res. 11:929-937.
6. Blackburn, W.H., R.E. Eckert, M.K. Wood, and F.F. Peterson. 1975. Influence of vesicular horizons on watershed management. p. 494-515. In Watershed Management Symposium, Logan, UT. ASCE, New York.
7. Bowen, B.M. 1990. Los Alamos climatology. Los Alamos National Laboratory Rep. LA-11735, Los Alamos, NM. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.
8. Bowen, B.M. 1996. Rainfall and climate variation over a sloping New Mexico Plateau during the North American Monsoon. J. Clim. 9:3432-3442.
9. Breshears, D.D., J.W. Nyhan, C.E. Heil, and B.P. Wilcox. 1998. Effects of woody plants on mieroclimate in a semiarid woodland: Soil temperature and evaporation in canopy and intercanopy patches. Int. J. Plant Sci. 159:1010-1017.
10. Breshears, D.D., P.M. Rich, F.J. Barnes, and K. Campbell. 1997a. Overstory-imposed heterogeneity in solar radiation and soil moisture in a semiarid woodland. Ecol. Applic. 7:1201-1215.
11. Breshears, D.D., O.B. Myers, S.R. Johnson, C.W. Meyer, and S.N. Martens. 1997b. Differential use of spatially heterogeneous soil moisture by two semiarid woody species - Pinus edulis and Juniperus monosperma. J. Ecol. 85:289-299.
12. Bromley, J., J. Brouwer, A.P. Barker, S.R. Gaze, and C. Valentin. 1997. The role of surface water redistribution in an area of patterned vegetation in a semi-arid environment, South-West Niger. J. Hydrol. (Amsterdam) 198:1-29.
13. Cerda, A. 1997. The effect of patchy distribution of Stipa tenacissima on runoff and erosion. J. Arid Environ. 36:37-51.
14. Cerda, A., S. Schnabel, A. Ceballos, and D. Gomezamelia. 1998. Soil hydrological response under simulated rainfall in the Dehesa Land System (Extremadura, SW Spain) under drought conditions. Earth Surf. Processes Landforms 23:195-209.
15. Davenport, D.W., B.P. Wilcox, and D.D. Breshears. 1996. Soil morphology of canopy and intercanopy sites in a piñon-juniper woodland. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 60:1881-1887.
16. Dunkerley, D. 2000a. Hydrologic effects of dryland shrubs: Defining the spatial extent of modified soil water uptake rates at an Australian desert site. J. Arid Environ. 45:159-172.
17. Dunkerley, D.L. 2000b. Assessing the influence of shrubs and their interspaces on enhancing infiltration in an arid Australian shrubland. The Rangeland J. 22:58-71.
18. Eldridge, D.J., M.E. Tozer, and S. Slangen. 1997. Soil hydrology is independent of microphytie crust cover - Further evidence from a wooded semiarid Australian rangeland. Arid Soil Res. Rehab. 11: 113-126.
19. Elkins, N.Z., G.V. Sabol, T.J. Ward, and W.G. Whitford. 1986. The influence of subterranean termites on the hydrological characteristics of a Chihuahuan desert ecosystem. Oecologia 68:521-528.
20. Goodrich, D.C., L.J. Lane, R.M. Shillito, S.N. Miller, K.H. Syed, and D.A. Woolhiser. 1997. Linearity of basin response as a function of scale in a semiarid watershed. Water Resour. Res. 33:2951-2965.
21. Greene, R.S.B. 1992. Soil physical properties of three geomorphic zones in a semi-arid mulga woodland. Aust. J. Soil Res. 30:55-69.
22. 39Ar age constraints for the Jaramillo Normal Subchron and the Matuyama-Brunhes geomagnetic boundary. J. Geophys. Res. 99:2925-2934.
23. Johnson, C.W., and N.D. Gordon. 1988. Runoff and erosion from rainfall simulator plots on sagebrush rangeland. Trans. ASAE 31:421-427.
24. Luxmoore, R.J. 1981. Micro-, meso- and macroporosity of soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45:671-672.
25. Lyford, F., and H.K. Qashu. 1969. Infiltration rates as affected by desert vegetation. Water Resour. Res. 5:1373-1377.
26. Martens, S.N., D.D. Breshears, C.W. Meyer, and F.J. Barnes. 1997. Scales of above-ground and below-ground competition in a semiarid woodland detected from spatial pattern. J. Veg. Sci. 8:655-664.
27. Martens, S.N., D.D. Breshears, and C.W. Meyer. 2000. Spatial distributions of understory light along the grassland/forest continuum: effects of cover, height, and spatial pattern of tree canopies. Ecol. Modell. 126:79-93.
28. Mohanty, B.P., M.D. Ankeny, R. Horton, and R.S. Kanwar. 1994. Spatial analysis of hydraulic conductivity measured using disc infiltrometers. Water Resour. Res. 30:2489-2498.
29. Parsons, A.J., A.D. Abrahams, and J.R. Simanton. 1992. Microtopography and soil-surface materials on semi-arid piedmont hillslopes, southern Arizona. J. Arid Environ. 22:107-115.
30. Pierson, F.B., W.H. Blackburn, S.S.V. Vactor, and J.C. Wood. 1994. Partitioning small scale spatial variability of runoff and erosion on sagebrush rangeland. Water Resour. Bull. 30:1081-1089.
31. Prieksat, M.A., M.D. Ankeny, and T.C. Kaspar. 1992. Design for an automated, self-regulating, single-ring infiltrometer. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 56:1409-1411.
32. Reid, K.D., B.P. Wilcox, D.D. Breshears, and L. MacDonald. 1999. Runoff and erosion in a piñon-juniper woodland: Influence of vegetation patches. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63:1869-1879.
33. Reneau, S.L. 2000. Stream incision and terrace development in Frijoles Canyon, Bandelier National Monument, New Mexico, and the influence of lithology and climate. Geomorphology 32:171-193.
34. Reynolds, J.F., and J. Wu. 1999. Do landscape structural and functional units exist? p. 273-296. In J.D. Tenhunen and P. Kabat (ed.) Integrating hydrology, ecosystem dynamics, and biogeochemistry in complex landscapes. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
35. Roundy, B.A., W.H. Blackburn, and R.E. Eckert, Jr. 1978. Influence of prescribed burning on infiltration and sediment production in the pinyon-juniper woodland, Nevada. J. Range Manage. 31:250-253.
36. Seyfried, M.S. 1991. Infiltration patterns from simulated rainfall on a semiarid rangeland soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 55:1726-1734.
37. Seyfried, M.S., and B.P. Wilcox. 1995. Scale and the nature of spatial variability: Field examples having implications for hydrologic modeling. Water Resour. Res. 31:173-183.
38. Wainwright, J., A.J. Parsons, and A.D. Abrahams. 2000. Plot-scale studies of vegetation, overland flow and erosion interactions: Case studies from Arizona and New Mexico. Hydrological Processes 14: 2921-2943.
39. Warren, S.D. 2001. Synopsis: Influence of biological soil crusts on arid land hydrology and soil stability, p. 349-362. In J. Belnap and O.L. Lange (ed.) Biological soil crusts: Structure, function, and management. Springer, Berlin.
40. Wilcox, B.P. 1994. Runoff and erosion in intercanopy zones of pinyon-juniper woodlands, New Mexico. J. Range Manage. 47:285-295.
41. Wilcox, B.P., and D.D. Breshears. 1995. Hydrology and ecology of pinyon-juniper woodlands: Conceptual framework and field studies. p. 109-119. In Desired future conditions for pinyon-juniper ecosystems. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Flagstaff, AZ.
42. Wilcox, B.P., D.D. Breshears, and C.D. Allen. 2003. Ecohydrology of a semiarid woodland: temporal and spatial scaling and disturbance. Ecol. Monogr. in press.
43. Wilcox, B.P., M.K. Wood, and J.M. Tromble. 1988. Factors influencing infiltrability of semiarid mountain slopes. J. Range Manage. 41: 197-206.
44. Williams, J.D., J.P. Dobrowolski, and N.E. West. 1995. Microphytic crust influence on interrill erosion and infiltration capacity. Trans. ASAE 38:139-146.
45. Wilson, G.V., and R.J. Luxmoore. 1988. infiltration, macroporosity, and mesoporosity distributions on two forested watersheds. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:329-335.
46. Wood, M.K., and W.H. Blackburn. 1981. Grazing systems: Their influence on infiltration rates in the Rolling Plains of Texas. J. Range Manage. 34:331-335.
47. Yair, A. 2001. Effects of biological soil crusts on water redistribution in the Negev Desert, Israel: A case study in longitudinal dunes. p. 303-314. In J. Belnap and O.L. Lange (ed.) Biological soil crusts: Structure, function, and management. Springer, Berlin.
48. Young, J.A., R.A. Evans, and D.A. Eash. 1984. Stem flow on western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) trees. Weed Sci. 32:320-327.