










International Hydrological Programme

Forest Hydrology íConservation of Forest, Soil, and Water Resources


The Twenty-fourth IHP Training Course                                                               Photo: Katsuyoshi Kubota (Kyushu University Forests)

Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University

Supported by

Water Resources Research Center, Disaster Prevention Research Institute,
Kyoto University
Ecohydrology Research Institute, The University of Tokyo ForestsGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo
























International Hydrological Programme







Forest Hydrology íConservation of Forest, Soil, and Water Resources






The Twenty-fourth IHP Training Course

23 November - 7 December, 2014


Nagoya, Japan







Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University

Supported by

Water Resources Research Center, Disaster Prevention Research Institute,
Kyoto University
Ecohydrology Research Institute, The University of Tokyo ForestsGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of TokyoOutline
A short training course “Forest Hydrology í&onservation of Forest, Soil, and Water
Resources” will be programmed for participants from Asia-Pacific regions as a part of theJapanese contribution to the International Hydrological Program (IHP). The course is composedof a series of lectures and practice sessions.

Objectives
Incident rainwater is firstly intercepted by foliage and branches and evaporates fromtheir surface to the atmosphere. Following interceptions by plant surfaces, the water is channeledalong the plant body. Some of incident rainwater directly reaches the soils without touching
foliage and branches. This rainwater infiltrates into the soils and is influenced by the soil pore
structure, as it percolates to the groundwater table. Since soil water movement is slow, some ofthe soil water is absorbed by plant roots, where it is conducted through stem conduits, reaches
leaves, and evaporates to the atmosphere through stomata. The groundwater flows to a river.
This is an outline of water cycling in the forest ecosystems, and science on this water cycling is“Forest Hydrology”.
As one can see above, Forest Hydrology has two major scientific aspects: (1)discharge from forested watersheds; and (2) water use by trees (evaporation from the forest
canopy). Soils in the forested watershed have a high hydraulic conductivity at the ground surface,which prevents soil erosion, and functions to make soil water flow slowly, resulting in a
behavior like a dam. Rainfall subtracted by the forest water use denotes the upper limit ofavailable water for the ecosystem including human use. This means that forest management,such as thinning and conversion of forest, can be expected to alter and enhance the forest’s
abilities to prevent disasters and preserve water resources. These are the main practicalapplications of Forest Hydrology.
In this training course, the basics of forest hydrology and its application forconservation of forests, soil and water resources will be introduced. Its global scale implications
will also be included. Practices are for understanding hydrological significance of forests andlearning skills to manage forests so that managers may optimize their hydrological functions. As
an important aspect, this training course will deal with the specific hydrological issues of East
Asian countries. For example, many of the forest water use theories assume larger evaporative
demand than annual precipitation and an evenly distributed precipitation throughout the year or
large precipitation in winter. Scientists from the US and UK devised these theories forapplication to their familiar hydrologic environment. As such, there is a need for more detailed
information of forest water use when precipitation is larger than evaporative demand and when
there is greater precipitation in summer conditions, as in most East Asian countries, which would
advance knowledge of forest hydrology both locally and globally.

Lecturers
L1: Basics of forest hydrology

T. Kumagai

L2: Discharge from forested watershed (1)M. Tani

L3: Discharge from forested watershed (2)K. Kosugi

L4: Effect of vegetation cover on sediment transportation and erosion

T. Gomi

L5: Nutrient and organic matter export from forested watershed

H. Haga

L6: Evapotranspiration from forest

L7: Water resources in forested watershed

L8: Basics of forest dynamics

Y. Kosugi

H. Komatsu

H. Sato

L9: Global/local hydrometeorology and forest (1)T. Hiyama

L10: Global/local hydrometeorology and forest (2)H. Fujinami

Exercise
E1: Forest dynamics modelling
E2: Global/local hydrometeorology map

H. SatoH. Fujinami, H. Kanamori

Field Workshop
W1: Hydrologic regime change accompanied by forest recovery

K. Kuraji, N. Tanaka

W2: Hydrologic observations at Kiryu Experimental Watershed (Kyoto University) in Shiga Prefecture

Schedule (23 November to 7 December, 2014)
23 (Sunday)

Arrival at Central Japan International Airport and movement to Nagoya
University

24 (Monday)

09㸸30 - 09㸸40

Registration & Guidance

09㸸40 - 12㸸10

Lecture 1

T. Kumagai

14㸸00 - 16㸸00

Keynote 1

T. W. Giambelluca

17㸸00 - 19㸸00

Welcome party

09㸸30 - 11㸸30

Keynote 2

N. A. Chappell

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Lecture 2

M. Tani

09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Lecture 8

H. Sato14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Exercise 1

H. Sato09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Lecture 3

K. Kosugi

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Lecture 4

T. Gomi09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Lecture 5

H. Haga

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Lecture 6

Y. Kosugi

09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Lecture 10

H. Fujinami

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Exercise 2

H. Fujinami,

25 (Tuesday)

26 (Wednesday)

27 (Thursday)

28 (Friday)

29 (Saturday)

H. Kanamori
30 (Sunday)

Free time1 (Monday)

09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Lecture 7

H. Komatsu

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Lecture 9

T. Hiyama

09㸸30 - 11㸸30

Field Workshop 1

K. Kuraji,
N. Tanaka

13㸸30 - 16㸸30

Field Workshop 1

K. Kuraji,
N. Tanaka

2 (Tuesday)

3 (Wednesday)

Briefing for Field Workshop 2 and Tour for Japanese culture (Move to Kyoto)

4 (Thursday)

Field Workshop 2 at Kiryu Experimental Watershed

5 (Friday)

09㸸30 - 12㸸00

Making reports and discussions

T. Kumagai

14㸸00 - 16㸸30

Making reports and discussions

T. Kumagai

09㸸30 - 11㸸30

Report presentations and discussions

11㸸30 - 12㸸00

Completion ceremony of this course

13㸸30 - 15㸸30

Farewell party

6 (Saturday)

7 (Sunday)

Departure from Central Japan International Airport

L1: Basics of forest hydrology
Tomo’omi Kumagai (Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University)

Abstract
Forest Hydrology has two major scientific aspects, 1) discharge from forested
watershed, and 2) water use by trees (evaporation from the forest canopy). Soils in theforested watershed have a high hydraulic conductivity at the ground surface, which
prevents from soil erosion, and functions to make soil water flow slow, resulting in a
behavior like a dam. Rainfall subtracted by the forest water use denotes the upper limit ofavailable water for the ecosystem including human use. These mean that forest management
such as thinning and forest conversions can be expected to alter and enhance the forest’s
abilities to prevent from disasters and preserve water resources, Forest Hydrology’s main
practical applications.
Such forests’ hydrological functions can be explained along a context of water cyclingin the forest ecosystems as follows: Incident rainwater is firstly intercepted by foliage andbranches and evaporates from their surface to the atmosphere. From the surface full of
rainwater, the rainwater conducts to soils along the plant body, and also, some of incident
rainwater directly reaches the soils without touching foliage and branches. These rainwaters
coming to the soils infiltrate into the soils with being influenced by the soil pore structure,and reaching to groundwater table. During the slow soil water movement, some of the soil
water is absorbed by plant roots. It conducts through stem conduits, reaches leaves, andevaporates to the atmosphere through stomata. The ground water flows to a river. We haveto recollect that science on this description of water cycling is “Forest Hydrology”. In my
lecture, the basics of Forest Hydrology including both observations (methods and results)
and theories will be introduced.

ᵠᵿᶑᶇᶁᶑᴾᶍᶄᴾᵤᶍᶐᶃᶑᶒᴾᵦᶗᶂᶐᶍᶊᶍᶅᶗᴾᴾ Hydrology for describing ecosystems
Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center
Nagoya University

Tomo’omi KUMAGAI䠄Rodriguez-Iturbe䠈 2001, Adv. Water Res. 24; 695䠅Today’s Menu
I.
II.

What is tree?
Hydroloic components inforest ecosystems
III. Forest’s hydrologic functions
This is not a good
forest. Rather, adegraded forest.

ᵲᶐᶃᶃᴾᵥᶐᶍᶕᶒᶆᴾᴾ
CO2

Ontogenetically old
Physiologically young

Ageing of the xylem akes place
along the major axes of a treeLight

䐟 Radially, from the pith to thebark.
䐠 Vertically, from the pith at theWhat is tree?

bottom of the trunk to thepith at the top.
䐡 Concentrically, around theentire outermost growing ring.

Bark
Cambium
Sapwood
Heartwood
PithPhotosynthate is
distributed
throughout thetree via phloem.
Water andnutrition go up via
sapwood.

Ontogenetically old
Physiologically young
Ontogenetically young
Physiologically young

Schweingruber et al. “Atlas of Woody Plant Stems”

Water
Nutrition
Shimaji et al. “Wood Tissue”

ᵲᶐᶃᶃᴾᵥᶐᶍᶕᶒᶆᴾᴾ

Precipitation

Hydrologic
components inforest ecosystems

Interception(Evaporation)

Throughfall

Saturated/Unsaturated soil water flow
Stemflow

Surface flow

Transpiration

River flow
Groundwater flow

Relationships between Forest and Water -Forest’s Function

•
•
•
•
•
•

Flood prevention
Landslide disaster prevention
Relaxation of severe heat environment
Less water resource
Stable water resource
Unstable water resource

Main drivers for hydrologic phenomena:

Ṟ Evapotranspiration
ṟ Forest soil’s water retention
Ṡ Runoff from forest watershed

These forest’s functions are made up of eachhydrologic component in forest ecosystems.

㚋 Evapotranspiration

Stomata
Light

CO2 Water

400 ”Mr. WaterVapor” (here, 100 people)z Enhanced CO2 concentrationinduced closing stomata.
(Wullschleger & Norby, 2001)
z Decrease in the number ofstomataWhen
Mr. CarbonDioxide
try to come in,
Mr. WaterVapor
automaticallygo out.

As a result,

Decrease in transpiration

Woodward (1987;Nature)

2 ”Mr. CarbonDioxide”

Leaf--Stem--Root Continuity
Leaf

Root

Stem

›⁡⁩‒ ⁧⁕⁚‒⁩⁓⁦⁗⁤‒⁓‒⁦⁤⁗⁗‒⁕⁡⁠⁥⁧ ⁗⁥‒⁢⁗⁤‒⁖⁓⁫‱‒‒

Transpiration and Photosynthesis

Soil moisture availability controls
photosynthetic rate through stomatal control

Solar energy is the driver of circulation.

ࠉRn(1  a ) RS  RL  HVTs

4

Rn
Net radiation

Long-wave Short-wave
radiation
radiation

H  OE  G
Latent heat
Sensible heat

Long-wave Short-wave
radiation
radiation

Forested area

Bare land area

Soil storage heat

A0 Horizon L Horizon
F Horizon
H Horizon

A Horizon

㚌 Forest soil’s water retention

B Horizon
C Horizon

Forest soil is layered.
Schematic presentation offorest soil profile(Ohta, 1996)

Schematic diagram of soil particles
Various sizes of soil particles
and Various sizes of pores

Saturated

Schematic diagram of soil particles~103 times faster soil waterflow in saturated soil thanunsaturated soil.

Schematic diagram of soil particles

How soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

Unsaturated

Soil water’s
speed is very
slow until
reaching
groundwatertable.

How soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

Soil water that canbe easily extracted
by gravity
immediately after
rainfallHow soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

How soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

How soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

Soil water almost
impossible to be
extracted

How soil water held within the cavity is extracted?

Soil water that
forest soil can hold

㚍 Runoff from forest watershed

Precipitation, P

Evapotranspiration, ET

Stored water change, ǻSForest’s hydrologic
functions

Runoff, R

WeirExperimental watershed
and Weir䠷R䠹䠙䠷P䠹䠉䠷ET䠹 䠉䠷ǻS䠹

Runoff

Bare land• Fast response to rainfall• High peak
• Low base flow

ForestIncrease in annual runoff (mm)RainfallConifer
Deciduous or mixed broad leaved
ShrubsConifer
Deciduous or mixed broad leaved
ShrubsOthersTime
Ratio of decrease in vegetation (%)

Schematic presentation of
runoff responding to rainfall

Increase in runoff with decreasing forest
From Bosch and Hewlett (1982)

Impact of deforestation on precipitation• Forests do not make water.
Rather, they reduce it.
• Forests gently release water.
• There is runoff without rainfall.
• Forest looks like a dam, butThis is conditional.
Aragao䠄2012䠅Nature 489, 217

Impact of deforestation on precipitationa Annual mean moisture convergenceb Annual mean precipitationc

If the current status of deforestation in Amazon lasts forlong years, how will the rainfall regime be?
Changes in the period 2000-2050. Black dots denoteparticular changes from the 1998-2010 rainfall.
a: Wet season and b: Dry season
䠄Spracklen et al. 2012, Nature 489, 282䠅Precipitation
Evapotranspiration

Most moisture is recycled
over the land area
(curtained space). Little
moisture horizontallymoves in or out.

Plentyof rainfall despite little moisture convergence all over Borneo䝪䝹䝛䜸䛿࿘ᅖ䛛䜙Ỉ⵨Ẽ䛜౪⤥䛥䜜䛺䛔䛾䛻㞵䛜ከ䛔䚹
Activerainfall recycling from forest evapotranspiration᳜⏕䛾⵨Ⓨᩓ䛻䜘䜛㞵䛾䝸䝃䜲䜽䝹䛜┒䜣䚹(Kumagai et al. 2013, Hydrological Processes 27, 3811)

Precipitation (mm/year)

c 3,000

50-year reduction in pristine forest
area in Borneo. (Radday, 2007)

2,000

1,000
1950

Hypothesis: Evapotranspiration is decreasing,and Rainfall?

㻞㻜㻌㼥㼑㼍㼞㼟㻌㼍㼓㼛㻌㻼㼞㼑㼟㼑㼚㼠㻌

Shiiba Research Forest,
Kyushu University

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

Year
About 60-year time course of rainfall integrated all over Borneo(Kumagai et al. 2013, Hydrological Processes 27, 3811)

Park-like landscapeHistorical Emissions from Land Use Change

Lower winter-mortality due to global warming

Carbon Emissions from Tropical Deforestation
2000-2007

1.80

Vegetation degradation

Pg C yr-1

Increasing population=Grazing damage

1.5 Pg C y-1

1.60

Africa1.40

Latin America

1.20

S. & SE Asia

1.00

SUM

(16% total emissions)

0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
2000

1990

1980

1970

1960

1950

1940

1930

1920

1910

1900

1890

1880

1870

1860

0.00
1850

᳃ᯘὶᇦỈ཰ᨭ䛾ኚ໬
Problems
from soils

Canadell et al.䠄2009䠅䇾Carbon Budget 2007”

Changes in Forest Cover in 2000-2012ᵤᶇᶌᶂᶇᶌᶅᶑᴾ


1. Lost forests: 2.3million km2; Established forests: 0.8million
km2 in 2000-2012. 0.2million km2 experienced both processes(i.e., forestry).
2. Forest loss rate is increasing only in tropics (2101 km2/year).
3. Tropical rainforests loss is 32 % of the world forest loss.
4. South American tropical dry forest is lost at the highest speed
in the lost tropical forests.

䠄Hansen et al., 2013䠊Science 342䠗850䠅

Seasonality: wet and dry seasons

5. In tropical forests: forest loss rate in Brazil is decreasing(40000 km2 in 2003-2004 to 20000 km2 in 2010-2011). While,
forest loss in Indonesia is drastically increasing (8000 km2 in
2000-2001 to 20000 km2 in 2010-2011). Asian tropicalforest loss wastes Brazilian efforts.

Inter--annual variation in rainfall
Rainfall reduced by El Niño

Seasonality is㻌 HIGH㻌 LOWMalhi and Wright (2004)
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 359, 311–329

Kumagai et al. (2005) Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 128, 81–92

Transpiration cannot be affected by episodic soil moisture depletion,
ᴾ ᴾ ᴾ and is almost constant throughout year

ᴾ ᴾ ᴾ ᴾ ᴾ ᴾ in a Malaysian tropical rainforest:
Kumagai et al. (2005: Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 128, 81-92)
Kumagai et al. (2004: Journal of Hydrology, 287, 237-251)

M.Nakagawa et al.: Impact of severe drought associated with the
1997-1998 El Nino in a tropical forest in Sarawak(J.Trop.Ecol., 16, 355, 2000)

El Nino Effect䠗㻌 Decrease in above-ground biomass
1993-1996: 8.6 t/ha year

1997-2001: -4.5 t/ha year

Increase in mortality

This is like Sea!!
Water cannot be a limitation.

1993-1996: 0.89 %/year
1997-2001: 6.37-4.35 %/year
NOTE!!㻌 Mortality of Dipterocarpaceae had 12-30 times in 1997-2001.
EnergyPartition

Carbon source

Disturbance Death

Can this be applied to “SPECIAL DROUGHT?

Carbon sink

Regeneration
Time

Mortality sensitivity to drought for Bornean and Amazonian forests

BorneoAmazonia
Other tropicalforests**MCWD, monthly cumulative water deficit.

䠄Phillips et al䠈2010䠊New Phytol. 187䠗631䠅

We have to note that
forest hydrology inSoutheast Asian
tropics is special.

L2: Discharge from forested watershed (1)- Forest role in stormflow responses in active tectonic regions with large storms Makoto Tani (Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University)

Abstract
In an active tectonic region with large storms such as Pacific Rim, it is still difficult topredict stormflow responses by runoff models from the catchment properties without aparameter calibration using observational data. One of the key reasons for this difficulties isbased on the structure of distributed runoff models. Based on classical simulations forhillslopes by Freeze (Water Resour. Res., 1972), the source of stormflow is usuallyconsidered as a saturation-excess overland flow (Beven and Kirkby, Hydrol. Sci. Bull,
1979) because of too small saturated hydraulic conductivity of the soil layer for subsurface
flow. However, hillslope hydrology has demonstrated that preferential paths such as natural
pipes could play an important role in the subsurface flow (Anderson et al.,Water Resour.
Res., 1997; Uchida et al., Hydrol. Process., 2003), and this quick downslope water
movement with a quick wave-form transmission along the vertical infiltration (Tani, J.
Hydrol., 1997;Montgomery & Dietrich, Water Resour. Res., 2002) strongly suggested thestormflow generation through the underground runoff processes.
Some portion of the rainwater is absorbed by the soil through the wetting-front advance(Tani, J. Hydrol., 1997) and deep percolated into the weathered bedrock (Kosugi et al.,
Water Resour. Res., 2006). Effective rainfall is then produced as the rest of these two
rainwater distribution processes. After sufficient rainwater falls and exceeds the threshold,however, all the rainwater except the deep percolation can contribute to the stormflow, but
this contribution may not occur as an overland flow but as a wave-form transmission in a
hydraulic continuum created within the soil layer (Tani, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 2013).
Why can the soil layer function as the hydraulic continuum with preferential pathways?
This may be explained only from a long-term process of the soil-layer evolution against
strong erosional forces in the active tectonic regions with large magnitude storms. Runoff
and erosional processes are closely linked. This link will be discussed in this lecture basedon a comparison in the runoff and erosion processes between forested and denuded
hillslopes, which was obtained from detailed field observations in a weathered granite
mountain, Tanakami, in Shiga Prefecture, Japan (Suzuki and Fukushima, Suirikagaku,1989). A new insight into the forest effect on the stormflow mitigation will be proposedfrom this discussion as a conclusion.

International Hydrological Programme
Forest Hydrology íConservation of Forest, Soil, and Water ResourcesSuperstitions for stormflow
1 Overland flow is a main
source for the stormflow

Discharge from forested watershed (1)Overland flow

Stormflow- Forest role in stormflow responses in active
tectonic regions with large storms -Maybe doubtful for steep mountains
300

Makoto Tani

Total stormflowvolume(mm)
Stormflow

2. Forest gives no influence onlarge-magnitude stormflow
20

Graduate School of Agriculture
Kyoto University

mm/h

15

Rainfallvolume10

Stormflow
volume

5
0

4 Day

2

0

qi d 0.003 mm h-1

Stormflow
less0.003, q d 0.006
0.006
 q d 0.01
than
rainfalliiqi ! 0.01

200

Threshold100

All rainfallcontributes
stormflow
0

100

200

300

400

Total storm rainfall (mm)RainfallvolumePart 1 Basic characteristics of stormflow response

This talk consists of
1. Basic characteristics of stormflow response

20

mm/h

15

2. Mechanism of stormflow response

Rainfallvolume10

Stormflow
volume5

3. Forest effects on the stormflow mitigation0

Allocation of rainwater to stormflow

Stormflow response to rainfall in the wettest stage

Rainfall allocation to stormflow depends on the wetness
and increases with rainfall

During a large magnitude storm event,
all the rainfall contributes to stormflow
after the catchment become the wettest stage

All the rainwater contributes to the stormflow
after enough rainfall volume

This looks like a limitation for the stormflow mitigation
but needs careful consideration.....

15
10

RainfallvolumeStormflow
volume

5
0

0

2

4 Day

The same event of large magnitude storm
Cumulative rain and flow relationshipTemporal changes of rainfall and flow rate

qi d 0.003 mm h-1

300

Stormflow
less0.003, q d 0.006
0.006
 q d 0.01
than
rainfalli30

iqi ! 0.01

KT: Kitatani

200

Thresholdmm/h

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

20
100

All rainfallcontributes
stormflow
0

100

200

Total storm rainfall (mm)Rainfallvolume

300

10

400

Stormflow
Totalstormflowvolume
(mm)

20

mm/h

Total stormflowvolume(mm)
Stormflow

300

4 Day

2

0

9

10

11

12

13

-1

qi ! 0.01

200

Threshold100

All rainfall
contributes
to stormflow
0

0

mm h
qi d 0.003 less
Stormflow
0.003, qi d 0.006
thanrainfall
0.006 qi d 0.01

100
200
300
Total stormrainfall (mm)Rainfall volume400

A single tank simulates stormflow responses

Stormflow response to rainfall in the wettest stageDuring a large magnitude storm event,
all the rainfall contributes to stormflow
after the catchment become the wettest stage

r

dV
r q
dt

V

V

In KT and MN, Tatsunokuchi-yama,
the stormflow can be simulated
by a single tank in the wettest stage

A comparison of the adjacent catchments show
MN has lower peaks than KT,
indicating a larger mitigation in MN

Kq P

q

Data by courtesy of Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute
30

30

KT: Kitatani

MN: Minamitani

30

K=25
P=0.3

KT: Kitatani30

MN: Minamitani

K=40
P=0.3

mm/h

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

20

20High peaks

10

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

Low peaks

10

9

10

11

12

10

12

11

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

0

0

9

13

20

10

10

0

0

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

20

9

13

10

12

11

9

13

10

12

11

13

A single tank is general for the storm runoff models

A single tank means a quasi-steady state

Good simulation results by tank-type runoff models such as
A single tank is a waveform converter as a quasi steady state system

dq
dt

r

iq
dV dq

Sugawara’s (1957) Tank model, Beven & Kirkby’s (1979) TOPMODEL,
Kimura’s storage-function model, and Fukushima & Suzuki’s (1986) HYCYMODEL

dV
r q
dt

A general applicability of a single tank for stormflow responses
100

V

The smoothing effect is controlled bystorage change (dV/dq ) in a steady state

V

Kq P

10

䠉

Jakujo1981 RevegetatedGranite

䕿

1

Obs.
Cal.

0.1

q

0.01
0.001
100

The fluctuation around the average of 1 mm h-1

The relationship of storage to outflow

10

Rachi 1981 denuded
Granite

1
0.1

P=0.3

Small KdV /dq small

i
q

0.01

q

0.001
100
10

Sedimentary rock secondary forest

1

Recession
Dynamic equilibrium

0.1

Large KdV /dq large

0.01
0.001

HYCYMODEL(Suzuki & Fukushima, Kyoto Uni. Forest, 1986䠅 Simulation example using HYCYMODEL(Tani et al., HP, 2012)

Part 1 Basic characteristics of stormflow response

Part 2 Mechanism of stormflow response

Summary
Soil absorption and deep percolation control
the rainwater allocation to stormflow
30

All the rainfall may contribute to stormflow
in the wettest stage
Stormflow can be simulated by a single tank

K=25
P=0.3

KT: Kitatani

r

dV
r q
dt

V

V

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

20

10

q

Storage change (dV/dq) makes flow smoothing

0

9

10

11

12

13

Kq P

Response to constant rainfall by the simulator
How does a zero-order catchment respond to a constant rainfall?
A 7-day experimentin a very steep zero-oreder catchment
in CB1, Oregon, USA

Soil absorption and deep percolation for the loss
The allocated water is:1) escaping soil abosrption in early days
2) escaping deep percolation in late days
Both rainfall and flow rate are roughly constantand the flow responds to daily oscillation of rainfall(Anderson et al., Water Resour Res, 1997)

Result is.........

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

3

2

Deep
percolation

Ranfall intensity

soil-water1
absorption
Flow rate
Total rate ofrunoff discharge

25

May, 1992

4
June, 1992

30

Anderson et al., Water Resour. Res.1997

Expansion of the stormflow source area

Mechanism of the source area expansion

The area is small
nar the stream
in an early stage(Hewlett & Hibbert, 1967)

Fixed source area

Variable source area

The area expands
as rainfall increases
to the entire catchment

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

3

The soil is dry
and no stormflow(Hewlett & Hibbert, 1967)

Fixed source area

Variable source area

2

1

Soil-water
absorption
25

May, 1992

30

4June, 1992

Anderson et al., Water Resour. Res.1997

Expansion of the source area

(Hewlett & Hibbert, 1967)

Wet zone goes down andsubsurface flow starts
close to the slope bottom

Expansion of the source area

Fixed source area

(Hewlett & Hibbert, 1967)

Variable source area

The wet zone goes down Variable source areafrom the srface andthe subsurface flow grows
upslope

Deep percolation

Deep percolation

Subsurface flow

Fixed source area

Subsurface flow

The fixed source area expanded to the entire area

Wet zone connection contributes to stormflow
Dry zone (low permeability) intercepts the flow

(Hewlett & Hibbert, 1967)

The wet zone is expanded
to the entier soil layer

Fixed source area

Soilsurface

RainfallPressure
head

Variable source area

Deep percolation

Deep percolation

Subsurface flow

Wet zone connection contributes to stormflow

Temporal flow response yields a mitigation

Dry zone (low permeability) intercepts the flow
All rainwater except deep percolation contributes to stormflow,
but smoothing may remain as a mitigation

Unsarturated but wet zone grows down,
contributing to subsurface stormflow
Soilsurface

RainfallRainfallPressure
head

Both rainfall and flow rate are roughly constantand the flow responds to daily oscillation of rainfall

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)3

Deeppercolation

2

1

Deep percolation
25

Subsurface flow

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge
After the source area is fixed,
what mechanism functions for the flow response to rainfall?

May, 1992

4
June, 1992

30

Anderson et al., Water Resour. Res.1997

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge
Consider the vertical profile of pressure headin response to a lower rainfall intensity

Let us investigate
the mechanism of responsereferring to CB1 experimentPressure head

Soil depth

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

3

2

1

25

May, 1992

30

4June, 1992

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge
Pressure head become larger
in response to higer rainfall intensity

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge
Consider the vertical profile of pressure head
Pressure headin response to a lower rainfall intensity

Soil depth

Soil depth
3
Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

3

2

1

25

Pressure head

May, 1992

30

Pressure head become larger
in response to higer rainfall intensity

1

25

4
June, 1992

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge

2May, 1992

4
June, 1992

30

Daily oscillation of rainfall and flow discharge
Pressure head

Water pressure is propagatedfrom the surface to the slope bottom

Pressure head

The pressure head & soil water content
fluctuate in respose to rainfall intensity
Soil depth

Soil depth

Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

2This storage change (dV/dq )contributes to a smoothingfrom rainfall to flow discharge

1

25May, 1992

30

4June, 1992

3
Rainfall, runoff (mm/h)

The water storage is fluctuatedin the unsaturated & saturated zones

3

2

1

25

Rainfall intensity

May, 1992

30

SMOOTHING

Slow infiltration and fast subsurface flow

Slow infiltration and fast subsurface flow

Tracer tests both forvertical infiltration anddownslope subsurface flow
were conducted in CB1

Tracer tests both forvertical infiltration anddownslope subsurface flow
were conducted in CB14June, 1992

Flow rate

Bromide ion signal
showing
4 – 20 m/hour
Stable isotopic signal of water
showing
velocity only 10 - 20 cm /dayFast subsurface flow

Slow infiltrationbutquick pressure propagation
Very slow in vertical infiltration

Very fast in downslope subsurface flow
(Anderson et al., Wat. Resor. Res. , 1997)

Slow infiltration and fast subsurface flow

Slow infiltration and fast subsurface flow

Both contribute to

Both contribute tofrom rainfall to flow discharge

from rainfall to flow dischargea quick pressure propagationa quick pressure propagation

Data by courtesy of Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute
30

K=25
P=0.3

KT: Kitatani30

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

20

Very fast in downslope saturated flow

All rainfall contributes
to stormflow

0

0

9

(Anderson et al., Wat. Resor. Res. , 1997)

Part 2 Mechanism of stormflow response

20

K=40
P=0.3

10

10

Very slow in vertical unsaturated flow

MN: Minamitani

10

12

11

9

13

10

11

12

13

Part 3 Forest effects on the stormflow mitigation

Summaryin active tectonic regionswith large-magnitude storms

Stormflow response is derived fromthe pressure propagation within unsaturated & saturated
zones in the entire soil layer after the wet zone is connected
NOT from the overland flow

The flow smoothing results fromthe storage change (dV/dq) in the soil layer

Why overland flow is not realistic?

Background of overland-flow basis concept
50

Ceritainly realistic in gentle terrains

We must consider a role of erosion

Gentle

Steep

Location of overland flow initiationin active tectonic regionswith large-magnitude storms

Ks=0.001 cm s-1(=36 mm h-1) Ȧ=30㼻

L=A/b
m

40

Soil permeability islarger than rainfall intensity but
not enough for subsurface flow

Ks=0.01 cm s-1(=360 mm h-1)
Ȧ=30㼻

30

Ks=0.01 cm s-1
Ȧ=10㼻

20

as already explained by Freeze(Water Reour. Res., 1972)

10

0

5

10

rainfall intensity r

15mm h-120

1m

The location of saturation excess overland
flow for the soil-layer depth of 1 m
Overland flow

Hence, soil layer has to be saturated and overland flow naturally occurs
This gave an overland-flow basis concept to many stormflow models

However, this is valid for homogeneous soil

Long-term evolution results in heterogeneities

Soil and water move in a zero order catchment
Look at a zero order catchment (important in geomorphological evolution)

The soil layer was naturally evolved over hundreds years
against severe erosion force(Tsukamoto, Journal of the Japan Society of Erosion Control Engineering, 1974)

NOT made in a couple of days by a worker
Soil produced from the weathered bedrock
moves into the hollow

Water also moves into the hollow during storms
Heterogeneous slope

Homogeneous slope produces
saturation overland flow

Soil movement by the gravity force consists of
two categories as ....

Let us the history of soil layer evolution

Soil creep near ridge (category No. 1)

Landslide in hollow (category No. 2)

Near ridge (nose), soil depth depends on the curvatureaccounts for a diffusive transportation by soil creep

Soil cumulated in a concave hollow
is removed by landslide occurrences 2z ! 0

Soil

Soil

Convex 2z ! 0ConvexLandslide

Bedrock
ConvexRidge(nose)

Concave

Curvature

Bedrock 2z | 0

Ridge
(nose)

Linear 2z ! 0

Curvature 2z | 0
Linear 2z ! 0

Concave

Concave

Hollow

Hemsath et al., Geomorphology, 1999

Hollow

However, soil depth
increases infinitely
in a hollow(Tsukamoto, Journal of the Japan Societyof Erosion Control Engineering, 1978)

Collaboration of two-type soil movements
Soil-layer evolution after a landslide in a hollow is
supported by soil supply from the ridge by creep

Landslide occurs in hollows
not in other topographic zones

The collaboration owing to vegetation
A long-term observation in a denuded slope in a granite mountain,
Shiga Prefecture near Kyoto, Japan, gives the evidenceby Suzkuki and Fukushima

Soil depth

Diffusive
soil supply

Year after landslide

Landslide(Shimokawa, Proceeding of Symposium on
Effects of Forest Land Use on Erosion andSlope Stability, 1984)

Landslide ocasionally occurs in response to a large storm
but creep gurantees the soil-layer evolution

䠄Suzuki and Fukushima, International Syposium on Erosion, Debris Flow and Disaster
Prevention, 1985)

Stream erosion

Soil movement in a denuded slope

Deposit behind a check dam also measured

Cumulative value of elevation
averaged over a denuded slope

Long term observation on the micro topography on a denuded slope shows

One-year cycle

150

SummerDeposition

One-year cycle

100

Summer50

2ºConstant erosion rate
1965

Fall
ErosionNovemberMay

4º

A brief increase in springmm

August1970
1975
䠄Suzuki and Fukushima,: Suirikagaku, 1989)

Check damOne-year cycle of the sand deposit behind a check dam

A freezing-thawing process in spring detached soil
particles, causing the annual constant rate of soil erosion

Fall
The deposit increased by soil inflow from the slope in summer
and decreased by erosion in fall due to no soil inflow.

Soil moves as one-year cycle without vegetation

Importance of root network

Two-type soil movements supported by root system
Soil aggregation by the root network
resisting erosion supports soil creep

Soil produced from the bedrock is constantly transported downstream
Soil stay no longer than one year on the slope

Soil depth

Without vegetation

Diffusive
soil supply

With vegetation
Year after landslide(Shimokawa, Proceeding of Symposium on
Effects of Forest Land Use on Erosion andSlope Stability, 1984)

Kitahara, Suirikagaku, 2010

Soil remains on the slope supported by the root network
Soil layer evolves after a landslide for over hundreds years
till an occurrence of the next landslide

Remember fast subsurface flow
Tracer tests both forvertical infiltration anddownslope subsurface flow
were conducted in CB1

Shear strength enforced by the root network
decreasing landslide frequency supports soil-layer evolution

Reduction of overland flow by pipe in a hollow
Overland flow may accelerate boththe surface erosion and landslide,The development of pipe network along the hollow
is responsible to the soil layer evolutionin active tectonic regions

Bromide ion signal
showing
4 – 20 m/hour
Fast subsurface flow
inhibits watertable rise

Fast subsurface flow
inhibits watertable rise

Not only root networks
but also this fast flow
contributes to soil-layer evolution
against erosion forces during storms

Not only root networks
but also this fast flow
contributes to soil-layer evolution
against erosion forces during storms
Very fast in downslope subsurface flow

(Anderson et al., Wat. Resor. Res. , 1997)

LandslideLong-term evolution results in heterogeneities

Part 3 Forest effects on the stormflow mitigation

Summary

Simultaneous evolutions ofsoil layer and pipe drainage creates
perfectly different spatial charactersfrom a manmade soil layer

Soil layer evolution and landslide are repeatedin active tectonic regions with large-magnitude storms
Soil movement on a forest slope consists ofcreep near the ridge and landslide in the holow
A comparison with a denuded slope demonstrates
a role of forest root netowork in the soil layer evolution

Homogeneous slope
artificially made in a few days

The soil layer evolution is also supported by
fast subsurface flow through pipes in a hollow
Heterogeneous slope
naturally created over hundreds of years
Under tectonic uplift and erosion force

Answer to superstitions
1 Overland flow is a main source for the stormflow

This is not true
Water pressure propagation
within unsaturated zone (vertical infiltration)and saturated zones (subsurface flow)
produce the stormflow responses

Long-term evolution of soil layer with forest
creates the stormflow mitigation

CONCLUSION
Rainfall stormflow response can be simulated by a sigle tankThis response is explained by the pressure propagation in the soil layer
Soil layer evolution is supported by the root network and fastsubsurface flow, and responsible for stormflow responses

2. Forest gives no influence on large-magnitude stormflow

This is not true
Stormflow responses as the water pressure propagation
are responsible for the soil layer evolution
supported by the root network as well as pipe drainage

MESSAGE for hazards on soil and water
Movements of soil and water by gravity force are inevitable
due to strong erosional environment in active tectonic regions
Long-term cycle by soil evolution and landslide is derived
from an intraction of forest resilience against this environment

Forest management considering the balance of use and conservation
plays a key role even during large-magnitude storms
Comprehensive land-use strategy is important because
forest use, housing project, erosion control work, and evacuation planningare closely corelated each other

Long-term evolution of soil layer accompanied with forest
causes the stormflow mitigationin active tectonic regions with large magnitude storms
such as Pacific Rim

L3 : Discharge from forested watershed (2)Ken'ichirou KOSUGI (Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University)

Abstract
Understanding a discharge hydrograph is one of the leading interests in catchmenthydrology. Recent research has provided credible information on the importance of bedrock
groundwater on discharge hydrographs from headwater catchments. However, intensive
monitoring of bedrock groundwater is rare in mountains with steep topography. Hence, howbedrock groundwater controls discharge from a steep headwater catchment is in dispute.
This lecture introduces results of long-term hydrological observations using densely locatedbedrock wells in a headwater catchment. We demonstrate that understanding regionalized
bedrock aquifer distribution is pivotal for explaining discharge hydrograph from headwater
catchments.
Then, distributed hydrological models, which calculate topographically-driven
rainwater movement within a catchment, are explained. The models are combined withmechanical analyses of slope stability, producing spatial and temporal variations in safety
factors against slope failures. The models have been used as practical tools in real-time
warning systems for shallow landslide and debris flow hazards. In this lecture, we examine
accuracies and limitations of one of these models, by using hydrological data obtained
through intensive observations conducted at a head-water catchment. The model succeededin predicting decreases in safety factors at some past landside locations, where
topographically-driven rainwater convergences were computed. However, for some pastlandslides, which were located in downstream regions along the main hollow of thecatchment, the model failed to detect decreases in the safety factor. As a result, rainwater
convergence by bedrock groundwater exfiltration was suggested to be one of the controlling
factors for the occurrences of these landslides.
Groundwater, which is formed in a soil mangle as well as in a bedrock layer, is reported
to be one of the main factors governing discharge from watersheds and occurrences oflandslides. In the last part of this lecture, a simple functional model is introduced, whichcorrelate antecedent precipitation indices (APIs) to groundwater level changes caused by
rainwater infiltration. Performances of the model are examined by using hydrological data
observed at 25 locations with various geological settings. Then, based on the model, a new
method is proposed for evaluating slope failure vulnerability in steep mountainous regions.
The method has a potential to establish credible warning and evacuation systems against
landslide and debris flow disasters.

International Hydrological Program
Forest Hydrology −Conservation ofForest, Soil, and Water Resources
The Twenty-fourth IHP Training Course
23 November - 7 December, 2014
Nagoya, Japan

L3 : Discharge fromforested watershed (2)Ken'ichirou KOSUGIGraduate School of Agric.
Kyoto Univ.
& JST CREST

In Japan, mountains cover 73%
of the national landmass

Introduction
Understanding of rainwater movement in headwater catchment
is essential for¾ Water resources exploitation¾ Flood and landslide mitigations¾ Ecosystem management
Various hydrological models have been proposed and used
→ topography and soil thickness distribution (i.e., TOPMODEL)For some catchments, performances of such models areunsatisfactoryThis lecture demonstrates importance of bedrock
groundwater for hydrological processes in headwater
catchments

Water stored in mountains
sometimes trigger enormous landslides
which cause huge damages

Annual precipitation is 1,700 mm

A lot of rain/snow water isstored in mountainous regions

It helps us to developrich life and culture related to water

Water flow in hillslope

Yoshimatsu in
Kagoshima Pref.
(Photo by Prof.
Jitousono)

Rainwater movement in hillslope

Unsat.
verticalSlope gradient & length infiltration(topography)

Forest soil
Soil hydraulicproperties
Bedrock

Discharge

Saturatedhorizontal flow

Distributed hydrological model

Distributed hydrological model
Water balance for each block
L2 D T s  T r S et  't  S et / 't

ER

L2 R  E  Qin  Qout

Time derivative of water content

L

Block volume

Element A

Before storm

During storm

After storm

Water flux calculation② Elevation and soil thickness
to each element

Hydraulic conductivity
EK

K s S e → Unsat. hydraulic conductivity ( HKH§ H· ~
K s  ¨1  ¸ K s S eE
D
D¹
©

Z

③ Solve water balance andmovement

LDK sin Z cos Z

Q

D

Q

① 10×10 m Elements
Soil thickness

Element B

0)( H ! 0)

Hydraulic conductivity above GW
Hydraulic conductivity below GWKs，E：Parameters for each soil type
（Kubota et al.，1988, J. Jpn. For. Soc.）

Distributed hydrological modelCalculation of groundwater level
Calculate H by using effective saturation Se
H

S e d S e ,c

0

n

n
c
n
c

H/D

1 ] Se  ]½°§x x ·
°
¸
y ¨¨
°
¸
© 1 x ¹
°°
¾
y ]
H D
°
1]
°
n
n°



1
]
]
]
>
@
S
e
c
,
°
ただし，xcn
n
1 ]
¿°
x

1/ n

Distributed hydrological model
1.0

S4, 5 (by Eq. (12) with ] = 0.4)
S6 (by Eq. (12) with ] = 0.4)
S4, 5 (by Eq. (10))
S6 (by Eq. (10))

0.8
0.6

n=7
Se,c = 0.2

0.4

S e ! S e ,c

0.2

n=3
Se,c = 0.6

0.0
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Se

（Kosugi et al.，2002, JSECE）

Thick line: observed
Thin line: computed（Kubota et al.，1988, J. Jpn. For. Soc.）

Distributed hydrological model
1.0

Calculation of groundwater level
Calculate H by using effective saturation Se

0.8

0

x

1 ] Se  ]

½
°
°
°
°°
¾
°
°
n
n°
> 1  ] S e ,c  ] @  ] °
°¿
1] n

H/D

S e d S e ,c

H

1/ n

§ x n  xcn ·
¸
y ¨¨
n ¸
© 1  xc ¹
y ]
H D
1 ]
ただし，x

n
c

0.6
n=7
Se,c = 0.2

0.4
S e ! S e ,c

0.2

n=3
Se,c = 0.6

0.0
0.0

Slope stability analyses
Ffs

Real time hazard warning systemfor predicting landslides and debris flow

S4, 5 (by Eq. (12) with ] = 0.4)
S6 (by Eq. (12) with ] = 0.4)
S4, 5 (by Eq. (10))
S6 (by Eq. (10))

C  > D  H J 1  H J 2  J w @cos 2 D tan I> D  H J 1  HJ 2 @cosD sin D

J1：Unsaturated soil density
J2：Saturated soil density

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Se

（Kosugi et al.，2002, JSECE)

Jw ：Density of waterC：
Coherence
I ：Friction angle
D ：Slope gradientHazard warning system by Hyogo Pref.
(Okimura et al., 2011, JSECE)14 km2

Accuracy> 90%

Sumiyoshi watershed
Area：14 km2
Elevation：100-931 m

Study area

Headwater-scale Area：2.10 ha
Q1 watershed Gradient：35 °Soil depth：1.4 m
Estimated bymodel calculation

Landslide scar

il
So

Be

Estimation results of landslides caused by a huge storm in 1967
(Okimura et al., 2011, JSECE)

Comparison
between two WS

Granitic bedrock
Ohtsu

Kobe

k

1km2

Comparison
between two WS

Granitic bedrock

c
dro

100

Rain(mm/d)

50
0
15

Discharge(mm/d)

10

Q1 watershed
Area：2.10 ha
Gradient：35 °Soil depth：1.4 m

K watershed
Areal: 5.99 ha
Gradient: 12°
Soil depth:1.5 m

K watershed

Q1 watershed
Area：2.10 ha
Gradient：35 °Soil depth：1.4 m

5

0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2Year 2009 MonthAreal: 5.99 ha
Gradient: 12°
Soil depth:1.5 m

Topography and soil thickness distribution
Q1 watershed

34 ＝ 81 cases(Kosugi et al., 2012, JSECE)

Other parameters(Kosugi et al., 2012, JSECE)

Distributed hydrological model
81 runs of model calculations with different parameter sets

Tr

0.275

Secet

0.1

C (t/m2)

1.2

tanI

0.7

U

2.65

Simulation
results

Simulation
results

Simulation

Q1 watershed

Soil mantle
groundwater

K watershed

Dischargehydrograph(Kosugi et al., 2012, JSECE)

Estimation of landslides
020

Rain (mm/h)abRain (mm/d)

200
160
120
80
40
0

f 40
g

Case 73
Observed
Case 78

Number of cell

100
80
60
40
20
0
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12

Month

1

c

h

d

i

e

j

2 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12Day

(Kosugi et al., 2012, JSECE)

Fs
Before Storm
End of Storm

Accuracy> 90%

Accuracy> 90%... including“no landslide”
area... including“no landslide”
area

Landslide
cover ratio
63.9%

Estimated bymodel calculation

Before Storm

End of Storm

Storm in 1967

Safety factor Fs

GW at D (cm) GW at C (cm) GW at B (cm) GW at A (cm)

0
40
80
120

Soil mantle GWL

Simulation results(Kosugi et al., 2012, JSECE)

Landslide
cover ratio
63.9%

Landslide scar
Failed to
reproduce> 36%

Failed to
reproduce> 36%

Estimation results of landslides caused by a huge storm in 1967
(Okimura et al., 2011, JSECE)

Estimation results of landslides caused by a huge storm in 1967
(Okimura et al., 2011, JSECE)

Rainwater movement in hillslope

Detailed observation in Q1 watershed
Elevation (m a.s.l.)
86
0

870

a
84
0

c
d
h

80
0

f
g

0
84

B

760

0
82

C
0
81

Bedrock well

0
80

D

D class
CL class
Max. waterlevel
CM class

079

S −N (m)eA780

Discharge

b
860

0

0
83

Horizontal
flow

82

0
85

Slope gradient & length(topography)

Forest soil
Soil hydraulicproperties
Bedrock
Bedrock infiltration

Unsat.
verticalinfiltration

0
78
0
77

Bedrock groundwater

Soil mantle well

0
76
0m
75

Discharge

W −E (m)(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

Drilling boreholes

Borehole locations on cross sections

820

aa

ee

h

Elevation

b
cc b

ff

m a.s.l.
840

dd

800

820

ff

780

800

g
780

70 m
Discharge
measurement

760

Borehole
Soil
D class
CL class

740

CM class
720

Borehole core samples

Bedrock GW

Rain
雨量 (mm/d)(m m /d)(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

2008/2/14
0

2009/2/13

2010/2/13

2009/2/13

2010/2/13

30
60
90
120
0

Depth from
Soil surface

Bedrock
GW
深度水位(m )level (m)

‑10

Ra1n
Rb1
Rc1D
Rd2n
Re2e
Rf2
Rg2s
Rh2w

(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

‑20

‑30

‑40

‑50

‑60

‑70
2008/2/14(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

Bedrock GW

Bedrock GW levels on cross sectionsaaeeLine IIh820

ElevationLine Iffb
cc b

m a.s.l.
840

dd

800

Upper Aq.

820

ff

780

800

g
780

G W flow crossing
topographic divide

Elevation
Middle Aq.

760

Discharge
measurement

Sudden drop in W L Borehole
betw een each Aq. Water level Soil
D class

Lower Aq.

21 Aug. 2009

CL class

18 Jan. 2009

CM class

740

720

18 Jan.

21 Aug.

(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

Modelcalculation
Bedrock GW level (m)Comparisonsamonghydrographs

Middle Aq.

Lower Aq.

Discharge (mm/h)

Soil mantle
groundwater

Discharge

Soil mantle ground water (cm)Dull peak

Discharge (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

q1：Discharge from soil mantle
q1>a 2  b S  S 0 @1/ 2bwhen S  S 0 ! 0

q1

0

when S  S 0 d 0

S t  't  S 0  S t  S 0't

O P t Gt  't / 2  T t Gt  't / 2  q1t  't / 2

Modelcalculation

Discharge (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)

Modelcalculation(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

q2 ：Discharge from lower Aq.
Discharge from middle Aq.
q3：

q2

D 2 h2  hc , 2  qc , 2

q2

0

q3

D 3 h3  hc ,3  qc ,3

q3

0

2

2

~
when h2 ! h2~
when h2 d h2~
when h3 ! h3~
when h3 d h3

Discharge (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)
流出強度 (mm/h)(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

hc , 2   qc , 2 D 2
hc , 2   qc , 2 D 2(Kosugi et al., 2011, WRR)

hc ,3   qc ,3 D 3
hc ,3   qc ,3 D 3Dupuit–Forchheimer formulaq1：Discharge from soil mantle
7% of annual Dis.
q2：Discharge from lower Aq.
q3：Discharge from middle Aq.

93% ofannual Dis.

Recharge mechanismof Bedrock
groundwater

Extended borehole drilling900

31 points¾ Depth: 7 to 78 m
¾ about 50% screen¾ about 50% casing

880

Q1 watershed

860

il
So

Elevation (m a.s.l.)

840
820

dB e ck
ro

800
780
760

Weathering class

740
720

gro
Bedrocker
undwatN - S (m)Rock permeability
0.36〜3.6 mm/h

Boundarydt
D
D - CLCL
CL - CMCM
CM - CHCH
CH - B
B
Bore hole

200

150

100

50

3,000〜30,000 mm/year

0

200

150

100

50

0

Because of soil buffer effect, most of
the rainfall infiltrates into bedrock!

W - E (m)JST CREST Project

Summary¾ In a steep headwater catchment, large amount ofrainwater infiltrates into bedrock, recharging
bedrock groundwater (BRGW)¾ Importance of BRGW for water resources studies
and disaster mitigation studies

Densely-nested
boreholes

Elevation (m a.s.l.)¾ BRGW controls surface hydrological processes in
the headwater catchment

Development of innovative technologies to exploit groundwater resources inmountainous regions in order to achieve a sustainable supply of unpolluted
high-quality water and to mitigate sediment disasters

Soil

Bedrock
Aquifer
N ‑ S

well
Drainage

Groundwater dynamics

(m)

ck
dro
Be

Optimal water harvestingDrain

W ‑ E (m)W ‑ E (m)Utilizationsof mountains as natural reservoirs● Unpolluted high-quality water● Flood and sediment disaster mitigations● Diverse water resources● Promotion of local community ● Low cost, energy, and environmental disturbance ● Conservation of headwaters

JST CREST Project【Methods of study】
1st stage
Discovery methods
1-1 Hydrochemical observation of discharge
1-2 Time-space analysis of discharge source
1-3 Remote sensing

2-1 Hydrogeological survey¾Borehole drilling¾Tracer¾Borehole survey¾Water level¾Pumping & injection ¾Chemistry¾Rock core analysis ¾Stable isotope

Kyoto

Disasters in Kii-peninsula
caused bytyphoon 12th in 2011

1-3 Remote sensing
Groundwater poor

Intensive monitoring catchments¾Thermal infrared¾Airborne electromagnetic¾LIDAR

Groundwater rich

2nd stage
Groundwater dynamics
2-1 Hydrogeological survey
2-2 Physical survey

3rd stage
Exploitation methods
3-1 Optimal water harvesting
3-2 Quality and contamination

2-2 Physical survey¾Electric resistivity¾Resistivity tomography¾Electromagnetic survey¾Penetration test
¾Self-potential survey

3-1 Water harvesting
3-2 Quality and contamination

1-1 Hydrochemical
observation¾Rain & discharge¾Stable isotope¾Temperature¾Chemistry

1-2 Discharge source

Red relief image map: Produced by Asia Air Survey Co., Ltd.

Technologies to exploit groundwater
resources in mountainous regions

Borehole

Physical survey

Weir

Rain gauge

UNESCOWorld Heritage Site

Damages cause by typhoon 12th

30
25
20

時間雨量(m m /h)Hourly rainfall

15
10
5
0
Feb

M ar

Apr

M ay

Jun

Jul

A ug

Sep

O ct

N ov

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Rain of 1 ,4 0 0 m m
triggered a lot ofenorm ous landslides

D ec

Jan

Feb

実効雨量 半減期1.5h

API with HLT of 1.5 h
Feb

M ar

Apr

M ay

Jun

Jul

A ug

Sep

O ct

N ov

D ec

Jan

Feb

250
200
実効雨量 半減期72h

150

Landslides: 2 0 0 0
C asualty: 8 2
Property loss: > 1 billion US$

50
0
Feb

M ar

Apr

M ay

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

O ct

N ov

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
M ar

A pr

M ay

Jun

Jul

A ug

Sep

O ct

N ov

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Jan

Feb

D ec

Jan

API with HLT of 216 h
Feb

実効雨量 半減期720h

API with HLT of 720 h
Feb

Snake
line plot

D ec

実効雨量 半減期216h

Feb“Record of the 2011 Kii Peninsula Typhoon”
Nara. Prefecture, 2013

API with HLT of 72 h

100

M ar

A pr

M ay

Jun

Jul

A ug

S ep

O ct

M ar

A pr

M ay

Jun

Jul

Aug

S ep

O ct

1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0

N ov

D ec

Jan

Feb

API with HLT of 3000 h

実効雨量 半減期3000h

Feb

N ov

D ec

Jan

Feb

Functional model for Groundwater level
C ontour of H
C L Danger
30

GW level = HighAPI with short HLT, X2

縦軸実効雨量（m m1.5） (h)API with
HLT of40

Safe
GW level
= Low

20

10

C ontour of H

0
0

50

100

150

200

（m m ） 半減期7 2 h
API 横軸実効雨量with HLT of
72 (h)

API with long HLT. X1

API with short HLT, X2

Functional model for Groundwater level

Functional model for Groundwater level

Xp

C ontour of HHb0  b1 X 1 1  b2 X 2 2
p

p

p< 1
p= 1

p> 1

API with long HLT. X1

XStudy site

API and Groundwater level (N8)

b

N1

N2

220

N5

N3
N7

200

180

H1
H2

c

1200

Y1

I4
I3

A5

10

Y5

e

I2
I1

A1,2

0
90

A3
1400

00

Y4

d

A4

500 m

1600

100 m

1800

Yotagiri

横軸実効雨量Horizontal
API
30

Vertical
API
縦軸実効雨量H LT 1 .5 h

100

20

50

10

0

0

775

H3

地下水位 （標高m (m)）Groundwater
level

N6

Y3 Y2

150

80

N4

N8

40

H LT 7 2 h

70

WL
実測値
降雨
Rainfall

774

60

773

50

772

40

771

30

770

20

769

10

768
2/13

Asatani

縦軸実効雨量（m m ）
Vertical API (mm)

200

20 m

Rainfall
降雨 （m(mm/h)
m /h）

20 m

240

50 m

10
0

a

Rokkou foothill

横軸実効雨量mm）
Horizontal
API （
(mm)

Rokkou ridge

0
3/16

4/16

5/17

6/17

7/18

8/18

9/18

10/19

11/19

12/20

1/20

Harihara(Kosugi et al, 2014, JSECE)

API and Groundwater level (N8)3020

横軸実効雨量Horizontal
API
Vertical
API
縦軸実効雨量

200
150

400
100

H LT 7 7 h
200

50

0

0

10

0

50

100

150

200

横軸実効雨量mm）
API with
HLT of （72
(mm)
未満

769.7

770.3

770.8

771.8

772.4

772.9

773.4

Snake line plot

H

774

実測値
WL

773

Rainfall
計算値

772
771
770

768
2/13

771.3

b0  b1 X 1  b2 X 2
0.8

未満

200

769.7
770.3
770.8
771.3

150

771.8
772.4
772.9
773.4

100

769.7
770.3

b0  b1 X 1  b2 X 2
0.8

H

769

3/16

4/16

5/17

6/17

7/18

8/18

3.2

9/18

10/19

11/19

12/20

0

200

400

600

1/20

3.2

30

20

10

0
0

50

100

150

200

半減期72hの実効雨量(mm)
APIwith HLT of 72 (mm)

200
150
100
50
0
800

半減期1061hの実効雨量(mm)
APIwith HLT of 1061 (mm)

770.8

50

771.3

m

771.8
772.4
772.9

0
100

200

300

400

500

600

API with横軸実効雨量
HLT of 1061
（m m ） (mm)

700

800

773.4

観測地下水位 低

Low

Observed groundwater level

観測地下水位 高High

Rainfall (mm/h)

地下水位 （標高m (m)）Groundwater
level

775

0

縦軸実効雨量m ）(mm)API with
HLT of（m77250

H LT 1 0 6 1 h

600

縦軸実効雨量（m m ）
Vertical API (mm)

横軸実効雨量mm）
Horizontal
API （
(mm)

800

半減期1.5hの実効雨量
APIwith HLT of 1.5 (mm)(mm)

縦軸実効雨量m m ）(mm)API with
HLT of （1.540

半減期77hの実効雨量(mm)
APIwith HLT of 77 (mm)Snakeline plot

API and Groundwater level (A3)

API and Groundwater level (I3)

H LT 9 6 h

200

Vertical
API
縦軸実効雨量100

H LT 1 0 h

150
100

50

50
0

300

0

横軸実効雨量Horizontal
API
Vertical
API
縦軸実効雨量200

400

H LT 6 1 h

100

200

0

25.5

0

24.5

24

H
23
1/1

2/1

3/4

b0  b1 X
4/4

5/5

0.2

 b2Y

6/5

1.8

7/6

8/6

9/6

11/7

12/8

4.2

100

100
50
50
0

0
0

200

600

0

200

400

600

X1 (mm)

c

120

400

-3
.0

Panel

-3

H

104

b0  b1 X 0.3  b2Y 1.9

a

b

c

-27.0

-9.1

-3.0 m-30.3 -10.8-3.6 m-33.6 -12.5-4.2 m-36.9 -14.2-4.8 m

2/1

3/4

4/4

5/5

6/5

7/6

8/6

9/6

10/7

11/7

12/8

.6

60

2
-4.
-4.8

X2 (mm)

100
80

108

1/1

-1

.9
-36

150

150

6
3.
-3

X2 (mm)

200

10/7

-9.
1
-10
.8
-1
2.
5

b

-27
.0
-3 0
.3

112

100

200

a

250

116

HLT of Vertical API (h)

23.5

WL
実測値
Rainfall
計算値

120

Rainfall (mm/h)

25

地下水位 （標高m (m)）Groundwater
level

124

WWL
L3
Rainfall
計算値

Rainfall (mm/h)

地下水位 （標高m (m)）Groundwaterlevel

H LT 5 7 9 h600

縦軸実効雨量（m m ）
Vertical API (mm)

横軸実効雨量Horizontal
API

250

横軸実効雨量mm）
Horizontal
API （
(mm)

150

縦軸実効雨量（m m ）
Vertical API (mm)

横軸実効雨量mm）
Horizontal
API （
(mm)

300

40
20
0
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

HLT of Horizontal API (h)X1 (mm)

40

1200
900

30
時間雨量 (m m /h)
積算雨量 (m m )

20

600
300

10
0
8/31

0
9/1

9/2

9/3

9/4

9/5

9/6

HLT 3.7 hr

HLT 1070 hr
API (mm)

1500

API (mm)

Past maximum ＝157mm

Hyetograph for Typhoon No. 12
50

Cumulative rainfall (mm)Hourly rainfall (mm/h)(Kosugi et al, 2014, JSECE)

Past maximum = 1243mm

2

1.5

ShobaraHiroshima Pref.
July 16, 2010

1

0.5

0
1

10

100

1000

10000

HLT (h)EPM of API with HLT of1350h

50

1500

First landslide

40

Warning for
sediment disaster
30
Warning for heavy rain
20
Before rainfall

1200

Last land slide

900
時間雨量
(m m /h)Hourly rainfall
Cumulative(mrainfall
積算雨量
m)

600
300

10

0

0
8/31

9/2

9/3

9/4

9/5

9/6

At the occurrence of the first landslide
2⑤③
Past maximum
Kii

Shobara

API with HLTof 3.7 (mm)

既往最大値に対する比Ratio of API
to the past maximum

9/1

積算雨量
(mm)
Cumulative
rainfall(mm)

Ratio of API to the past maximum

既往最大
8/31 4:00
9/1 11:00
9/2 12:00
9/2 21:00
9/3 11:00
9/4 7:00

0.1

Hourlyrainfall(mm/h)
時間雨量(mm/h)

Shallowlandslides

2.5

1

②

①
Below past
maximum

④

庄原
紀伊山地
0
0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

半減期
M (h)
HLT (h)API with HLTof 1070 (mm)Pastmaximum

Debris flow
NagisoNagano Pref.

Area 1
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
Area 5

1000

100

July 9, 2014
Debris flow
17:40

10

1

0.1
1

10

100

1000

Hourlyrainfall(mm/h)
時間雨量(mm/h)

HLT of Horizontal
API (h)M1 [h]
50

HLT (h)EPM of API with HLT of1350h

1500First landslide

40

Warning for
sediment disaster
30
Warning for heavy rain
20
Before rainfall

1200

Last land slide

900
時間雨量
(m m /h)Hourly rainfall
Cumulative(mrainfall
積算雨量
m)

600

10
0
8/31

300
0
9/1

9/2

9/3

9/4

9/5

9/6

積算雨量
(mm)
Cumulative
rainfall(mm)

0.1

Rainfall (mm/10min)

M2 [h] API (h)HLT of Vertical

9/3 11:00

16:40〜17:40
70 mm

20

15

10

5

0
15:00

16:00

17:00

18:00

19:00

102

Combinations
causing EPM

101
100

API with HLT of 0.9 (mm)HLT of Vertical API (h)103

Past maximum
Current storm
Past data

17:00

17:40
35.6 mm

10-1
10-1

100

101

102

103

HLT of Horizontal API (h)API with HLT of 51 (mm)

L4:Effect of vegetation cover on sediment transportation and erosion
Takashi Gomi (Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology)

Abstract
Numerous issues related to land use and vegetation cover changes on soil erosion havebeen concerns in the wide ranges of regions around the world. “International Year of Soil”
in 2015 was announced for increasing awareness and understanding of the importance ofsoil for food security and essential ecosystem functions. Rapid changes in local economic
conditions, population expansion, and shifting resource management policies have been
affected planning of land conversion. Rapid shift from old growth forested area to more
fragmented second growth and agricultural land have degraded ecological resources andfunctions. At the degraded land, soil erosion is central concerns for sustainable land use
management and productivity of resources. Landscape fragmentation can also be associatedwith rapid road expansion and other transpiration which links from market centers and ruralarea in the recent years. Such alternation of landscape induces order of magnitude of soil
erosion at various scales from local, watersheds, to regional scales. In steep mountainous
terrains, probability for the occurrence of mass movement (e.g., landslide and debris flows)increases due to changes in hydrological flow pathways associated with land use changes
and road development. These changes lead to issues for water supply, water quality, soil
conservation, agricultural productivity, natural hazard control, and residential conservation.
In this training course, we explore the effects of vegetation condition on soil erosion
and sediment transport. Vegetation ground covers have important roles for mitigating andreducing soil degradation while vegetation is often altered by land use changes. Within thisclass, we cover basic processes of soil erosion including rain splash, sheet and gully erosion,and mass movement. Soil erosion and resultant loss of soil productivity such as nutrient andcarbon will also be examined using some examples around the world. We also learn about
simple modeling approaches for estimating and predicting soil erosion in a given landscape.
Effects of land use changes will also be included for understanding forest cover, land
conversion vegetation conversion. We then discuss about hydrological connectivity which
is important for understanding sediment transport from hillslopes to rivers and resultant
river sedimentation. Scaling effects from plots, headwater, and larger watersheds are also
considered for examining how processes related to soil erosion can be altered due to land
use changes. We finally learn about specific soil conservation practices for minimizing soil
erosion by using structure and vegetation cover in forested and agriculture lands.

)RUHVW+\GURORJ\&RQVHUYDWLRQRI)RUHVW6RLODQG:DWHU
7KH7ZHQW\IRXUWK,+37UDLQLQJ&RXUVH,QWHUQDWLRQDO<HDURI6RLO

/

(IIHFWRIYHJHWDWLRQFRYHU
RQVRLOHURVLRQDQG
VHGLPHQWWUDQVSRUW7DNDVKL*RPL/DERUDWRU\IRU:DWHUVKHG+\GURORJ\
DQG(FRV\VWHP0DQDJHPHQW
7RN\R8QLYHUVLW\RI$JULFXOWXUHDQG
7HFKQRORJ\*OREDOFRQFHUQVRIVRLOHURVLRQ,QFUHDVHDZDUHQHVVDQGXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIWKHLPSRUWDQFHRI
VRLOIRUIRRGVHFXULW\DQGHVVHQWLDOHFRV\VWHPIXQFWLRQV0DMRUFRQFHUQVIRUVRLOHURVLRQFrom UNEP

From UNEP

6RLOHURVLRQLQYDULRXVODQGVFDSHV

6RLODQG
QXWULHQWORVVMontgomery, D. R., Soil erosion andagricultural sustainability, Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, v. 104,
p. 13,268-13,272, 2007

http://rootsforgrowth.com/soilhealth/(URVLRQ3URFHVVHV

7\SHVRIZDWHUHURVLRQWater erosion

6XUIDFH(URVLRQ*XOO\(URVLRQ

Gully erosion

Rill erosion

Sheet erosion

Splash erosion

0DVV0RYHPHQW
Greater potential for sediment movement

5DLQGURSLPSDFWDQGVSODVK+RUWRQLDQ2YHUODQGIORZ,QILOWUDWLRQH[FHVVRYHUODQGIORZ

RainsplashSoil particle can bemobilized.

'HILQLWLRQV ,QILOWUDWLRQ7KHGRZQZDUGHQWU\RIZDWHULQWRWKHLPPHGLDWHVXUIDFHRIVRLORURWKHUPDWHULDOV ,QILOWUDWLRQ&DSDFLW\7KHPD[LPXP
UDWHDWZKLFKZDWHUFDQLQILOWUDWHLQWRD
VRLOXQGHUDJLYHQVHWRIFRQGLWLRQV ,QILOWUDWLRQ5DWH7KHUDWHDWZKLFKZDWHUSHQHWUDWHVWKHVXUIDFHRIWKHVRLO
DQGH[SUHVVHGLQFPKUPPKURU
LQFKHVKU 3HUFRODWLRQ9HUWLFDODQG/DWHUDO
0RYHPHQWRIZDWHUWKURXJKWKHVRLOE\JUDYLW\

6KHHW(URVLRQ

9 6KHHWHURVLRQLVGHILQHGDVWKHXQLIRUPUHPRYDORIVRLOLQWKLQOD\HUVIURPVORSLQJODQG0DVV0RYHPHQWRill and gully erosion
9 GHWDFKPHQWDQGPRYHPHQWRIPDWHULDOHLWKHULQGLYLGXDOVRLOSDUWLFOHVRUODUJHDJJUHJDWHVLQDZHOOGHILQHGFKDQQHO

HURVLRQLQZKLFKFRKHVLYH
PDVVHVRIVRLODUHGLVSODFHG

&RQVHTXHQFHRIVRLOHURVLRQ 6SODVKLQJRIUDLQGURSVVHSDUDWHVRUJDQLFPDWWHUVLOWDQGFOD\IURPVDQG
 7KHVHPDWHULDOVDUHWKHQZDVKHGDZD\E\VXUIDFHIORZDQGWKHKHDY\VDQGLV
OHIWRQWKHILHOG
 7KLVVDQGLVWXUQHGXQGHUDWWKHQH[W
SORZLQJRIWKHILHOGRUPL[HGZLWKWKH
VXUIDFHOD\HURIWKHVRLODWWKHQH[WFXOWLYDWLRQ%HGORDGDQG6XVSHQGHG
VHGLPHQW

:LQGHURVLRQ
6XVSHQGVLRQ
6DOWDWLRQ&UHHS

%HGORDG tPP PRYHVDVVDOWDWLRQ
FUHHSDQGERXQGLQJ
6XVSHQGHGVHGLPHQW PP PRYHG
DVVXVSHQVLRQDQGIORDWLQJLQZDWHU

Erosion Impacts on streams([FHVVVHGLPHQWLQ
VWUHDPFDXVHZDWHUSROOXWLRQIRUGULQNLQJZDWHUDQGGDPDJHIUHVKZDWHUILVKHV0HDVXUHPHQWRIVHGLPHQW

Estimation of soil erosion+\VWHUHVLVSDWWHUQRIVXVSHQGHG
VHGLPHQW\LHOGVHystersis pattern can
indicate potential sourcesof sediment.
SS particles
Stage 1

Transported
Stage 2

Stage 38QLYHUVDO6RLO/RVV(TXDWLRQ

9 22.1m long
9 9% slope gradient
9 4m wide%HFDXVHODQGPDQDJHPHQWSUDFWLFHVFUHDWHDYDULHW\RIFRQGLWLRQVWKDWLQIOXHQFHWKHPDJQLWXGHRIVXUIDFHHURVLRQODQGPDQDJHUVIUHTXHQWO\ZDQWWRSUHGLFWWKHDPRXQWRIVRLOORVVE\VXUIDFHHURVLRQ2QHRIDYDLODEOHPRGHOVIRUVRLOSUHGLFWLRQLV8QLYHUVDO6RLO/RVV(TXDWLRQ 86/( :LVFKPHLHU:+DQG''6PLWK3UHGLFWLQJUDLQIDOOHURVLRQORVVHV86'$$JULFXOWXUH+DQGERRN86'HSDUWPHQW
RI$JULFXOWXUHThe equation

A = R x K x LS x C x P
9 A = average annual soil loss (tons/ha year)
9 R = rainfall and runoff erosivity index
9 K = soil erodibility factor
9 L = slope length factor
9 S = slope steepness factor
9 C= crop/management factor
9 P = conservation or support practice factor

Characteristics and assumption5 UDLQIDOODQGUXQRIIHURVLYLW\
LQGH[  (PSLULFDOPRGHO $QDO\VLVRIREVHUYDWLRQV 6HHNVWRFKDUDFWHUL]HUHVSRQVHIURPWKHVHGDWD

Erosion index (EI) for a given storm:Product of the kinetic energy of thefalling raindrops and its maximum 30

 %DVHGRQ 5DLQIDOOSDWWHUQVRLOW\SHWRSRJUDSK\FURSV\VWHPDQGPDQDJHPHQWSUDFWLFHV

minute intensity.

 3UHGLFWV /RQJWHUPDYHUDJHDQQXDOUDWHRIHURVLRQR factor =6 EI over a year / 100

A =R x K x LS x C x P. VRLOHURGLELOLW\ /6 VORSHOHQJWKJUDGLHQW Susceptibility of a given soil toerosion by rainfall and runoff.
Depend on:TTexture, structure, organic matter
content, and permeability.

5DWLRRIVRLOORVVXQGHUJLYHQFRQGLWLRQVWRWKDWDWDVLWHZLWKWKHVWDQGDUG
VORSHDQGVORSHOHQJWKA =R x K x LS x C x P& FURSPDQDJHPHQW  5DWLRRIVRLOORVVIURPODQGXVH
XQGHUVSHFLILHGFRQGLWLRQVWRWKDWIURPFRQWLQXRXVO\IDOORZDQGWLOOHG
ODQG

3 (URVLRQFRQWUROFRQVHUYDWLRQSUDFWLFHV Ratio of soil loss by a support
practice
3UDFWLFH3)DFWRU

8S 'RZQ6ORSH




9HJHWDWLRQFRYHU
3ODQWOLWWHU
6RLOVXUIDFH/DQGPDQDJHPHQWA =R x K x LS x C x P&URVV6ORSH&RQWRXUIDUPLQJ

6WULSFURSSLQJFURVVVORSH



6WULSFURSSLQJFRQWRXUA =R x K x LS x C x P

086/(0RGLILHG8QLYHUVDO6RLO/RVV(TXDWLRQ& FURSPDQDJHPHQW DQGS HURVLRQFRQWUROSUDFWLFH IDFWRUVDUHUHSODFHGE\YHJHWDWLRQPDQDJHPHQW 90 IDFWRU &DQRS\FRYHUHIIHFWV (IIHFWVRIORZJURZLQJYHJHWDWLRQFRYHU

$ 5[.[/6[90 %DUHJURXQGZLWKILQHURRW

t $ DYHUDJHDQQXDOVRLOORVV WRQVKD\HDU 
t 5 UDLQIDOODQGUXQRIIHURVLYLW\LQGH[t . VRLOHURGLELOLW\IDFWRU
t / VORSHOHQJWKIDFWRU
t 6 VORSHVWHHSQHVVIDFWRU
t 90 YHJHWDWLRQPDQDJHPHQWIDFWRU

4XHVWLRQ

4XHVWLRQWe are currently working on soil management project in a
12,000 ha Watershed. The area is covered by 30 % groundcover of grass with 25 % canopy of tall weed.
Based on the previous studies in the area, the following
values were determined,–R = 400–K = 0.15–LS = 10
–VM = 0.13
Total Erosion rate of the entire watershed =t/yr

Estimated annual Soil loss, A =t/ha/yr:K\YHJHWDWLRQLVLPSRUWDQWIRU
SUHYHQWLQJVRLOHURVLRQ"

•
•
•
•

9HJHWDWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW 90 IDFWRU

Now we are conducting watershed rehabilitation projects. We
converted vegetation ground cover as the following½ watershed area (Area I) = 25 % tree canopy with a 60 % grasscover (VM=0.038)½ watershed area (Area II) = 25 % short brush cover with 80 %grass cover (VM=0.042)

Estimated annual soil loss of Area I, A1 =t/ha/yr

Estimated annual soil loss of Area II, A2 =t/ha/yr

Then estimate percentage of soil loss reduction after the
rehabilitation management

Vegetation, infiltration, and soil erosion
Soil erosion per 1 mm rain

5HGXFLQJVRLOVSODVK
5RRWJURZWKDQGUHLQIRUFHPHQW,QFUHDVHLQILOWUDWLRQFDSDFLW\3URYLGLQJVXUIDFHURXJKQHVV
Total ground cover (%)
Hiraoka et al., 2010

Chu et al., 2010

Landuse activity and soil
erosion

Forest management and soil
erosionRemoval vegetation decreaseinterception loss.
Reducing infiltration capacity due
to soil compaction increase runoff.

Before timber harvesting

After Catchment
timber harvestingIncreasing the soil erosion
decreases capacity of channel for
flow.
Overland flow
RunoffInfiltration

Infiltration

Suspended sediment yields after timber harvesting
Area

Annualprecipitation

(ha)

(mm)

B3

43.0

B5

150.0

Forested catchment

375.5

N/A

Cutting

N/A

Deer Creek

304

2540

Cutting

25.0Country

Catchment

SSY (kg/ha/yr)
Pre

Post

Increasein SSY(folds)

55.0

N/A

N/A

0.2

Feller–bunchers and skidders

53.0

N/A

N/A

0.6

No additional operations

N/A

N/A

45.0

Skidding and roads

161.7

194.3

1.2

Cable yarding and tractor skidding

Thinning
treatment

Percentage oftreatment (%)

500

Clear cut

500

Clear cut

Skid trail(road) and/or machinery

Reference

Macdonald et al. (2003)

Nothern
America

Needle Branch

75.0

2540

Clear cut

82.0

75.7

208.6

2.8

Cable yarding and tractor skidding

Johnson Gulch research

137.0

N/A

Random thinning

20.0

1.8

13.7

7.7

Tractors and skidder

Watershed 1

96.0

2300

Clear cut

100.0

140.0

1700.0

12.1

Burning and cable yarding

6RLOHURVLRQDIWHUIRUHVWILUH

Megahan (1972)
Brown and Krygier (1971);
Beschta (1978)
Aderson and Potts (1987)

Grant and Wolff (1991)

UnitedKindomAustralia

Watershed 3

101.0

2300

Random thinning

Subbasin EAG

27.0

1200**

Clear cut

25.0
100.0

1500.02600.0

N/A

710.0

1.7

Burning and cable yarding
2.4 Tractor yarding, burning, and roads

Lewis et al. (2001)

Loch Ard (Catchment 10)

84.0

2000.0

Clear cut

70.0

550.0

835.6

1.5

N/A

Ferguson et al. (1991)

Hore

308.0

2458.0

Clear cut

N/A

122.0

571.0

4.7

Felling operations

Leeks (1992)

Kirkton

685.0

2372.0

Clear cut

50.0

141.5

1157.0

8.2

Skylines and tracked vehicle

Johnson (1993)

Afon Tanllwyth

89.0

N/A

Clear cut

20.0

242.0

438.0

1.8

A single harvester

Stott et al. (2001)

Catchment I-3

515.0

1183.0Random thinning

38.7

N/A

N/A

0.3

Roads

Berembun BC1

12.9

2121*

Random thinning

N/A

136.6

269.1

0.7

Tractor or skidder

Webb et al. (2012)

Kasran (1988)

Asia

Japan

Berembun BC3

29.7

2121*

Random thinning

N/A

68.6

117.0

1.0

Tractor or skidder

Bukit Berembun Negeri
Sembilan

13.0

2126*

Random thinning

40.0

136.0

270.0

2.0

N/A

*

Ulu Segama Sabah

50.0-100.0

3280

Random thinning

N/A

600.0

6600.011.0

logging trails

Sipitang Sabah

3.0-18.0

3280*

Clear cut

N/A

240.0

2530.010.5

Tractor removal

Jengka28.4

2508

Random thinning

25.0

100.0

300.0

2.0

Watershed B

1.1

2147

Clear cut

N/A

6.9

9.0

1.3

Catchment K2

17.1

1232

Strip thinning

50.0

1.1

9.2

29.3

Logging roads and skid trails withtractorSkylines and both of no roads andskid trails
Cable yarding and skid trail andZulkifli et al. (1990)
Douglas et al. (1992)
Malmer (1990)
Kasran and Nik (1994)

Evidence of overland flow andsoil erosion

Hotta et al. (2007)
This study (2013)

Note: SSY indicates suspended sediment yields. Asterisk (* and **) indicated annual precipitation and mean precipitation during study period. N/A: Not available.

(IIHFWVRIVRLOZDWHUUHSHOOHQF\5HFRYHU\DIWHU
IRUHVWILUH

Doerr (2000)
MacDonald and Larsen (2012)

,PSDFWRIODQGXVHRQLQILOWUDWLRQFDSDFLW\(IIHFWVRIIRUHVWURDGVRQVWRUPIORZ
JHQHUDWLRQDQGVHGLPHQWWUDQVSRUW஬࿡㻌 㧗ᚿ

(IIHFWVRIIRUHVWURDGRQIORZJHQHUDWLRQ
DQGVRLOHURVLRQ ‫ق‬+LOOVORSHVFDOH &RQWUROOLQJVRLOHURVLRQ5HGXFLQJUDLQGURSLPSDFW

⋈ 3URYLGLQJYHJHWDWLRQ&RYHU

%HGURFN&XWVORSHVHHSDJH+RUWRQLDQRYHUODQG
IORZ

,QFUHDVHVRLOUHVLVWDQFH

......... .……………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………….
…………………………………………………………….

5HGXFLQJVKHDUVWUHQJWK'UDLQDJHGLVFKDUJH

9HJHWDWLRQSUDFWLFHV
9HJHWDULDQ&RYHU
&RQWRXULQJ
6WULS&URSSLQJ
7LOODJH2SHUDWLRQ







⋇ ,PSURYLQJVRLOVWUXFWXUH
⋈ 2UJDQLFPDWWHUDQG
FRKHVLYHSURSHUWLHV

6XEVXUIDFHIORZ⋇ 6RLOPDQDJHPHQWUHGXFLQJVORSH

,QFUHDVH,QILOWUDWLRQ,QFUHDVHUHVLVWDQFHIRUVRLOHURVLRQ5RXJKODQGVXUIDFHDJDLQVWZDWHUDQGZLQGHURVLRQ
6RLOPRLVWXUHUHWDLQLQJFDSDFLW\⋇ 'HFUHDVLQJUXQRIIYHORFLW\

0HFKDQLFDOSUDFWLFHV7HUUDFLQJ
3RQGVDQG'DPVS
9HJHWDWHG%XIIHU6WULS$SODQWHGRUQDWXUDOYHJHWDWLYH
EXIIHULQWKHDUHDWKDWOLQNVWRVWUHDPFKDQQHO
6(59(6$6 Filter Transform Sink+RZ'R%XIIHUV3URWHFWIURPHURVLRQ"

0RXQWDLQFRQVHUYDWLRQ

9HJHWDWLRQILOWHUVHURVLRQLQVXUIDFHUXQRII
6RLO DOVRSROOXWLRQ 
6RXUFH)ORZUHVLVWDQFH+LJKLQILOWUDWLRQFDSDFLW\:DWHUVKHGSHUVSHFWLYHIRUPDQDJHPHQWHeadwater streams

Flood plain stream

Spatial variation and downstream linkages of sediment movementin numerous headwaters is important for watershed management.

Structure for preventing soil surface
erosion and sediment movement withinchannels were introduced.

L5: Nutrient and organic matter export from forested watershed
Hirokazu Haga (Faculty of Agriculture, Tottori University)

Abstract
Forest management is not limited to the forest industry any more. It is one of theimportant pillars of the national land control, because it is considered that water andsubstances supplied from forests to streams are transported in the channel to have large
influences on the water resources and environments in the downstream basins.
The matters that receive special attention in recent years in Japan are the delay of tree
thinning in artificial forests expanded by the forestation policy after World War II and theloss of the original mountain stream environments caused by afforestation and sedimentcontrol works. In the case of the cypress artificial forest, the delay of tree thinning can because the deterioration of infiltration capacity of soil to generate overland flow and muddy
stream water. Previously, the only purpose of tree thinning was lumber production. In lateyears, however, tree thinning is expected to be an important land control technique forsupplying water resources stably through deterring of the overland flow generation andimproving the stream water quality. In fact, Forestry Agency in Japan has widely promoted
the effective tree thinning by supporting large subsidies as a national growth strategy.
However, although proposals and trials of forest management are ongoing under such a
new framework, there are lots of unclear points regarding whether the expected results canbe actually obtained. What kind of change is caused to the rainwater flow paths, streamflow
and geomorphic features of streams by intense tree thinning? What kind of influence isexerted on the water resources and environments in downstream basins? Such informationand knowledge are extremely insufficient. The verification of results and sophistication ofassessment techniques are needed in the near future.
In this lecture, the following points will be introduced: (1) close relationships between
rain water flow paths in hillslope and dissolved substances (nitrogen and organic carbon) in
stream water; (2) a variety of export properties of solid substances (sediment andparticulate phosphorous; (3) dynamics of in-stream wood (fallen tree and thinning residues
supplied from riparian area to stream); and (4) specific methods of their investigations. In
addition, this lecture will include a short practice of field survey using a highly accurate
surveying instrument which employs electro-optical distance metering method. These
topics could help participants enhance their imagination necessary to understand linkage
between forest management and stream water in their country.

upstream
forestNutrient and Organic Matter Export
from Forested Watershed

Nutrient production
farm land- Nitrogen- Phosphorus

Faculty of Agriculture, Tottori University
Hirokazu Haga

- Carbonetc...

urban area

sea/lake/reservoir

downstream
Large contribution of headwater areas to downstream nutrient

Our life and headwater areas

Water as resources for…
- Agricultural use- Industrial use- Electric power generation- Drinking waterin humid regions like Japan,
headwater areas = forested areas
Positive aspectÎ Supply of timber, mushroom, fuel wood, charcoal
Keeping of biodiversity, ecosystem service

High-quality water- little of organic matter- unpolluted- low cost purification- easy to use and apply

Reserved water surface covered by floating wood
Î trouble of water intake, decline of water quality'LVVROYHG2UJDQLF&DUERQ '2&
䞉 soil- and litter-derived
䞉 energy source of lotic and lentic ecosystems
䞉 growth of phytoplankton
䞉 acidification of stream water䞉 transport of metal or agricultural chemical䞉 declining quality of enclosed water area
䞉 disinfection by-product with water purification

ᅵተ
DOC

DOC
8

Hydrological flow paths

A

a)
15

The Mizugaki ResearchWatershed

50

N

Yamanashi Forest Research Institute, Japan
144E

Rainfall/Snowfall
Infiltration

15

44N

0.65 ha40
153

Evapotranspiration

0

P4

40N

Weir
Spring area
Measurement point
10
15
Catchment divide
Contour line
1500
Walkway for accessing
15

20

Soil

Hortonian overland flow

Bedrock Recharge

Throughflow(lateral subsurface flow)

Groundwater flow
Hillslope

140E

32N

136E
132E

Riparian

StreamObservation points of soil water and groundwateralong the bottom of unchanneled catchment

P3
P2.5
P2
P1

SP

0

b)

Spring point

10 20 30 40 50 (m)
P4

1520

Altitude (m)Saturation overland flow
(return flow)

36N

P3

1510
1500

P2
SP

P2.5

P1

Soil
rock
Be d

TDR(CS615)
Tensiometer
Piezometer

1490
0

10

20

30
40
50
Distance (m)6070Haga et al. 2005

Spring area and V-notch weir

P4

P3
P2.5

P2

P1
㻜㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌

㻝㻚㻜㻌㼙

-N
ov

29

ct

Discharge(Ls-1)

30

20

0

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1.0

c)

P1

P2

P2.5

Soil moisture

P3

P4

d)

0.5

30

P1
-0.5
-1.0
0

SP
P1
P2

SP

P2
P1

P3

2.0
P3

NOC
1.5

f)

1.0
P1
0.5
0.0

40
30

㻼㻞

2

June

P2

P1

㻼㻝

SP
P1
6

7

P4

㻼㻞

8

㻼㻝
P2

SP
P1
25

26

27

August
12
July

22

1

11

21

August31

1020

September

30

10

20

October

30

9

19

29

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0

P2
P1

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8

P2

5

P3

30

P4

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8

GRZQZDUG P2XSZDUG

P2.5

40

0 1.0
0.2 0.8
0.4 0.6
0.6 0.4
0.8 0.2
1.0 0
-0.2
-0.4

Groundwater level

P2

50

P2.5

-0.5

22

P3

1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4

e)

1.5

P2

50

P1

60

20

0.5
1.0

70

P1

60

20

Soil porewater pressure

P2
0

70

Depth toWater Table (m)

0.01

12

28

29

July

9

November

DOC concentration of soil water
10

Soil water DOC (mg/L)

Subsurface flow䠙low conc.

Shallow soil water
0.2 m depth

8

DOC (mg/L)

Overland flow䠙high conc.
ᵪᵿᶌᶂᴾᶑᶓᶐᶄᵿᶁᶃ
ᵛᶑᶍᶓᶐᶁᶃᴾᶍᶄᴾᵢᵭᵡ

Depth (m)100.4

20 0.20.2
0Volumetric
Water Content(%)

Volumetric
Water Content (%)

Soil Pore Water
Pressure Head (m)Hydraulic gradient

Vertical HydraulicHead Gradient ( 㸫)Groundwater level

Depth toPiezometric Surface
below Ground (m)Soil porewater pressure

0.4

0.1

0.001

Soil moisture0

Lag>30 h

0.6
10

Rainfall(mm h-1)

-O

ct

-O

13

21

b)

1

Lag<1 h0.6

Soil Pore Water
Pressure Head(m)

Discharge(mm h -1)20
-S
2 4 ep-Sep5b) Event 25-Jul0

RainfallSpring discharge

10

0
10

Spring dischargea) Event 05-Auga)15

Depth to PiezometricSurface below Ground(m)

Rainfall(mm h -1)

Rainfall

25

Ev
e

-Ju
l
05
-A
0 8 ug-A
1 4 ug
-Au
g

nt
#
25
-Ju
01 n
-J
03 ul
-Ju
l
12
-Ju
l

Hydrological measurements
20

6

Short lag time event

higher4

Non-storm event
2

Hypothesis

䞉 Subsurface flow-dominated event
delayed response hydrograph Æ low concentration

Headwater area
Hillslope

Loading (kg/year)

continuous monitoring Æ OK

StreamExport loading = discharge x Concentration
EstimationÍ unrealistic Å continuous monitoring

0

Lower
Long lag time event

Sillica (mg/L)
Short lag time Æ Overland flow Æ High DOC
Long lag time Æ Subsurface flow Æ Low DOC

Convenient method for estimation of concentration
Regression line method

Concentration䠈C䞉 Overland flow-dominated event
quick response hydrograph Æ high concentration

1.0 m depth
Deep soil water

Regression line

Stream discharge䠈Q

C-Q plot Î C-Q relation
Using the C-Q relation, concentration is estimated from discharge

DOC concentration of soil watera broad range of data on C-Q plot

Overland flow䠙high conc.
ᵪᵿᶌᶂᴾᶑᶓᶐᶄᵿᶁᶃ
ᵛᶑᶍᶓᶐᶁᶃᴾᶍᶄᴾᵢᵭᵡ

Depth (m)DOC concentration 䠄mg/L䠅

Soil water DOC (mg/L)

Subsurface flow䠙low conc.

Hypothesis
Even the same stream discharge,
C
Overland flow Æ high concentration
Subsurface flow Æ low concentration

Stream discharge䠄L/s䠅

Q

Hinton et al.1997

Study site

Outlet of the catchment (106 ha)㼓㼍㼡㼓㼑㼐㻌㼔㼕㼘㼘㼟㼘㼛㼜㼑䠄㻜㻚㻢㻡㻌㼔㼍䠅㻻㼡㼠㼘㼑㼠㻌䠄㻝㻜㻟㻌㼔㼍䠅

Flow path and DOC concentration
Stream water DOC conc. 䠄mg/L䠅

C-Q plot
Saturated area: near SP
Overland flow

DOC (mg/L)㻝㻠

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011

㻝㻞㻝㻜Transient state㻤㻢Saturated area: expansion upslope
Subsurface flow

㻠
㻞
㻜
㻜

㻜㻚㻝

㻜㻚㻞

㻜㻚㻟

㻜㻚㻠

㻜㻚㻡

Stream discharge䠄m3/s䠅

24
Flow paths in a hillslope were identified using spring discharge

Hillslope = 0.65 ha䠈Catchment outlet = KD

Stream '2& PJ/)Overland flow-dominatedTransient state

Subsurface flow-dominated㻴㼕㼓㼔㻌㻰㻻㻯
㻸㼛㼣㻌㻰㻻㻯

Stream discharge PV

&RQWULEXWLRQRIVDWXUDWHGVXEVXUIDFHIORZ
WR'2&FRQFHQWUDWLRQRIVWUHDPZDWHUStream water DOC䠄mg/L䠅

Flow paths in a hillslope and &4LQDFDWFKPHQW

Overland flow
14

Transient state flow

12
10
8

Subsurface flow

6
4
2
0
0

ⰾ㈡䜙䠄䠅ᅵᮌᏛ఍ㄽᩥ㞟*䠈

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Stream discharge䠄m3/s䠅

Increase of contributionof subsurface
flow
3/s䠅
ἙᕝỈ䛾ὶ㔞䠄mÎ dilution of stream water DOC

Flow paths strongly control export loading:RRG\GHEULVLQGDPODNHDQGVDOYDJHRSHUDWLRQ

Cumulated loading of
dissolved organic carbon (kg)

Shifting of flow path in a hillslope
Æ Changes in concentration in a catchment

Simulation:
All is overland flow

Simulation:
All is intermediate flow
Observed
Simulation:
All is subsurface flow

toward good countermeasures to lake eutrophication
Î flow path-based estimation of loading exported from forests
Î importance of rainfall-runoff mechanisms

Step formation associated with woody debris

Investigation of woody debris movement
Haga et al. 2002

,QVLWXWUDQVSRUWH[SHULPHQW

7UDFNLQJVXUYH\
RIPRYHPHQW:RRG\GHEULV㻰㼕㼍㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞/RJ

㼐WRVLPSOLI\/HQJWK / Gͤ shorter than channel widthd = 0.14 m, L = 1.7 m
Sediment trap / energy loss of flowing water caused by stepExperiment stream
catchment area 530 ha, reach length 5500 m, width 9 m, gradient 4%

Experimental log deposited after flood

flow

flow
logs moved from a different site to deposit at the same site

7KHRUHWLFDOFRQVLGHUDWLRQ a) 1st Period (n=63) Oct 1, 1997 – Dec 9, 1997





UROOLQJVOLGLQJ
7UDQVSRUWGLVWDQFH P

Transport distance of log (m)depositional form “grounded”

 b) 2nd Period (n=60) Dec 9, 1997 – Jun 3, 1998





0

1000

Other example of “grounded”

at most
10 m

2000

3000

4000

Downstream

5000
Upstream

Location of log on the first day of each period (m)IORDWLQJ

㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜
100~1000 m

㻝㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻝㻜
㻝㻜

㻝㻝
㻜㻚㻝
㻜㻚㻝

Critical
depth
ᾋ㐟㝈⏺

㻜㻚㻜㻝
㻜㻚㻜㻝

㻜㻜㻌㻌㻝㻝 㻞㻌㻌
㻞 㻟㻌㻌
㻟 㻠㻌㻌
㻠 㻡㻌
㻡 㻢㻌㻌㻣㻌㻌㻢 㻣 㻤㻤

1RQGLPHQVLRQDOGHSWK:DWHUGHSWK/RJGLDPHWHU

㻯㼞㼕㼠㼕㼏㼍㼘㻌㼐㼑㼜㼠㼔㻌㼒㼛㼞㻌㼒㼘㼛㼍㼠㼕㼚㼓 Æ 㼠㼞㼍㼚㼟㼜㼛㼞㼠㻌㼜㼍㼠㼠㼑㼞㼚Æ 㼟㼑㼢㼑㼞㼍㼘㻌㼛㼞㼐㼑㼞㼟㻌㼛㼒㻌㼙㼍㼓㼚㼕㼠㼡㼐㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㼠㼞㼍㼚㼟㼜㼛㼞㼠㻌㼐㼕㼟㼠㼍㼚㼏㼑

Scientific data as information for decision-making
Japan

Your country

humid temperate

tropics / steppe / arid

PolicyImplementation

Planning
Data
NationLocal government

Data
Evaluation of effects
Open

Resultwithout disguisethe public

Data is necessary and powerful for planning of policy,
but in case of issue related to natural environment…
- Data is not always correct- Our knowledge about nature should be tested in each case
- People want information to judge the quality of policy
whether government officials or general public

Natural environmental conditions Î large difference
but…..
Basic concept to deal with forest and water resources issues
Î little difference- Understanding water balance (rainfall-runoff), flow path, quality
based on objective data and scientific approach- Planning of water resources policy and evaluating its effects
based on scientific evidence and fact

L6: Evapotranspiration from forest
Yoshiko Kosugi (Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University)
Abstract
With regard to the water cycle in terrestrial ecosystems, approximately 65% of
precipitation reaching the land surface returns to the atmosphere as evapotranspiration, withthe remainder running off to rivers and oceans. The partitioning of precipitation into
evapotranspiration and runoff has been a significant concern for human societies fromancient times. Evapotranspiration is the main driver of the water cycle, and it governs the
Earth’s climate system through control of the water cycle, energy budget, and greenhouseeffect. It also has a huge influence on the carbon cycle, which is driven by photosynthesis,
because transpiration occurs simultaneously with the uptake of CO2 by plants via stomata.
Thus evapotranspiration has an important role in many environmental processes. Studies inmany environmental fields, including forest hydrology, have attempted to understand the
bio-physical mechanism of evapotranspiration as a primary aim.
In this lecture, the significance of evapotranspiration is introduced, and two basic
physical concepts, the energy balance and Penman-Monteith equation, that are commonlyused to investigate the environmental and physiological control of evapotranspiration fromvegetation, are described. Methods for estimating evapotranspiration based on fieldmeasurements are also outlined. In forest ecosystems, evapotranspiration can be divided
into three components: transpiration of plant leaves from a dry canopy, evaporation from a
wet canopy during and after rain, and evaporation from the soil surface. I also briefly
explain how these components can be measured separately to investigate the factors that
control them.
1. Basics of evapotranspiration
1.1 Evapotranspiration and forest hydrology
1.2 Energy balance
1.3 Penman-Monteith equation(Exercise)
2. Measurement of evapotranspiration
2.1 Water budget method
2.2 Micrometeorological methods
2.3 Methods used to measure each components of evapotranspiration

Contents

International Hydrological Programme
Forest Hydrology оConservation of Forest,
Soil, and Water Resources

1. Basics of evapotranspiration
1.1 Evapotranspiration and forest hydrology
1.2 Energy balance
1.3 Penman-Monteith equation(Exercise)
2. Measurement of evapotranspiration
2.1 Water budget method
2.2 Micrometeorological methods
2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

The Twenty-fourth IHP Training Course
23 November - 7 December, 2014

L6:Evapotranspirationfromforest
YoshikoKosugi,KyotoUniv.

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology
Runoff = Precipitation - Evapotranspiration - 'storage
Precipitarion

Evapotranspiration'storage

RunoffTrenberth et al, 2007, J. Hydrometeor, 8, 758-769

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

The partitioning of precipitation into evapotranspiration andrunoff has been a significant concern for human societies.

Water budget of forest vs. bare land
Day of Year
0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

240

270

300

330

360

180

210

240

270

300

330

360

Precipitation(mm day -1)

050Annual Precipitaiton 1602 mm

100

Runoff from bare land 1103 mm
Runoff from forest
714 mmRunoff(mm day-1)

100

Aral Sea In 2004

In 1989 (left)

In 2008 (right)

10

1

0.1
0

30

60

90

120

150

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

Evapotranspiration governs the Earth’s climate system throughcontrol of the water cycle, energy budget, and greenhouse effect.

Evapotranspiration has a huge influence on the carbon cycle,
which is driven by photosynthesis.
O2
O2

O2
O2
O2
O2
O2

O2
O2

O2

O2

O2

O2
O2

O2

O2

O2

H2 O

O2

O2
O2
H2 O
H2 O
O2

O2

O2
O2
O2
O2
O2

O2
O2

O2

O2

H2 O
O2
O2
O2
O2

O2
O2

O2

O2
O2
O2
O2

O2

O2
O2

O2
O2

O2
O2

O2
O2 O2

O2 O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
H2 O
O2
O2 O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2
O2

O2

O2
O2
O2 H 2 O
H2 O H2 O H2 O
H2 O
O2 O 2
H2 O
H2 O
O2
H2 O
H2 O
H2 O
H2 O
H2 O
H2 O
O2
O2
H2 O
O2
H2 O
O2
O2
O2
O2
H2 O H2 O
O2
H2 O
O2 H2 O
O2
O2

http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/sin_riyou/ondanka/con_2.html

The atmospheric circulation

The atmosphere’s energy budget(NASA illustration)(Trenberth et al. 2009)

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology

O2

Actually…
InatmosphereO2:H2O:CO2=550:100Ͳ25:1
Exchangethroughstomata
O2:H2O:CO2=0.3:1000Ͳ10:Ͳ1

1.1Evapotranspirationandforesthydrology
Three components of Evapotranspiration‘Evapotranspiration’
The process by which water is transferredfrom the land to the atmosphere byevaporation from the soil and other surfaces
and by transpiration from plants.
(Oxford Dictionary)

9Runoff = Precipitation - Evapotranspiration - 'storage
9Evapotranspiration = Transpiration + Evaporation during andafter rain + Evaporation from soil
9Evaporation during and after rain = Interception =Precipitation - Through fall - Stem flow
Precipitarion
Evaporation
Transpiration
during and after rain
Evaporation
From soil

Through fall
Stem flow'storage

Runoff

1.2Energybudget

1.2Energybudget

Energy Budget Equations

The Atmosphere’s Energy Budget

Rn = Sd – Su + Ld – Lu

SdRn 䠖 Net Radiation
Sd 䠖 Downward Shortwave 䠄Solar) Radiation
Su 䠖 Upward Shortwave Radiation
Ld 䠖 Downward Longwave Radiation
Lu 䠖 Upward Longwave Radiation

Ld
Su

Lu

Rn = H + OE + G ( + S + M)
Rn䠖 Net Radiation
H 䠖 Sensible Heat Flux
OE 䠖 Latent Heat Flux
G : Soil Heat FluxS 䠖 Physical Storage Flux
M : Metabolic Storage Flux

Su

Sd
H

9Unit W m-2

lE

Lu
Ld

9Flux : The rate of flow of a fluid, radiant energy, or particles across a given area
11

Trenberth et al. 2009

1.2Energybudget

1.2Energybudget

Wien’sLawandgreenhouseeffectStefan-Boltzmann Law and Planetary temperature

Infrared absorbed by greenhouse gases
H2O, CO2

Stefan-Boltzmann Law

LT = HVT4
LT䠖radiation emitted per unit area per unit time by a materialH䠖emittance (black body = 1)
V䠖Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.67*10-8 W m-2 K-4)
T : the Kelvin temperature of the material

Shortwave radiation from the Sun (K=6000)
Wien’s Law
Om=2897.769/T (mm)Om: wavelength at max radiation (mm)400-700nm PAR

Planetary temperature
Tplanetary=(Lt/HV)1/4

Longwave radiation from the Earth (K=290)

suitable for the most living things

1.2Energybudget

Energy budget, Earth vs Moon

Energy budgetofvariouslandsurfaces
MOON

atmosphere => H
Ld (greenhouse effect)
water => OE

no atmosphere => no H
no Ld
no water => no OE

Rn = H + O E + G

Rn = G
Daytime : T = 130 C

DesertForestPaddy field

FLUX (W m-2)

EARTH

T = 17 C

Tlandsurface = 288K (15C)

13

1.2Energybudget

too cold!

Nevertheless, because of the water vapor’s greenhouse effect, actual
temperature at the land surface is,

8-14mm ‘atmospheric window’
Ultraviolet 10-380nm
Visible 380-770nm
Infrared 770nm-1mm

if Lt = 239 W m-2, Tplanetary = 255K (-18C)

Desert : Vehrencamp 1953, Coniferous forest : Mcnaughton & Black 1973, Paddy field : Yabuki 1957
䛂㎰Ꮫ䡡⏕ែᏛ䛾䛯䜑䛾Ẽ㇟⎔ቃᏛ䛃䜘䜚㌿෗

What makes the difference in partitioning of net radiation ?
Nighttime : T = -170 C
Energy budget is a primary concept to understand the Earth’s environment

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

Transport Equation (Mass)

Transport Equation (Heat)‘Under steady state, the flux goes from regions of high concentration toregions of low concentration, with a magnitude that is proportional tothe concentration gradient.’ (Fick's First Law of Diffusion)‘The rate of heat transfer is proportional to the temperature gradient
present in a solid.’ (Fourier's Law)

‫ ܬ‬ൌ െ‫ܿߜ ܦ‬Ȁߜ‫ݔ‬
flux = diffusion coefficient 㽢concentration gradient
J: flux [kg m-2 s-1], D: diffusion coefficient [m2 s-1]
c: concentration [kg m-3], x: distance [m]‫ ܥ‬ൌ ‫ܦ‬ு ߩܿ௣ ȟܶȀ݈‫ ܬ‬ൌ ‫ܦ‬ȟܿȀ݈'c: concentration difference [kg m-3] , l: length, thickness [m]'T: temperature difference [K] , l: length, thickness [m]Ļ(using an analogy of Ohm’s Law, ‫ܦ‬ு Τ݈ =݃ு =ͳΤ‫ݎ‬ு )Ļ(use an analogy of Ohm’s Law, ‫ ܦ‬Τ݈ ൌ ݃ ൌ ͳΤ‫)ݎ‬g: conductance [m s-1], r: resistance [s m-1]

C: heat flux [J m-2 s-1], k: thermal conductivity [J m-1 s-1 K-1]
T: temperature [K], x: distance [m], DH: thermal diffusion coefficient [m2 s-1]
U: density [kg m-3], cp: specific heat capacity [J kg-1 K-1]
Ļ(integrated form)

Ļ(integrated form)‫ ܬ‬ൌ ݃ȟܿ ൌ ଵ௥ȟܿ‫ ܥ‬ൌ െ݇ ߜܶȀߜ‫= ݔ‬െ‫ܦ‬ு ߩܿ௣ ߜܶȀߜ‫ݔ‬
flux = diffusion coefficient 㽢 temperature gradient

Adolf Eugen Fick (1829-1901)‫ ܥ‬ൌ ݃ு ߩܿ௣ ȟܶ ൌଵߩܿ௣ ȟܶ
௥ಹ

Joseph Fourier (1768-1830)

gH: conductance for heat [m s-1], rH: resistance for heat [s m-1]

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

Evaporation (E) and Latent Heat Flux (OE)

Sensible Heat Flux (H)(from Fick’s law for mass transfer)(from Fourier’s law for heat conduction)‫݃=ܧ‬ௐ ȟܿௐ‫ ܪ‬ൌ ݃ு ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ܶ௦ െ ܶ௔ ൌ

E: evaporation [kg m-2 s-1], gW: total conductance for water vapor [m s-1],
cW: concentration of water vapor, absolute humidity [kg m-3]

ܿௐ =ߩ௔ ‫ܯ‬ௐ Τ‫ܯ‬஺ ݁Τ ܲ െ ݁ߛ ൌ ܲܿ௣ ‫ܯ‬஺ Τ‫ܯ‬ௐ ߣൎ ߩ௔ ‫ܯ‬ௐ Τ‫ܯ‬஺ ݁Τܲͳߩ ܿ ܶ െ ܶ௔‫ݎ‬ு ௔ ௣ ௦

H: sensible heat flux [W m-2], gH: total conductance for heat [m s-1], Ua:
density of dry air [kg m-3], cp: specific heat capacity [J kg-1 K-1],
Ts: surface temperature [K], Ta: air temperature [K]Ua: density of dry air [kg m-3], MW: molecular mass of water, MA: effective
molecular mass of dry air, MW/MA=0.622, P: atmospheric pressure [Pa], J:
psychrometer constant [Pa K-1], O: latent heat of vaporization of water [J kg-1],
cp: specific heat capacity [1012, J kg-1 K-1], e: vapor pressure [Pa]‫ ܧ‬ൌ ݃ௐ ߩ௔ ‫ܯ‬ௐ Τ‫ܯ‬஺ Ȁܲ ݁௦ሺ்௦ሻ െ ݁௔ ൌ ݃ௐߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ ݃ௐఘೌ ௖೛ఊ݁௦ሺ்௦ሻ െ ݁௔ ൌଵ ఘೌ ௖೛௥ೈ ఊߩ௔ ܿ௣݁௦ሺ்௦ሻ െ ݁௔ߣߛ݁௦ሺ்௦ሻ െ ݁௔es(Ts): saturated vapor pressure at Ts [Pa], ea: air vapor pressure [Pa]1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

Penman Equation (for evaporation from wet surface, 1948)

Introduction of canopy resistance/conductance by J. MonteithĻ(if we don’t know the surface temperature…..)

Ļ(combining equations to solve OE without Ts)ߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ

H݁௦ ்௔ െ ݁௔ ൅ ο ܶ௦ െ ܶ௔ȟ ܴ௡ െ ‫ ܩ‬൅ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ݁௦ሺ்௔ሻ െ ݁௔ Ȁ‫ݎ‬ுȟ൅ߛ

Penman linearisation

Saturated vapor pressureͳ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ͳ ߩ௔ ܿ௣
݁௦ሺ்௦ሻ െ ݁௔ ൌ‫ݎ‬ௐ ߛ
‫ݎ‬ௐ ߛͳ‫ ܪ‬ൌ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ܶ௦ െ ܶ௔‫ݎ‬ு‫ݎ‬ு ൌ ‫ݎ‬ௐ ĸAssumption for wet surface‫ ܪ‬ൌ ܴ௡ െ ‫ ܩ‬െ ߣ‫ܧ‬ߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ

Slope='

Ta
Ts

ra

OE
ea
ra=1/gaes(Ts)

wetsurfacees(Ts)es(Ta)

Ta[dry canopy]
rH = ra = 1/ga
rW = ra + rc = 1/ga+1/gc= (ga+ gc)/ga gc

stomataraTsea
ra=1/ga
rc=1/gces(Ts)

drycanopy

ra: aerodynamic resistancerc: canopy resistance
ga: aerodynamic conductancegc: canopy conductance

Ta Ts
Temperature

To evaluate the potential evaporation rate from wet surface

John Monteith 1929-2012

Howard Penman 1909-1984

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

Penman-Monteith Equation (for evapotranspiration from vegetation, 1965)

Aerodynamic conductance vs Canopy conductance[Penman Equation for potential evaporation rate]

grass land, crop field

forestOE

Hȟ ܴ௡ െ ‫ ܩ‬൅ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ݁௦ሺ்௔ሻ െ ݁௔ Ȁ‫ݎ‬௔ߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ
ȟ൅ߛ

Ta

ra

Ts
stomataȟ ܴ௡ െ ‫ ܩ‬൅ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ݁௦ሺ்௔ሻ െ ݁௔ Ȁ‫ݎ‬௔ȟ ൅ ߛሺͳ ൅ ‫ݎ‬௖ Τ‫ݎ‬௔ ሻ

Determining factors of evapotranspiration related to vegetation =aerodynamic resistance (ra), canopy resistance (rc)ea
ra=1/ga
rc=1/gces(Ts)

drycanopy

[Penman-Monteith Equation for dry canopy]ߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ

OE

H[wet surface]rH = rW = ra = 1/ga

ga: 50 – 1000 mm s-1
gc: 1 – 20 mm s-1

ga: 5 – 100 mm s-1
gc: 1 – 40 mm s-1

gc governs E

Both gc and ga govern E1.3PenmanͲMonteith Equation

Exercise

Big Leaf Model[Dry Canopy]

OE

H[Wet Canopy]
H

Ta

ea
ra=1/garaTsstomata

Ta

ra

Ts

rc=1/gces(Ts)

OE
ea
ra=1/gaes(Ts)

Q: Using the Penman-Monteith equation, calculate the evapotranspiration
rate (E) and latent heat flux (OE) from a forest (ga = 200 mm s-1) or from shortgrass (ga = 10 mm s-1) for Rn-G = 400 W m-2, Ta = 20C, es(Ta) - es = 1kPa ; (a)when the surface is wet, (b) when gc = 30 mm s-1.
(' = 145 [20C, Pa K-1], Ua = 1.204 [20C, kg m-3], cp = 1012 [J kg-1 K-1],
J = 66.1 [20C, 145 Pa K-1], O= 2.454 [20C, MJ kg-1])

Caution! UNIT (mm s-1 -> m s-1, kPa -> Pa, MJ kg-1 -> J kg-1)

drycanopy

wetcanopy
Wetcanopy

Penman-Monteith Equation

rc=0, Penman Equation

A: (a) forest:
short grass:(b) forest:
short grass:

E = 0.000581 kg m-2 s-1
E = 0.000135 kg m-2 s-1

OE = 1426 W m-2
OE = 331 W m-2

E = 0.000188 kg m-2 s-1 OE = 461 W m-2
E = 0.000123 kg m-2 s-1 OE = 302 W m-2(‘Plants and Microclimate7 3rd Eddition, H.G. Jones, 2014)

2.1 Water budget method

Contents

Runoff=Precipitation Ͳ Evapotranspiration Ͳ 'storage

1. Basics of evapotranspiration
1.1 Evapotranspiration and forest hydrology
1.2 Energy balance
1.3 Penman-Monteith equation(Exercise)
2. Measurement of evapotranspiration
2.1 Water budget methods
2.2 Micrometeorological methods
2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

2.1 Water budget method

precipitarion evapotranspiration'storagerunoffVarious weirs depending on runoff range

2.1 Water budget method
Water budget over the world

At KEW (Japanese cypress forest)
Precipitation 䠖 1645mm
Runoff䠖

873mm

Evapotranspiration䠖

772mm

40 years average (1972-2011)
Anual Runoff or Evapotranspiration(mm year-1)

1400

W B RunoffW B Evapotranspiration

1200

Q=P-749

1000
800

749m m

600
400
1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Anual Precipitation (mm year -1)

2200

䠄Kondo,1999)

2.2 Micrometeorological methods
Estimation of Potential Evaporation Rate[using air temperature data]
Thornthwaite Eq., Hamon Eq.
[using more precise met data]
Penman Eq., Penman-Monteith Eq.

2.2 Micrometeorological methods
Micrometeorological methods for evaluating evapotranspiration
 Bowen ratio–energy balance (BREB) method
 Eddy covariance (EC) methodHࣅࡱ= ࡾ࢔ െ ࡳ Τ ͳ െ ߚܲߩ௔ ܿ௣ ȟܶࡴൌߚൌͲǤ͸ʹʹߩ௔ ߣȟ݁ࣅࡱȟܶ ൌ ܶ௔ଶ െ ܶ௔ଵȟ݁ ൌ ݁௔ଶ െ ݁௔ଵ

OE

ea1
rH = rW
ea2
Ta2

Ta1

Boundarylayer
vegetation

E : Bowen ratio
http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/grid-j/gridtxt/pet.html

Howistheactualevapotranspirationfromvariousvegetation?

IS Bowen, 1926, The ratio of heat losses by conduction and by evaporation from any water
surface, Phys. Rev., 27, 779-787

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

Micrometeorological methods for evaluating evapotranspiration
 Bowen ratio–energy balance (BREB) method
 Eddy covariance (EC) method

Ecosystem flux observation with eddy covariance method
6U-WIND
m/s

4
AGERAGE=1.24m/s

2
0

9If H2O concentration is high when vertical wind go down,
and low when wind go up,
net H2O molecules were absorbed into vegetation.
(=condensation)-2
4
W-WIND
m/s

2

AGERAGE=0.00m/s

0
-2

-4
15.0

CO2

3

AGERAGE=14.53m/s

mmol/m9If H2O concentration is low when vertical wind go down,
and high when wind go up,
net H2O molecules were emitted from vegetation.
(=evapotranspiration)

14.5

14.0
0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Ultra sonic anemometer
Ultra sonic anemometerFor x, y, z wind and T at 10Hz For x, y, z wind and T at 10Hzߣ‫ ܧ‬ൌ ߣ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ ߩ௩ ᇱ

H2O molecule , Uv [kg m-3]

‫ ܪ‬ൌ ߩ௔ ܿ௣ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ ܶ ᇱ

Vertical wind, w [m s-1]

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

Ecosystem flux observation with eddy covariance method

Ecosystem flux observation with eddy covariance method

8

9

10

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

2.2 Micrometeorological methods

Flux measured with EC =Imbalance Problem

Cross check with water budget methodࡾ࢔ െ ࡳ ് ࡴ ൅ ࣅࡱ

EC VS Short-term water budget
Total Flux =ࡻࡸࡿ࢙࢒࢕࢖ࢋ ൌ++ࡴ ൅ ࣅࡱࡾ࢔ െ ࡳ

2.2 Micrometeorological methods
Big-leaf model analysis of canopy conductance

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration
Leaf-scale gas exchange[Advantage]
9 stomatal behavior
9 link with photosynthesis
9 control factors of gas exchange

Jan-MarApr-Jun
Jul-Sep
Oct-Dec

Midday gc (m s-1)

4
E (mm day-1)

Stomatal conductance model Jarvis type model(Jarvis 1976 Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B)+ Lohammer function for f(D)(Lohammer 1980 Ecol. Bull. ) Ball type model(Ball et al 1987Progress in Photosynthesis Res.)(Leuning 1995 Plant, Cell & Environment)

30

5

3
2

20

gc declined in
winter and spring.

10

1
0
0

5

10

15

0
20
0
5
Daily mean VPD (hPa)

10

15

20

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

Sap flow

Plant water potential
1[Advantage]
9 stand-scale continuous transpiration
9 timing of the onset of transpiration
9 scale up to the canopy transpiration

1

2

3

Sap flow measurements
 Heat pulse method (1)(Swanson & Whitfield 1981J. Exp. Botany) Thermal dissipation probe method (2)(Granier 1987 Tree Physiol.) Stem heat balance method (3)(Sakuratani 1981 J. Agric. Meteorol.)
etc..

2

3

1
[Advantage]
9 Plant water status
9 Pressure-volume curve
9 SPAC water movement(Soil-Plant-Atmosphere Continuum)
Water potential measurements
 Pressure chamber (1)(Scholander et al 1964 Proc Na Aca Sci USA) Psychrometer (2) Stem Psychrometer (3)2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

Interception (throughfall, stemflow, fog)

Leaf wetness

1

1[Advantage]
9 Transition between evaporation andtranspiration at rainfall event
9 gas exchanges during and after rain

[Advantage]
9 Evaporation during and after rain
9 Water budget components
Interception measurements
 Throughfall (1) Stemflow (2) Fog (3)1

2

Measurements
 Wetness sensors

3

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration

Lysimeter

Combination of EC flux and soil water budget method
2000

ĸrain

1500

(mm)

[Advantage]
9 Soil evaporation
9 Snow evaporation
9 Evapotranspiration from crop/grass field
9 Whole-plant transpiration

1000ĸevapotranspiration (EC)50002003/1

2004/1

2005/1

2006/1

2007/1

2008/1

2009/1

2010/1

2011/1

2012/1

Rainfall - Evapotranspiration (assuming MAX 'storage water of whole soil column)' Storage water of 0-0.5 m soilĻRainfall – evapotranspiration

50

(mm)

0
-50
ĸ50ha Plot

-100
-150
2003/1

Ĺ0-50cm soil water budget
2004/1

2005/1

2006/1

2007/1

2008/1

2009/1

2010/1

2011/1

2012/1

DatabasedonKosugietal2011JFR

2.3 Methods to measure each components ofevapotranspiration
Multi-layer model parameterized with field observations[Advantage]
9 Control factor analysis
9 Scale up
9 Ecosystem modellingetc..

L7: Water resources in forested watershed
Hikaru Komatsu (The Hakubi Center for Advanced Research, Kyoto University, Japan)

Abstract
This class will be held on the last day of the series of lectures. You will have learned
basic knowledge of forest hydrology before this day. In this class, we will apply theknowledge to think about practical problems.
This class focuses on the relationship between forests (or, more generally, vegetation)
and water resources (WR). Specifically, we will study two questions, i.e., (1) whether
deforestation/afforestation reduces WR and (2) whether converting native forests toplantations reduces WR.
First of all, we will think about why these problems are important. Many factors, otherthan vegetation, affect WR (e.g., topography, geology, and meteorology). What is thedifference between the vegetation factor and other factors? Also, we will discuss how torepresent WR. The meaning of “WR” is vague, as that of “intelligence” is. What kinds ofindices do we use to represent “WR”?
To study the two problems raised above, there are two steps. First, changes in WR withchanges in vegetation (e.g., deforestation) are evaluated using data recorded at a site.
Second, applicability of the results to other sites/regions are examined. We will see methods(e.g., time-trend analysis and the paired-catchments method) used in the first step anddiscuss advantages and disadvantages of each method. We will see methods used in thesecond step and learn a lesson that although Asia has been learning from results obtained inadvanced countries such as Europe and America, the results are not always applicable toAsia. Namely, we have to consider indigenous conditions of the target region to propose a
WR policy, instead of directly adopting policies developed in Europe and America. I am
looking forward to seeing and talking with you all.

WaterResourcesin
ForestedWatershed

PersonalHistory
Sameura damreservoirinShikoku

Hikaru Komatsu
TheHakubi CenterforAdvanced
Research,KyotoUniversity

DroughtUsual
2

Today’squestions

Whyisvegetationimportant?

1.Deforestation/Afforestation
reduces waterresources(WR)?

Meteorology
Geology

2.Convertingnativeforeststo
plantationsreducesWR?

Topography

RunoffWR

Vegetation

30.0

30.0

Runoff(mmdayͲ1)

TokyoUniv For

20.0

20.0

10.0

0.0

Dayoftheyear

0.0
1
20
39
58
77
96
115
134
153
172
191
210
229
248
267
286
305
324
343
362

10.0

1
20
39
58
77
96
115
134
153
172
191
210
229
248
267
286
305
324
343
362

Runoff(mmdayͲ1)

Howtorepresentwaterresources?

DayoftheyearTwosteps
1.ExaminechangesinWRata
site

Runoff(mmdayͲ1)

30.0

20.0

2.Assessapplicabilityoftheresultstoothersites/regions

10.0

1
20
39
58
77
96
115
134
153
172
191
210
229
248
267
286
305
324
343
362

0.0

Dayoftheyear

ExaminationatasiteTimeͲtrendanalysis

Runoff

Runoff

Simplecomparison

Runoff

Runoff

Before After

Clearcut Forest

Runoff

After

PairedͲcatchmentsmethod

BeforePrecipitation

Runoff

Runoff

Deforestation/Afforestation

Runoff(treated)

After

BeforeRunoff(control)
TokyoUniversityForests

Precipitaqtion,
runoff(mmyͲ1)

Precipitation

2000

Cut
1000

Annualrunoff
Treated(mm)

Maita etal.(2005)

Rawdata

Maita etal.(2005)

1200

After
800

Before400

Control
0

0
1993

1995

1997

1999

0

2001

400

Year

800

Control(mm)BoschandHewlett(1982)Lowflow
Maita etal.(2005)

After

0.6
0.4

Before0.2㻢㻜㻜Treated(mm)0.8Treated(mm)

1200

㻠㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻜

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

Control(mm)

0.8

㻜

㻞㻜

㻠㻜

㻢㻜

㻤㻜

Cutarea(%)

㻝㻜㻜Farleyetal.(2005)20

Nativeforests/plantations

Lowflow change(%)

0
Ͳ20
Ͳ40
Ͳ60
Ͳ80
Ͳ100
Ͳ80

Ͳ60

Ͳ40

Ͳ20

0

20

AnnualͲrunoffchange(%)

BoschandHewlett(1982)

SwankandDouglass(1974)

㻞㻜㻜

Canopyclosure
㻝㻜㻜
㻜
㻙㻝㻜㻜

㻢㻜㻜

Treated(mm)Runoffincrease(mmyͲ1)

Coniferplanted

㻠㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻙㻞㻜㻜
㻜
㻜

㻙㻟㻜㻜

5

10

㻞㻜

15

High

JPN
US

NZ

㻝㻜㻜㻜

Runoff(mmyͲ1)

Low

㻢㻜

㻤㻜

㻝㻜㻜

Cutarea(%)

Yearsafterbroadleafcutting

Winterrainfall
DeciduousEvergreen/phenology

㻠㻜

Komatsuetal.(2009)䕦 Conifer䕿 Broadleaf
䠇 Insect infestation

㻤㻜㻜
㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻜
㻤㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻝㻠㻜㻜

㻝㻢㻜㻜

Precipitation(mmyͲ1)㻝㻤㻜㻜Komatsuetal.(2011)㻤㻜㻜䕔 US (low P)
䕕 US (high P)
䕦 NZ
䖃 JPN (low P)
䕿 JPN (high P)

㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻜


   Precipitation(mmyͲ1)

Runoffincrease(mmyͲ1)

Runoffincrease(mmyͲ1)a) coniferousb) broadleaf

Komatsuetal.(2011)㻤㻜㻜䕔 US (low P)
䕕 US (high P)
䕦 NZ
䖃 JPN (low P)
䕿 JPN (high P)

㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻜


   Precipitation(mmyͲ1)

L8: Basics of forest dynamics
Hisashi SATO (Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Sciences and Technology, JAMSTEC)
Abstract
Vegetation is the most crucial component affecting water and energy cycles on the land
surface. Indeed, between 80% and 90% of the total evapotranspiration from the land surface
is estimated to be caused by transpiration, and the process consumes almost half of the solar
energy absorbed by the land-surface. The impact of vegetation on the climatic environmentis evident in our everyday experience. For example, the temperatures of land surface inurban areas covered in concrete and asphalt are typically higher than those in areas coveredin vegetation.
Therefore, around middle of the 1980's, simulation models used for predicting
long-term climate changes have embedded Land Surface Model (LSMs) that consider suchinteractions between terrestrial surface and atmosphere. Initially, these models only treatedthe water and radiation balances on the land surface. Around the end of the 20th century,
they gradually incorporated carbon balances to predict changes in atmospheric CO2
concentration. Subsequently, the changes in vegetation distribution caused by climatechange were also taken into consideration.
In this lecture, I present a brief explanation of the various land-atmosphere interactions
and how such interactions have been modeled. Subsequently, we will look into detail forforest dynamics and plant geography, both of which constitute recent LSMs. We will allot
enough time for learning forest dynamics, and how it interacts with local environment.
Finally, we will discuss how such LSMs can be utilize for planning forest and landscapemanagements under trend of rapid climatic change.

7KH7ZHQW\IRXUWK,+37UDLQLQJ&RXUVH)RUHVW+\GURORJ\&RQVHUYDWLRQRI)RUHVW6RLODQG:DWHU
5HVRXUFHV1RYf'HF#1DJR\D-DSDQ)RUHVW'\QDPLFV,QWHUDFWLRQVEHWZHHQ
9HJHWDWLRQDQG$WPRVSKHUH

fEDVLVDQGPRGHOOLQJf
'HF/HFWXUH
'HF([HUFLVH
/HFWXUHU+LVDVKL6$72

-DSDQ$JHQF\IRU0DULQH(DUWK6FLHQFHVDQG7HFKQRORJ\ +RZYHJHWDWLRQDIIHFWVLQWHUDFWLRQVEHWZHHQWHUUHVWULDOVXUIDFHDQGDWPRVSKHUH&DUERQ

9HJHWDWLRQLPSDFWRQVXUIDFHWHPSHUDWXUH*HRJUDSKLFDOGLVWULEXWLRQRIVXUIDFH
WHPSHUDWXUHREVHUYHGDW6HQGDLFLW\GXULQJGD\WLPHRQDPLGVXPPHUGD\

6RLO6XUIDFH
7HPS

Observations were made in the air using ahelicopter-based radiation thermometer (Observedby Hirofumi SUGAWARA). )URP.RQGR  
PRGLILHGE\6DWRHWDO  &DUERQ

>([DPSOH@

6RLO6XUIDFH
7HPS&DUERQ 7UDQVSLUDWLRQ
6HQVLEOH 6KRUWZDYH
3UHFLSLWDWLRQF\FOH /DWHQWKHDWKHDW
UHIOHFWLRQ&OLPDWLFHIIHFWVRI7URSLFDOGHIRUHVWDWLRQ

7KH'HYHORSPHQWRI&OLPDWHPRGHOVFrom: Climate Change 2001 (IPCC)
Technical Summary of the Working
Group I Report>([DPSOH@

Foley HWDO  

7LPHVFDOHVRIODQGHFRV\VWHPSURFHVVHV
(&2/2*,&$/

3+<6,2/2*,&$/

'HPRJUDSK\3KRWRV\QWKHVLV&KDQJHVLQJURZWKPRUWDOLW\  
UHFUXLWPHQWUDWHV 

6WRPDWDO2SHQLQJ%LRPH6KLIW&KDQJHVLQGLVWULEXWLRQRIELRPH
x 

6XFFHVVLRQ/HDI
3KHQRORJ\Basis for plant population
dynamics
Topics:&KDQJHVLQFDQRS\VWUXFWXUHFRPSRVLWLRQ y One-sided competition for lighty Self-thinning rule & Three-halves law

0RQWKV+RXUV:HDWKHU
3UHGLFWLRQ<HDUV

'HFDGHV,QWHUDQQXDO
9DULDELOLW\&HQWXULHV$QWKURSRJHQLF
&OLPDWH&KDQJH

y Successiony Gap-dynamics
y Wild fire as a major disturbance scheme

Incorporating ecological Processes is critical to forecast the
responses of land-ecosystems to anthropogenic climate change
2ULJLQDO)LJXUH3URI0RRUFURIW35

7KH6HOIWKLQQLQJ 7KUHHKDOYHVODZ

2QHVLGHGFRPSHWLWLRQIRUOLJKW

7UHH%

7UHH&*UDVV

*UDVV
/HDI'HQVLW\ŬŃŠŃůŤŬŃƎ

7UHH&

7KHRU\ź‫ܤ‬ůŤ‫ܤ‬ůź‫ܤ‬Ť

Ť‫ܤ‬ŧŬŃ 5HODWLYH6XQ/LJKW,QWHQVLW\ůŤŬŃ /HDI$UHD,QGH[DERYHWKH
PHQWLRQHGOD\HU P 

)RUHVW6WUXFWXUH

ŮŃ /LJKW$WWHQXDWLRQ)DFWRU
7\SLFDOO\DURXQG ź‫ܤ‬ŧ

Local vertical structure prominently controls
competition for light among trees

Succession: Sequential changes of physiognomy, those are
mediated by plant induced environmental changes (such as soil

7UHH'HQVLW\ P ůŃŃ/HQJWKRIVLGHRIDSODQWź0HDQELRPDVVSHUSODQWŤ$UHDSHUDSODQWŧ3ODQWGHQVLW\

If succession occurs on a disturbed site with soil, it iscalled Secondary Succession
6RXUFHRIWKLVILJXUH
WUHHSULPDU\VXFFHVVLRQ>$UW@,Q%ULWDQQLFD2QOLQHIRU.LGV5HWULHYHG
IURPKWWSNLGVEULWDQQLFDFRPFRPSWRQVDUW

formation and sun light interception)

If it begins in barren area where soil was not formed,
it is called Primary Succession)LJXUH,ZDWVXER  ஌௔েଙ৾

6HFRQGDU\6XFFHVVLRQ3ULPDU\6XFFHVVLRQ>([DPSOH@7HPSHUDWHIRUHVWLQ1RUWK$PHULFD([DPSOH 2EV >([DPSOH@7HPSHUDWHIRUHVWLQ1RUWK$PHULFD

Secondary succession is a much faster process
than to the primary succession

6RXUFHRIWKLVILJXUHIRUHVWILUHVHFRQGDU\VXFFHVVLRQ$UW%ULWDQQLFD2QOLQHIRU.LGV:HE6HSW
KWWSNLGVEULWDQQLFDFRPFRPSWRQVDUW!

7UHH%

5HODWLYH/LJKW,QWHQVLW\$/LJKWDWWHQXDWLRQIRUPXODWLRQEDVHGRQ
WKH/DPEHUW%HHUODZ

7UHH$0HDQELRPDVVSHUSODQW J 

7UHH$,QDGHQVHSODQWSRSXODWLRQWKH6HOIWKLQQLQJRFFXUVZLWKJURZWKRIPHDQSODQWVL]H7KLVSURFHVVJHQHUDOO\UHVXOWVLQ
WKH7KUHHKDOYHVODZ

&KDQJHVLQODQGDWPRVSKHULF
LQWHUDFWLRQVZLWKVXFFHVVLRQ&DUERQF\FOHVGHYHORSPHQWRID6LQJOH6WRULHG6WDQG
)ROLDJHELRPDVV‫*ܥ‬33

6FKHPDWLFGLDJUDPIRUSRVWILUHFKDQJHVREVHUYHGLQWKH$ODVND GXULQJVXPPHUWLPH 

3KDVH

)ROLDJHUHVSLUDWLRQUDWH

$OEHGR

6WHPUHVSLUDWLRQUDWH

6RLO6XUIDFH
WHPSHUDWXUH

3KDVH*33

7RWDOUHVSLUDWLRQUDWH

6HQVLEOH
+HDWIOX[3KDVH3KDVH

3KDVH

/DWHQW+HDW
IOX[

133
7LPH

Source f this Figure: Kira(1984) ೸ఝ௔भেଙ

133

1HW
5DGLDWLRQ)ROLDJHELRPDVVUHDFKHVPD[LPXP

3KDVH
6WHPELRPDVVVWLOOJURZWKUHVXOWLQJLQKLJKHUUHVSLUDWLRQͻFoliage biomass saturate faster than stem biomassͻ^Ž͕EWWŐƌĂĚƵĂůůǇĚĞĐůŝŶĞƐĂĨƚĞƌfoliage saturation)LJXUH/LX 5DQGHUVRQ  -*5

:LOG)LUHDVDPDMRUGLVWXUEDQFH
VFKHPH*DS'\QDPLFV
6PDOOJDS

Saplings of shade-tolerant
species fill the gap
Saplings of sun tree
species fill the gap/DUJHJDS
6KDGHWROHUDQWWUHHV)LUHIUHTXHQF\ $67(5 

6XQWUHHVDeaths of a canopy tree can cause gap dynamics, which is apartial decay and recovery (due to secondary succession)of small area in a dense forest

Wild Fire is a common disturbance scheme amongSemi-arid area and Boreal forest area

5ROHRIZLOGILUHLQVHPLDULGUHJLRQV

5ROHRIZLOGILUHRQ/DUFK)RUHVWLQ(DVW6LEHULD

Sparse forest maintain thickgrass layer, and it producesmuch fuel load

9HJHWDWLRQ7\SH )LUHIUHTXHQF\$FFXPXODWLRQRIRUJDQLF
OD\HURQVRLOVXUIDFH

5HGXFWLRQRIWUHHJURZWKGXHWROLWWOHVRLOZDWHU

5HFUXLWPHQWRI/DUFK7UHHVIn the dry season, this fuelload helps to spread wild fireFire mostly kills small
trees, and such size
dependency maintains
savanna

6KRUW

f\HDUV0RUWDOLW\UDWHGXHWRZLOG
ILUH
7UHH
W\SH
D

7DOO

5LVLQJ3HUPDIURVWOD\HU

7UHH
W\SH
E

7UHH
W\SH
F

7UHH
W\SH
G

7UHH
W\SH
H

([SRVHGVRLOHQKDQFHVKHDWH[FKDQJHVEHWZHHQ
VRLODQGDWPRVSKHUH

f<HDUV/RZHULQJ3HUPDIURVWOD\HU

\HDUVf
6WDQGUHSODFLQJILUH

FD\HDUVLQWHUYDOOLQ(DVWHUQ6LEHULD 

<HDUV+RIIPDQQ 6ROEULJ  )RU(FRO0DQDJH

:LOG)LUHPDLQWDLQV6DYDQQDHFRV\VWHP

:LOG)LUHLVDNH\IRUUHJHQHUDWLRQRIODUFKIRUHVW$ERXW6(,%'*90,2DQG&RPSRVLWLRQRI6(,%'*90

9HJHWDWLRQ
5HSUHVHQWDWLRQ/DQG6XUIDFH0RGHOV
/60V WKRVHWUHDWSODQWSRSXODWLRQG\QDPLFV$VLPXODWLRQUHVXOWIRU
7HPSHUDWHIRUHVWIndividual trees compete
for light and spacewithin a virtual forest

6XEPRGHOVWKDWFRPSRVH6(,%'*90
3URFHVV

3K\VLFDOSURFHVV

$SSURDFK6RXUFH5DGLDWLRQ%HHU VODZ(YDSRWUDQVSLUDWLRQ3HQPDQ0RQWHLWKWUDQVSLUDWLRQLQWHUFHSWLRQHYDSRUDWLRQIURPVRLOVXUIDFH

0RQWHLWK 8QVZRUWK 

6RLOZDWHUSURFHVV

6LPSOHEXFNHWPRGHO0DQDEH  

3K\VLRORJ\ 3KRWRV\QWKHVLV:RRG\3)7V W\SHV 

0LFKDHOLVW\SHIXQFWLRQ

0DLQWHQDQFH
UHVSLUDWLRQUHVSLUDWLRQUDWHLVLQSURSRUWLRQWRQLWUDWHFRQWHQWVIRUHDFKRUJDQ

5\DQ  

*URZWKUHVSLUDWLRQEDVHGRQFKHPLFDOFRPSRVLWLRQRIHDFKRUJDQ

3RRUWHU  

6WRPDWDOFRQGXFWDQFH

DVHPLHPSLULFDOPRGHODVDIXQFWLRQRI93'

/HXQLQJHWDO  

3KHQRORJ\DVHWRIVHPLHPSLULFDOPRGHOVRIZKLFKSDUDPHWHUVZHUHHVWLPDWHGIURPVDWHOOLWH1'9,GDWD

%RWWDHWDO  'HFRPSRVLWLRQ FDUERQ VRXUFH RI GHFRPSRVLWLRQ ODELOH SDUW RI OLWWHU DQGSDVVLYHSDUWLQPLQHUDOVRLO

6LWFKHWDO  

FOLPDWLFDOO\IDYRUHG3)7VHVWDEOLVKDVVPDOOLQGLYLGXDOV6LWFKHWDO  

0RUWDOLW\IXQFWLRQRInDQQXDO133SHUOHDIDUHD|nKHDWVWUHVV|nELRFOLPLWLFOLPLW|DQGnILUH|6LWFKHWDO  'LVWXUEDQFH ILUH 

DQHPSLULFDOIXQFWLRQRIVRLOPRLVWXUHDQGIXHOORDG.LUVWHQHWDO  (FRORJRFDO (VWDEOLVKPHQW'\QDPLFV3ODQWVSHFLHVZHUHVXPPDUL]HGLQWR
3ODQW)XQFWLRQDO7\SHV 3)7V 

3KRWRV\QWKHVLVFRQGLWLRQIRUZRRG\3)7V 'LUHFWUDGLDWLRQ 
Midday radiation is calculated
for each individual tree
for each 10cm-interval crown layer.

7URSLFDOEURDGOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ7URSLFDOEURDGOHDYHGUDLQJUHHQ7HPSHUDWHQHHGOHOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ7HPSHUDWHEURDGOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ7HPSHUDWHEURDGOHDYHGVXPPHUJUHHQ%RUHDOQHHGOHOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ%RUHDOQHHGOHOHDYHGVXPPHUJUHHQ%RUHDOEURDGOHDYHGVXPPHUJUHHQ*UDVV3)7V W\SHV &JUDVV&JUDVVHerbaceous species are represented
by average biomass per unit area

3KRWRV\QWKHVLVFRQGLWLRQIRUZRRG\3)7V 'LIIXVHGUDGLDWLRQ /HDIDUHDGHQVLW\

5HODWLYH
UDGLDWLRQ





Lower crown layer suffersfrom self-shading
To avoid ‘edge effect’, it is assumed
that virtual forest repeats

Based on average leaf-area-density for each crown layer, mean
intensity of diffused radiation was calculated for each crown layer+RUL]RQWDOVWUXFWXUHZDVLJQRUHG

*URZWKSURFHGXUHIRUZRRG\3)7V  $OORFDWLRQFRQWUROIDFWRUV
biomassleaf
biomassroot
biomassleaf
biomassstock'DLO\FRPSXWDWLRQ'DLO\DYDLODEOH
UHVRXUFH

*URZWKRI
5RRW

constant:DWHUVXSSO\FRQVWUDLQ
GXHWRWKHFURVVVHFWLRQ
DUHDRIVDSZRRG

*URZWKSURFHGXUHIRU*UDVV3)7V

:HHNO\
5XQQLQJPHDQV

leaf _ massroot _ mass

133RQWRSRIWKHJUDVVOD\HU

const .

2SWLPDO/$,

0DLQWHQDQFH
UHVSLUDWLRQUDWH
RIOHDYHV

6SDWLDOFRQVWUDLQWE\SUR[LPDWHWUHHV$GMXVWPHQWVRI
7UXQN7UHHKHLJKWDQG
FURZQGLDPHWHUJURZWK
5HSURGXFWLRQZLWKDOOUHPDLQLQJFDUERQDWWKLVVWDJH

0HDQ133IRUHDFKFURZQOD\HU

([FHVVUHVRXUFHZLOOEHDFFUXHGRYHUWRWKHQH[WGD\$OORFDWLRQFRQWUROIDFWRUV0RQWKO\FRPSXWDWLRQ$QQXDOWRWDO*URZWKRI
/HDYHV3DFNLQJFRQVWUDLQ
GXHWRWKHFURZQVL]H$OORFDWLRQFRQWUROIDFWRUV$OORPHWU\UXOHVDPRQJ'%+WUHHKHLJKW
DQGFURZQGLDPHWHU*URZWKRI
6WRFNRUJDQconstant*URZWKSURFHGXUHIRUZRRG\3)7V  

0HDQPDLQWHQDQFH
UHVSLUDWLRQFRVWIRUHDFKFURZQOD\HU$QQXDOFRPSXWDWLRQ
2SWLPXPFURZQGHSWK$GMXVWPHQWRIFURZQGHSWK&DUERQDQG:DWHUF\FOHV'DLO\FRPSXWDWLRQ/HDI5RRWJURZWK6WRFN2UJDQJURZWK
8QWLOLWFRPHVWRVDPHDPRXQW
RIH[LVWLQJOHDIPDVV

5HSURGXFWLRQ$OOUHPDLQLQJUHVRXUFHLVXVHG
IRUUHSURGXFWLRQ DGGWROLWWHU &ODVV'LVFXVVLRQ+RZ'\QDPLF9HJHWDWLRQ0RGHOVFDQEHXWLOL]HGIRU)RUHVW0DQDJHPHQW&DUERQF\FOHV:DWHUF\FOHV)URP6DWRHWDO  

Supplements

*OREDO'LVWULEXWLRQRI1DWXUDO9HJHWDWLRQ

3ODQWJHRJUDSK\DQG
%LRPH
7RSLFVy*OREDOGLVWULEXWLRQRIQDWXUDOYHJHWDWLRQ
y%LRPHV 'HILQLWLRQ'LVWULEXWLRQDQG%RXQGDU\ 
y%LRFOLPDWLFOLPLWV7URSLFDO(YHUJUHHQ)RUHVW7URSLFDO'HFLGXRXV)RUHVW7HPSHUDWH%URDGOHDI(YHUJUHHQ)RUHVW7HPSHUDWH1HHGOHOHDI(YHUJUHHQ)RUHVW7HPSHUDWH'HFLGXRXV)RUHVW%RUHDO(YHUJUHHQ)RUHVW%RUHDO'HFLGXRXV)RUHVW(YHUJUHHQ'HFLGXRXV0L[HG)RUHVW
6DYDQQD*UDVVODQG6WHSSH6KUXEODQG
7XQGUD'HVHUW

Biome:A major regional ecological community characterized
by distinctive life forms and principal plant species2.
Terrestrial ecosystems are typically classified into 5~20
biomes, those are mostly determined by climate.
,6/6&3

$'LFWLRQDU\RI(FRORJ\(YROXWLRQDQG6\VWHPDWLFV$QH[DPSOHRI%LRPH
7URSLFDOUDLQIRUHVW&RPPRQFKDUDFWHULVWLFV%XWWUHVVURRW'HQVHDQGVWUDWLILHG
IRUHVWVWUXFWXUH(SLSK\WLFSODQWV%LRPHGLVWULEXWLRQLQHDVWHUQ$VLD
Very short summer, andvery cold winterEĞĞĚůĞůĞĂǀĞƐĂƌĞƚŽůĞƌĂŶƚfor frost damage anddehydration'ULSWLSVWinter is not suitable forphotosynthesis
Moderate climate
throughout the year
Warm and Humid
throughout the year
3KRWRVDUHJDWKHUHGIURPWKH:HE

These characteristics are commonly observed in Tropical rain
forests, although species composition much differs among regions$GDPV  9HJHWDWLRQ&OLPDWH,QWHUDFWLRQ

Warm throughout the year,
but dry season exist

In eastern Asia, alternative band of Evergreen and
Deciduous forest exists along latitude%LRPHGLVWULEXWLRQ :KLWWDNHU %LRPHERXQGDU\>([DPSOH@1RUWKHUQSDUWRI0RQJROLD1RUWKIDFHGVORSH/DUFKIRUHVW6RXWKIDFHGVORSH6WHSSH

3KRWR)RUHVWVRI1RUWKHUQ0RQJROLD)&$7RGD\ ZZZIFDWRGD\FRPSDJHKWPO 

Biome boundaries generally transit gradually, but topographic
heterogeneity produces mosaic-structured transition zone

7KLVLVMXVWDQHPSLULFDOSDWWHUQ%LRFOLPDWLFOLPLWV3K\VLRORJLFDO5HTXLUHPHQWV‫ڨ‬%LRPHGLVWULEXWLRQ+ROGULGJHOLIH]RQH %LRPHGLVWULEXWLRQZDVDFWXDOO\FRQWUROOHGE\%LRFOLPDWLFOLPLWVIRUHDFK3ODQW)XQFWLRQDO7\SHV 3)7V >([DPSOH@+LJKWHPSHUDWXUHLQMXU\&)RUPRVWSODQWVSHFLHV&)RUVRPHVXFFXOHQWVSHFLHV

>([DPSOH@)URVWGDPDJH

&7(YHUJUHHQ%URDG/HDYHG6SHFLHV&7'HFLGXRXV%URDG/HDYHG6SHFLHV
1ROLPLWV‫ک‬%RUHDO&RQLIHU6SHFLHV
Efforts have been paied toestablish more mechanistical
criterion by employing a Biotemperature and an Aridity
index.

PFTs: a classification of plant species in terms of their responses toenvironmental changes such as higher air-temperature and CO2† : Beerling & Woodesrd (2001) Vegetation and the Terrestrial Carbon Cycle: "೘েधপਞभ4੏ফ(఺ਆ૱୲ ૰ఊ)n‡ For the Minimum Air temperature in the nature of the earth surface%LRFOLPDWLFOLPLWV
5HTXLUHPHQWVIRUVDWLVI\LQJ/LIH&\FOH
>([DPSOH@7HPSHUDWXUHUHTXLUHPHQWVIRU:RRG\6SHFLHV.RSSHQ  

2MLPD  ŷŃš
ŷ¼ORJų

3!
3!¼7

ŷŃDQQXDOPHDQWHPSHUDWXUH LQ& ųDQQXDOSUHFLSLWDWLRQ LQPP >([DPSOH@*URZWK'HJUHH'D\ *''UHTXLUHPHQWVIRUZRRG\3)7VLQWKH/3-'*90*''!7HPSHUDWHEURDGOHDYHG HYHUJUHHQVXPPHUJUHHQ *''!7HPSHUDWHQHHGOHOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ*''!%RUHDOQHHGOHOHDYHGHYHUJUHHQ*''!%RUHDOVXPPHUJUHHHQ QHHOGHEURDGOHDYHG $QQXDOVXPRIGDLO\DLUWHPSHUDWXUHDERYHZKLFK&%LRPH6KLIW&OLPDWHGDWD
6WDWLFYHJHWDWLRQPRGHOV'\QDPLFYHJHWDWLRQPRGHOV%LRFOLPDWLFHQYHORSH

%LRFOLPDWLFHQYHORSH
GHWHUPLQHV3)7VWRHVWDEOLVK&RPSHWLWLRQDPRQJ3)7V

&RPELQDWLRQVRI3)7VWKRVHH[LVW%LRPHZDVGHWHUPLQHGZLWKVRPHFULWHULD

Ranges, as indicated by pollen percentages in
sediment, of spruce and oak in eastern North America#3UHVHQW'D\@#\UVDJR

Davis & Shaw (2001)

6RXUFHRIWKH)LJXUH
$GDPV  9HJHWDWLRQ&OLPDWH,QWHUDFWLRQQGHGLWLRQ*HRJUDSKLFDO'LVWULEXWLRQRI&ORVHG)RUHVWDQG'HVHUW+RZWRGHWHUPLQH%LRPHLQYHJHWDWLRQPRGHOV

Species of trees, not communities of forests, tracked their climaticniches at their own rates and along their own trajectories

&DUERQ&\FOHVLQ/DQG(FRV\VWHPV
&2HPLVVLRQ&28SWDNH&DUERQF\FOHVLQYHJHWDWLRQ̆<*URZWKELRPDVV%LRPDVV

̆**UD]HGELRPDVV

5U5HVSLUDWLRQ

7RSLFVy*331331((̆//LWWHUIDOO

6RLO2UJDQLF
0DWWHU 620 

5K+HWHURWURSKLF
5HVSLUDWLRQy(VWLPDWLRQPHWKRGVIRUFDUERQF\FOHV

133

*33 7RWDO3KRWRV\QWKHVLV3URGXFWLRQ *33‫ ڨ‬1335U
133‫̆*̆<̆ ک‬/1(3x *33t5Ut5K ̆%LRPDVV̆620

y*HQHUDOSDWWHUQVRIFDUERQF\FOHV‫*ڨ‬URVV3ULPDU\3URGXFWLRQ‫ک‬1HW3ULPDU\3URGXFWLRQ

x1HW(FRV\VWHP3URGXFWLRQ ‫ ؠ‬െ1HW(FRV\VWHP([FKDQJH 

1(3(VWLPDWLRQ

1(3(VWLPDWLRQ 6XPPDWLRQ0HWKRG *33(VWLPDWH

E\6WHPGLDPHWHU133̆< *URZWK%LRPDVV ̆/ /LWWHU)DOO ̆* *UD]HG%LRPDVV 

0HDVXUHPHQWVRISKRWRV\QWKHVLVUDWH

PHDVXUHPHQWV,QWHJUDWLRQIRUERWKRI
7LPHDQG/HDIOD\HUVKWWSZZZOLFRUFRPെ

KWWSZZZIRUHVWU\DFQ]

5HVSLUDWLRQUDWH(VWLPDWH

&RPELQHGZLWKE\/LWWHU7UDS0HDVXUHPHQWV

E\(VWLPDWHG5RRW

7XUQRYHUUDWH
KWWSZZZFUHVWPRQVRRQRUJPDHPRK

6SHFLHV6SHFLILF
$OORPHWULF
(TXDWLRQV

6WHP'LDPHWHU
0HDVXUHPHQWV$OORPHWU\
5HODWLRQVKLS
0RUL6HWDO
 
31$6ŔœŚŃ

KWWSZZZIRUHVWU\DFQ]

*LOO -DFNVRQ  1HZ3K\WRO$GDSWDWLRQDQGDFFOLPDWLRQRISKRWRV\QWKHVLVSURSHUWLHVRIOHDYHVWRHQYLURQPHQWDOOLJKW
LQWHQVLW\+LJK&RPSHQVDWLRQSRLQW





/RZ
/LJKWLQWHQVLW\)OX[WRZHU

0DLQWHQDQFH5HVSLUDWLRQ3KRWRV\QWKHWLFUDWH

Leaf properties are “optimized”
to the sun light intensity of thegiven environment0D[3KRWRV\QWKHWLFUDWH

>([DPSOH@6WUDWLILHGIRUHVW
LQDWURSLFDOUDLQIRUHVW(VWLPDWLRQRI1(3 RU1(( :LWKWKH(GG\FRUUHODWLRQPHWKRG([DPSOH(VWLPDWLRQRI9DSRUIOX[9HUWLFDO
:LQG6SHHG
$EVROXWH
KXPLGLW\
9DSRUIOX[7LPH
8OWUDVRQLF
:LQG6HQVRU
&2+2$QDO\]HU

NEP=-NEE=-(FC+SC)
FC: CO2 flux
SC: Changes in CO2 concentration withi)LJXUH7HUDVKLPD  ೘੟भেଙ
3KRWRVZZZZHDWKHUFRMSH[WRPDNRPDLKWP‫ؚ‬ॡজঐॸॵॡઙૄভ঺

(VWLPDWHGFDUERQF\FOHVRINH\ELRPHV  

(VWLPDWHGFDUERQF\FOHVRINH\ELRPHV  
Ranges of estimated NPP/GPP ratio
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

BorealForest)LJXUH(GG\YDQGHU0DDUHO  9HJHWDWLRQ(FRORJ\

Temperate
ForestTropical
ForestGrassland

Cropland$PWKRU %ROGRFFKL  7HUUHVWULDOKLJKHUSODQWUHVSLUDWLRQDQG
QHWSULPDU\SURGXFWLRQŬƑ7HUUHVWULDOJOREDOSURGXFWLYLW\ͻŝŽŵĞƐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƐƚĞŵďŝŽŵĂƐƐŚĂǀĞůŽǁĞƌƌĂƚŝŽ
ͻTropical Forest has the lowest ratio among the key biomes

L9: Global/local hydrometeorology and forest (1)Tetsuya Hiyama (Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University)
Abstract
In this lecture, ecohydrological research results obtained from an interdisciplinary
research project No.C-07 of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN),
entitled ‘Global Warming and the Human–Nature Dimension in Siberia: Social Adaptation
to the Changes of the Terrestrial Ecosystem, with an Emphasis on Water Environments’(P.I.: T.H.) are shown. Main contents of this lecture are summarized below.
The extent of Arctic summer sea ice, especially in the Eurasian continent side, has been
decreasing. Global warming is a partial cause. Cyclones have appeared frequently insummer in the region, bringing much precipitation to Siberia and its forest ecosystems.
Because water-logging and humidification severely damaged to our monitoring forest ineastern Siberia, evapotranspiration and photosynthesis properties changed drastically after
2007.
Meteorological data revealed high rates of summer precipitation in the upper andmiddle parts of the Lena River Basin from 2005 to 2008 and in 2012.㻌 Thus summer riverflooding around Yakutsk, capital city of the Sakha Republic of the Russian Federation, has
become a problem, severely damaging local agriculture and pastoralism. On the contrary,
the spring thaw along the Lena River typically causes river ice flooding, which can besevere when low winter temperatures are followed by gradually increasing spring
temperatures. Such spring floods have caused severe damages to local residents living
along the river in almost every year since 1998.
We investigated local people's perceptions and local governmental adaptation strategies
for both spring- and summer-river flooding. Interestingly, spring flooding has beenrecognized as beneficial except when it causes damages to villages along the river. This isbecause spring floods bring nutrient-rich water to the river islands on which the farmers
cultivate pastures for cattle and horses. Summer river flooding, on the contrary is seen as ahazard, because it submerges the pasture completely in summer, and prevents getting of hay
for cattle and horses.
Village relocations were adopted as one of the adaptation strategies to prevent damages
from spring floods. Because local people prefer to live along the river on which theirsubsistence depends, they agreed, with government support, to migrate seasonally. There
have been no similar adaptations to summer flooding, however. Based on our observations
and analysis, we intend to promote sustainable subsistence activities in the region byproposing strategies to facilitate information transmission and improvement of feed-hay
distribution networks that can aid in adaptation to spring and summer river flooding.

The TwentyͲfourth IHP Training Course

Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN)

2014.12.01

Forest Hydrology оConservaƟon of Forest, Soil,and Water Resources

MultiͲdisciplinarity

їInterͲdisciplinarity

Science for science

L9:

ї

ї

TransͲdisciplinarity

Science for (in) society

Global/localhydrometeorology
andforest(1)HIYAMA Tetsuya

RIHNͲSiberia project(2009 Ͳ 2014)(HyARC, Nagoya University)

Global warming

Permafrost DistributionїͲͲͲͲͲͲ> InterͲdisciplinary project

Permafrost Terrestrial Ecosystemї

HumanͲbeing

Permafrost Degradation in the middle part of the Lena River Basin
Photos provided by A.R. Desyatkin

Eastern
Siberia

Arctic Ocean
Stage 1 (bullar)

Stage 2 (dyede)

Thermokarst lake

8,000 – 10,000 years(Brown et al., 1997)

Stage 3 (tuumpu)

Basics of the Permafrost

Stage 4 (alas)

Climate Change in the Lena River Basin

Seasonal Variation in Soil Temperature㛤ⴥⴠⴥLeafFoliation

LeafFallo⏕⫱ᮇ㛫 Growing Season0

Depth (cm)

-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
-120

(Shiklomanov and Lammers, 2009)59 Mar. 90 April121 May152June183July214 Aug.245 Sep.276 Oct.307 Nov.338 Dec.
Feb.

Month of 1998
⼥ゎ῝
Thawing Depthάືᒙ

Annual Maximum Active Layer
Thawing Depth(Ohta, Hiyama et al., 2001: HydrologicalProcesses)( AMTD )Figure 2. (http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/jp/seaice/extent.htm)
Annual time series of river discharge over the
Downstream monitoring sites of the six largest Russian
Basins and four North American basins, and aggregatedArctic sea ice extent. (Shiklomanov, 2010)

Permafrost Degradation in the middle part of the Lena River Basin

Research Objectives and Hypothesis• Objectives :1) To understand the changes of environment in Siberia caused by
Global Warming (GW).
2) To understand the impacts of GW on the society (the life of local
resident) through humidification, floods, and permafrostͲforest
degradation.
3) To suggest suitable adaptationstrategies.

1998

1993

• Hypothesis :meltͲwater from groundͲice
around 30 %Siberia will be humidified in a warmer climate(at least in decadal 䡚 half century scale)• Main Research Region :Lena River Basin (Sakha Republic, Russia) of Eastern Siberia
2003

2008

(Fedorov, Hiyama et al., 2014: Ecohydrology)

Main Research Topics

Research Group Structure

Climate Change• High Precipitation ї Permafrost Ecosystems
Waterlogging ї Changes in H2O, CO2 and CH4 fluxes• Flood Impacts

ї CattleͲhorse Pastoralism
Local Residents
River Floods ї Benefits or Hazards ?

• Flora and Fauna

ї Reindeer Herding
Degradation ї Adaptation to ecosystem changes

Social Changes

ї Foci : not only global warming but also social changes

CanopyͲscale Fluxes of H2O & CO2 at Larch Forest in Eastern Siberia

Flux Observation at Two Sites with Different Precipitation
Temperature,
Humidity , Wind,
Precipitation

OverͲhumidificationїCanopyͲscaleFluxes

Phenology observed from the Tower

ET (mm month Ͳ䠍)400
Precipitation (mm/year)

Soil Temperatureand Moisture

300

㻡㻜

98

㻠㻡

01

㻠㻜

03

USM
YKT

08
06

99

07

05

㻟㻡

04

Annual Prec.

200

99

JJA mean

㻜㻚㻡

09

10

04

㻜㻚㻠
㻜㻚㻟㻡

08

07

03

09

98
10

01

㻜㻚㻟
㻜㻚㻞㻡

㻟㻜
㻝㻡

㻞㻡

㻟㻡

㻠㻡

JJA mean

㻣

06

㻜㻚㻠㻡

㻢㻚㻡

06

07

05

㻢

09

04

㻡㻚㻡

08

㻡

10

㻠㻚㻡
㻠

㻝㻡

SWC0Ͳ50cm (%)

100

05

GPP (Pmol mͲ2 sͲ1)

JJA mean㻡㻡ET efficiency

Flux of Heat,
Water, and CO2㻞㻡㻟㻡

SWC0Ͳ50cm (%)

㻠㻡

㻝㻡

㻞㻡

㻟㻡

SWC0Ͳ50cm (%)

0
1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

(summer)

Precipitation (mm/month)80
70(ET & ET efficiency) я (SWC)(GPP) я (SWC)

Change response after 2007

Change response after 2008

Monthly Prec.

60
50

USM

40

YKT

30
20
10

䞉 Clear relationships between (SWC) and (ET, ET efficiency, GPP)
䞉 After 2007 Ͳ 2008, the relationships have changed.

01(Ohta, Kotani)(autumn)

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

(Ohta, Kotani et al., 2014: Agric.For.Meteorol.)㻠㻡Forest Damage (Regional or not ?)Reconstruction of Past Water Environment from Isotope Analysis in Tree Ring
12C

13C

99䠂

1䠂

ț13 C

Analysis of ASTER spectral imageºª § 13 C ·»« ¨¨ 12 ¸¸« © C ¹ sample  1» u 1000 ( ͙ )»« § 13 C ·»« ¨¨ 12 ¸¸»¼«¬ © C ¹ std

2001
2009

Early
Wood

250

Late
Wood

350

1 year time lag

300

200

250

150

200

100

150
100

50

50
0

0
1910

1920

1930

(Tei, Sugimoto et al., 2013)

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Precipitation in Growing
season䠄mm䠅

Estimated SoilͲwater
Content in past

¾ɷ13C in Late wood䠖Clear negative correlation between Isotope andPrecipitation (Kagawa et al., 2003)

㸸YKS

Wildfire
Insectdiseases
Waterlogging

͸㸸Changed Polygon(Yamamoto)Year

Decadal Trend of AMTD

Future Change of Species and Biomass in Forest

AMTD : Annual Maximum Thawing Depth

Dynamic Vegetation Model including Permafrostprocesswith Permafrost
without Permafrost
with

with

with

with
without

without

without

withwithout

without(cm)
䞉 Deepening of AMTD
䞉 Abrupt deepening after 1980’s
䞉 More than 30 cm deepening around permafrost boundaries
э Due to increase in winter snowfall and soil moisture(Park)(Zhang, Yasunari, Ohta, 2011: ERL)

CH4 Emission in Siberia

CH4 Emission in Siberia
Atmospheric methane 䠄CH4䠅 concentration

Western Siberia

Eastern Siberia

warm
cold

ј
LatitudeWesternSiberia
Emission from wetlands

0

Year

(from JMA web site http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/ghg/kanshi/ghgp/22ch4.html)

јEasternSiberia
Emission from biomass burning (?)э Depends on air (and soil) temperatureэ Seesaw pattern between western and eastern Siberia(Kim, Maksyutov)

GPP (Gross Primary Production) and ER (Ecosystem Respiration) in and around Siberia(2001 – 2010)

Gross Primary Production䠄GPP䠅

Impact of River Floods to the Social Adaptation
CattleͲHorse Pastoralism 䠄river sandbanks䠅 э Submerge of grass & hay
Houses & Villages 䠄along the river䠅э Inundation of houses
䛆Subjects in FR5䛇

East ј 䠄in spotͲscale љ䠅• How does the Global Warming affect river floods ?
• How does the Local Society adapt on river floods ?

West љ

䛆Social Adaptation䛇

Vegetation Activities:

Ecosystem Respiration䠄ER䠅

•

Subsistence Activitiesэ Aggregation of local knowledge•

Global Warmingэ Limits in adaptation (Adger etal., 2007)

䠄River Ice Jams䠅

(Smit and Wandel, 2006)

䠄Inundated Houses in Spring䠅䠄Harvesting Grasses䠅

(Sasai, Yamaguchi)

Is It caused by the Global Warming ?

Is the Risk of River Flood getting more Serious by Global Warming ?
IceͲJam Flood(Sakai)“River Ice Jam”

The spring thaw brings iceͲjams from the upper stream when the downstream is still frozen.
IceͲjam dam keeps large amount of water and ice, and it is suddenly broken.
This derives a serious flood.

Kjusjur
Dzardzan

Latitude dependent
Warming rate
Global average䠖0.0074Υ/yr
䠄IPCC 2007䠅

Zhigansk
The melted ice in upper stream starts toflow when the downstream is still frozen.
An iceͲjam dam keeps large amount ofwater and ice, and it suddenly is broken
Sangary
causing a serious flood.

33km(Sakai)

2007/
05/13

05/14

Lensk
Vitim

05/15

Is the Risk of River Flood getting more Serious by Global Warming ?

16 May, 2002
WL: 8.2 m

19 June, 2006
WL: 9.6 m

15 May, 2007
WL: 9.3 m

Batamaj
Yakutsk
Olekminsk

Pokrovskaja

Υ/yr

Isit

Is the Risk of River Flood getting more Serious by Global Warming ?

15, June, 2007
WL: 8.4 m

SpringFloodэ f (Ice thickness, Spring temp.)
Winter temp. ј 䠃 Snowfall јэ Ice thickness љэ Spring temp. determines
size of spring flood

SummerFloodэ f (summer heavy rainfall)(Sakai)Average Warming rate in Lena Basin(Park, Yoshikawa)

DOYFuture Impact to Winter River Road for Transportation
Frozen period is
almost half of a
year

Squeezeofwinterroadperiod
If 8 o C increase of temperature
after100 years
200 m

㻞㻠㻜
20t

Usabledaysperyear

㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻞㻜

About 2/3 ofroad in Sakha isroad usable only
in winter.

20 %

40t
60t
80t

41 %

㻤㻜

• Squeeze rate is larger
for heavier vehicles

Impact of River Floods to the Social Adaptation
Houses & Villages 䠄along the river䠅э Inundation of houses
CattleͲHorse Pastoralism 䠄river sandbanks䠅 э Submerge of grass & hay
䛆Hazards or Benefits ?䛇
• Spring Floods䠖
Increase since 1998, Possible to adapt by local knowledge• Summer Floods䠖 No local knowledge, Impossible to adapt so far䛆Adaptation Strategies䛇
• Spring Floods䠖
Seasonal Migration ֚ strong community• Summer Floods䠖 Improvement of information transmission andfeedͲhay distribution networks

20 t ͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲ 20 % decrease
80 t ͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲ 41 % decreasez NonͲlinear decreaseof usable days㻠㻜㻜㻜 㻝 㻞 㻟 㻠 㻡 㻢 㻣 㻤 㻥 㻝㻜
Increase of temperature (o C) from past 14 years

䠄River Ice Jams䠅

䠄Inundated Houses in Spring䠅䠄Harvesting Grasses䠅

(Okumura)LongͲTerm Base Flow Measurements э Annual Maximum Thawing Depth (AMTD)Interannual variations of summer base flow
1.2

Vilui
yL5

Another aspects on river discharge

upperLena䠄base flow or low flow䠅

1(mm d-1)

0.8

Aldan

0.6
0.4
0.2

The Lena River Basin

0
1950

y

y0 exp  t K

S

Ky

K0

1960

1970

1980

1990

dK 0
dt

S ne

2000



K or dKK r dt(Brutsaert and Hiyama, 2012: JGRͲAtmosphere)LongͲTerm Base Flow Measurements э AMTD Trend

LongͲTerm Base Flow Measurements э AMTD Trend

Equations

Decadal variation of storage coefficient (K)Eq. (1)

Eq. (2)

Eq. (3)dK 0
dt

in the Lena River Basin

K 0 r dy70

2 yr dt

60
K (d)Use of base flow change

dK 0
dt

K dy
2ne dtdK 0
dt

K or dKK r dt

UL

50
A2

40

Use of change instorage coefficient

30

A1
O

20
1950

1960

1970

1980

(Brutsaert and Hiyama, 2012: JGRͲAtmosphere)

1990

2000

2010

2010

LongͲTerm Base Flow Measurements э AMTD Trend

Is the GroundͲIce is melting as the Result of Global Warming ?

Decadal trend of active layer depth (dȘ0/dt)
in the Lena River Basin
Atmosphere43dȘ0/dt
2

Soil
water
-1

(cm a )

10

Equilibrium in solution

UL

-1

O

-2

A2
A1

-3
1950

Tentative ages observed are in the rangeof 1950Ͳ1970. Several tens of years older
than fresh water.
1970

1990

2010

(Brutsaert and Hiyama, 2012: JGRͲAtmosphere)(Hiyama et al, 2013: ERL)

Population of Domestic Reindeers

Tracking the Wild Reindeers (2010 summer Ͳ 2011 spring)

Collapse of the Soviet Union
45,000

Number of Reindeers

Capture site of wild reindeers
Tompo
Kobyai
OlenekSakha

40,000400,000
350,000
300,000

35,000250,000

30,000200,000

25,000150,000

20,000100,000

15,00050,00010,0000

5,000-50,000

Sakha Republic

50,000

Lena River-100,0000YearSocialchange : Important for the local peoples

61927(2 age:M)
61880(8 age:M)
61930(2-3 age:F)
61879(6 age, with 1 child:F)
101120(3 age, with 1 child:F)

1) Use of private network
䠄privatization䠅
2) Governmental conservation
䠄governance䠅䠄subsidizing䠅ͲͲͲ> CombinedRisk from “Environmental and Social Changes”(Nakada)(Tatsuzawa, Okhlopkov, Yamamoto)

Installation of Transmitters to Wild Reindeers(Tatsuzawa, Okhlopkov)

Capture Wild Reindeers and Install Transmitters (2010 summer)(Tatsuzawa, Okhlopkov)

Migration Route of Wild Reindeers

Domestic Reindeers (Overgrazing or not ?)Migration documentation

Wild Fire䞉 West (Tundra) ї overgrazing
䞉 East (Taiga) ї wild fire
+ waterlogging (in spotͲscale)

Domestic
Reindeer(Camp Sites)
Tundra Nenets

Northern migration group
Tompo
OlenekSebyan – Kyuelj

Forest Nenets

Southern migration group

Reindeermoss(Tatsuzawa, Okhlopkov, Yamamoto)(Yamaguchi, Yamamoto, Yoshida, Nakada)

Tracking of Wild Reindeers

Adaptation Strategies for Sustainable Use of Wild/Domestic Reindeers

Migration Speed (Seasonal Change)

Impacts of “Climate – Social Changes”

Summer(stay)

Migration(km/hour)
Winter(stay)

6.3

26.1

12.4

(1.2 䠉 18.2)(14.3 䠉 32.2)(6.8 䠉 25.1)

Northern Migration
Group
Southern Migration
Group

5.7

21.8

14.2

(0.9 䠉 16.7)(13.3 䠉 28.0)(8.2 䠉 22.0)

䛆Results from System Dynamics Model䛇• CC䠖 moss љ weight of domestic reindeer љwild reindeer ј•

income љ
entrainment of domestic reindeer ј

motivation љ
domestic reindeer љSC䠖 subsidy & public network љ
private network ј

domestic reindeer љdomestic reindeer јэ SocialAdaptation!!

䛆Adaptation Strategies䛇
•••Impact&Adaptation

keep subsidy (for keepers of domestic reindeer)
establish subsidy (for hunters of predatory animals)
establish protected grounds for winter stay region

э maintain “meat markets”
э control of wild reindeer
э winter place only

1) Use of upper topography ֚ GW impact2) Summer䠖 grass ј Winter䠖 moss љ(protein)(carbohydrate)3) Spring䠖 birth rate љ( & weight)э

need to establish “protected grounds”(Tatsuzawa, Okhlopkov)

Summary

Next Steps (FutureEarth)
ClimateChange

Global Warming

Precipitation

֛

Steps and involvement in coͲdesign and coͲproduction ofscientific knowledge䠛ArcticSeaIceExtent љ Teleconnection

SocialChange

CycloneActivity јCollapse ofSoviet Union
Permafrost

Maintenance љRiver Flood

Infrastructure
PublicNetwork љ
GovernmentalSubsidy љfromlowerlatitude

Spring Flood ј 䠄1998 䡚 ј䠅
adaptable 䠄cattleͲhorse keeping; pasture䠅䠄local knowledge 䞉 communication䠅unadaptable 䠄submergence of house䠅

Ecosystem

䠄local knowledge 䞉 feel horrible䠅

Animal Resources PredatoryAnimal јљ

Adaptation strategy ֚ started !!
䠄seasonal migration䠅

SocialChange

Wild Reindeer јљ

EconomyͲoriented

Domestic Reindeer љAdaptation strategy
LocalKnowledge љGeneration Gap

Motivation љ
EconomicGrowth

GreenhouseGas֛

Summer Flood ј 䠄2008, 2012䠅
unadaptable䠄no experience, no local knowledge䠅䠄hunting capability䠅
Adaptation strategy
䠄protected grounds䠅䠄informationtransmission䠅䠄governmental subsidy䠅
䠄community consciousness䠅 䠄feedͲhay distribution networks䠅

(from “FutureEarth” initial design report, 17 April 2013)

L10: Global/local hydrometeorology and forest (2)Hatsuki Fujinami (Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University)

Abstract
The Asian monsoon brings abundant precipitation to the land during summer. The bountiful
forests, cropland, and paddy fields in Asia are maintained by the monsoonal precipitation.
The Asian monsoon is the world’s most vigorous monsoon system, and is induced by theseasonal differential heating between the Eurasian continent, extending to the low latitudes,
and the surrounding oceans. The heat contrast between the land and oceans (i.e., warm landand cold oceans) generates differences in pressure fields. A low pressure area develops overthe heated land, while relatively high pressure is observed over the ocean. The pressure
gradient and the effect of the Earth’s rotation (i.e., the Coriolis force) induces strong
monsoon westerlies/southwesterlies around South/Southeast Asia, resulting in substantial
water vapor transport from the ocean to the land. The water vapor condenses over andaround the land leading to an abundance of rainfall and the release of latent heating. The
moist process with the phase transition of water enhances the entire monsoon circulation
effectively. In addition to the moist process, the presence of the Tibetan Plateau canstrengthen the monsoon circulation because it increases the meridional heat contrast andcreates a stronger pressure gradient between the land and the ocean. A vegetated land
surface can also moisten the atmospheric boundary layer over the land and increase theconvergence due to surface roughness, resulting in an increase of rainfall over the land.
Thus, land-atmosphere interaction, including the influence of vegetation, is an importantfactor in maintaining both the vigorous Asian monsoon system and the bountiful surface
vegetation.

Vegetation greenness in Asia
IHP Training Course 2014
Lecture 10

NDVI(Normalized Difference Vegetation Index)

Global/local hydrometeorology
and forest (2)Hatsuki Fujinami

Hydrospheric Atmospheric Research Center, Nagoya University

Period: 08/11/2013 - 08/20/2013

http://www.pecad.fas.usda.gov/

What maintains the greenness in Asia?

Asian monsoon: a huge water cycle
Precipitation, water vapor flux and 850-hPa ZJJA Climatology

What is a “monsoon”?
¾ The origin:
the Arabic word mausim which means season¾ The seasonal reversals of prevailing wind
¾ Two distinct phases: the “Wet” and ”Dry”
Cumulonimbi over the Tibetan Plateau in summer (wet phase)z Abundant rainfall by Asian summer monsoon

Contents:
1. Seasonal difference in wind fields and precipitation
2. Driving mechanism of Asian monsoon
2.1. Fundamental mechanisms
2.2. Mechanisms for enhancing Asian monsoon
3. Surface condition and its impact on precipitation
system over East Asia
4. Atmospheric water budget and its interpretation
5. Regionality of Asian monsoon
6. Interannual variation of Asian monsoon

1. Seasonal difference in wind fields
and precipitation
Wind vectors and Z at 850 hPa (~1500m) in northern summer
4GF*KIJRTGUUWTG$NWG.QYRTGUUWTG

*

*
.

*

(m)

(m/s)

z Low pressure area over the Eurasian continentz Westerlies/southwesterlies around S/SE/E Asia

Northern summer

Northern winterWind vectors at 850 hPa and precipitation

Wind vectors and Z at 850 hPa (~1500m)
4GF*KIJRTGUUWTG$NWG.QYRTGUUWTG

.

*
*

.

(mm/day)

(m/s)

(m)

(m/s)

zAbundant rainfall extending form South to East Asiaz High pressure area over the Eurasian continent (Siberian high)z Northwesterlies over East Asia, easterlies over S/SE Asia

Northern winterDifference between summer and winterWind vectors at 850 hPa and precipitation

Wind vectors and Z at 850 hPa (~1500m)(mm/day)(m/s)

zLow precipitation over Asia
zHigh precipitation over the maritime continent/N Australia

Difference between summer and winterDifference
between summer and winterPrecipitation
Precipitation

(m)

(m/s)

z Low pressure anomaly over the Eurasian continentz Wind anomalies in a counterclockwise direction around Asia

2. Driving mechanisms
2.1. Fundamental mechanisms:¾ Annual cycle of incoming solar radiation¾ Differential heating between the land and sea¾ Effect of the earth’s rotation (the Coriolis force)

2.2. Mechanisms for enhancing Asian monsoon:¾ Moist process (latent heating due to condensation)¾ Topography (Tibetan Plateau and other mountains)(mm/day)

Asian monsoon region:
most vigorous monsoon system on the earth¾ Land surface (vegetation, cropland, paddy fields,
soil…)

2.1. Fundamental mechanisms:
Annual cycle of incoming solar radiation

Surface heating in boreal summer

Insolation at the top of atmosphere

1. Solar Radiation: NH > SHLand

2. Specific heat andheat capacity:water(ocean)>dry soil(land)

HOT
WARM

3. Land-ocean heating contrast:
Hot land surface andcold ocean surface

Ocean
COLD
(Salby, 1996)(cal cmͲ2dayͲ1)z Solar radiation incident in boreal summer:
Northern hemisphere > Southern hemispherezLand:soonhot,sooncold

Response of the heating distribution
at low-level troposphere

Effect of the earth’s rotation (the Coriolis force)(nonrotating case)Low

4. Low pressure over the land
and high pressure over theocean(Figure: Monsoons 1987)- The earth rotates from west to east -The Coriolis force: the deflection force
when the object is moving with respect to the rotating earthf (Coriolisforce)= 2 ɏ(ƻ: the angular speed of rotation of the earth ǡ ߮凬latitude)

5. Pressure gradient between
the land and the ocean
High

fv

6. The wind directly fromthe ocean into the land(u: zonal wind ǡ ‫ݒ‬凬meridional wind, f > 0 in NH)

A particle moving northward (v>0) in NH is
deflected eastward (u>0).
(Figure: Monsoons 1987)

Upper-level troposphere(rotating case)Observed wind fields at 1500m
and precipitation (June- August)(nonrotating case)

High

High

Low

Low

(rotating case)

Low
Low

High

7. Southwesterlies in NH and southeasterlies in SH
8. Abundant moisture transport toward the land
(Figure: Monsoons 1987)

Low

zUpper-level high over the land z The swirling due tothe Coriolis force
and low over the oceanz Direct flow out from the land z Typical features in observed
upper-level troposphereto the ocean

2.2. Mechanisms for enhancing Asian monsoon- The role of moist process -Latent heating due to the phase transition

Latent heating due to condensation
Latent heat absorbed

Water

Water vapor
condensation

Latent heat released(photo by T. Ebisawa)

Condensation:phase transition from water vapor to liquid water

The moist process of the monsoon system

The enhancement of monsoon circulationby condensation heating
Meridional-vertical circulation between the land and ocean
Low
Altitude(Km)High

z Evaporation:
Water vapor from the ocean due to solar incident
z Water vapor transport (with trapped or absorbed energy)
by monsoon southwesterlies
z Condensation:
heat release in precipitation systems near/over the landz Stronger buoyancy induced by the latent heat releasez Stronger upward motion over the landz The enhancement of the whole circulation due tothe mass conservationRole of topography and vegetated surface

Roles of the Tibetan Plateau on
the Asian monsoon: aspects from modelling studies

Low

High

ThelandTheocean/QPUQQPU

Atmospheric numerical models:Fundamental conservation lows which govern atmospheric motions
and numerical methods to obtain the solution

We can modify the topography and land surface conditionin the numerical model to examine their effect on circulationz No mountain in Asiaz All desert condition

Tibetan Plateau

z With mountain in Asiaz Vegetated surface©NASAWorldwind(Yasunari etal.2006)

A relative role of the Tibetan Plateau
Difference of JJA precipitation and 850-hPa wind between MR and NMR

Roles of the vegetation
Possible effects:z Surface albedo: net radiation available at the surfacez Roughness: large-scale wind divergencez Evapotranspiration: moisten the atmospheric boundary layer(Yasunari etal.2006)(mm/month)(MR: case with the TP and no vegetation, NMR: case without the TP nor vegetation)

Possible effects of the TP: an elevated heat source and a barrierz The TP enhances precipitation in East and South Asia
due to the enhancement of the meridional heat contrast

http://www.pecad.fas.usda.gov/

Seasonal change in precipitation over East Asia

A relative role of vegetation
Difference of JJA precipitation and 850-hPa wind between MVS and MR

MVS
MS
MR
(Yasunari etal.2006)(mm/month)

NMR(MVS: case with the TP, soil and vegetation, MR: case with the TP and no vegetation)z The increase in precipitation due to the increase of available
radiation, roughness and evaporationz Contribution to the increase in Asia:
the TP effects
the land surface (soil-vegetation) effectz TP effects are important for the seasonal variationz Vegetation effects induce the large increase in precipitation

Effects of regional-scale mountains on
seasonal mean rainfall distribution

3.
Surfaceconditionandeffect on
Surfaceconditionand surface
heatitsbalanceprecipitation system over East Asia

Precipitation climatology from TRMM-PRv7
June–August (1998-2012)

Theobservationsite(䕔)(mm/JJA)z The formation of local rainfall maxima
in the windward slopes of regional-scale mountains

Shouxian meteorological bureau, Chinaz The surface condition changes dramatically related to the
double-cropping system (from wheat to paddy fields)

The change of surface condition related tothe double-cropping system(a) Mature wheat on 27 May 2004

How do the surface changes
affect surface heat fluxes
and the structure of
atmospheric boundary layer?

(b) Harvested wheat on 1 June 2004

Diurnal variation in surface energy fluxes
over the different surface conditions/CVWTGYJGCV*CTXGUVGFYJGCV

5*ἀ.*Black: net radiation
Red: sensible heat flux(SH)Blue: latent heat flux (LH)

5*Ჸ.*zThe increase in
SH from a dry soil(c) Planted rice on 16 June 2004
2CFF[HKGNF

5*Ჶ.*zThe increase in LH
due to large amount of
evapotranspiration(Tanakaetal.2007)

Structure of atmospheric boundary layerover dry and wet surfaces
Harvested wheat: dry soil

Paddy field: flooded fields

Height of ABL

Height of ABL

Surface heat fluxes

Surface heat fluxes(Tanakaetal.2007)

Impact of widely distributed paddy fields
LFSHz High atmospheric boundary(mixed) layer due to large
sensible heat flux
z Rapid developmentz Shallower boundary layer
due to small sensible heatflux
z Gradual development

A possible impact of paddy fields
on the development of Meiyu front(Shinoda andUyeda2005)

z Evapotranspiration fromthe paddy fields: an effective
factor to moisten the ABL andthe change moist static
stability over eastern Chinaz Large southerly moisturetransport

4. Atmospheric water budget
Evaluation of the contribution of evapotranspirationand large-scale convergence to precipitation:

Precipitable Water(W): area average
P: Precipitation
E: Evaporation/Evapotranspiration
W: Total column water vapor
Precipitation (P)డௐ: Time tendency of Wడ௧
Q: Total column moisture flux vector(Shinoda andUyeda2002)

Moisture Flux (Q)Evaporation(E)Precipitation and vertically integrated moisture
flux and its divergence in JJA (climatology)
If W tendency is negligible (i.e.,డௐడ௧Precipitation

Moisture flux and its div.

Convergence of moisture flux transported byatmospheric circulation:In-situ evapotranspiration from the surface
If:
in-situ evapotranspiration process(recycling process of precipitation) is important
as a source of precipitationz Areas of high precipitation corresponds well withthose of large moisture convergence (blue shadings)

Annual cycle of the atmospheric water budget
India and Indochina Peninsula

Annual cycle of the atmospheric water budget
China and Western Pacific

India

Indochina Peninsulamonthz India:z Indochina peninsula:

month
Red: Moisture convergence
Blue: Precipitation (GPCP)
Green: Evaporation (P-C)
Black: W tendency

Annual cycle of the atmospheric water budget
Eastern Siberia
Eastern Siberia

China(Yangtze River Basin)

Western Pacific(month)z China:z Western Pacific:(month)Red: Moisture convergence
Blue: Precipitation (GPCP)
Green: Evaporation (P-C)
Black: W tendencyinsummer

A feedback through water cycle
Active Asian monsoon circulation
Feedback throughwater cycle

vigorous
evapotranspiration

Asian Forests,
cropland,paddy fields,
Tibetan Plateau

Enhancement ofcloud/precipitation
activity(month)z Eastern Siberia:
in summer
z Evapotranspiration is a dominant source of precipitationz Taiga forest: a fundamental source of water vapor

Bountiful forest vegetation and paddy agriculture(Yasunari 2006)

5. Regionality of Asian monsoon

Regional differences in the seasonal marchWestern India (Western Ghats)(mm/day)

Regional classification of Asian monsoon regions

Bangladesh

China(YangtzeRiverBasin)(MurakamiandMatsumoto1994)
SEAM: Southeast Asian monsoon
TIBU: Wet climate regime over the Tibetan Plateau
BAIU: Wet climate regime over East Asian rainy season
WNPM: western North Pacific summer monsoon

Progression of the onset date of rainy season

ThailandWestern PacificBroad-scale monsoon onset on mid-May,WN[
,WPG

/C[

,WPG
/C[

᳸,WN[

᳸#WI

/C[

(Ueda2005)(WangandLinHo 2002)z Northward migration of the onset date over S/SE/E Asiaz Eastward progression over western Pacific

The spatial distribution in temperature

z Broad-scale monsoon onset occurs over the Arabian Sea,
the Bay of Bengal and the South China Sea in mid-May.

The timing of onset in southwesterlies
Monsoon southwesterlies at 850 hPa(LiandYanai 1996)

z Distinct temperature contrast around Asia:
warmer temperature over the land than over the ocean

Temperature difference(LiandYanai 1996)

z The timing of the onset depends onthat of the meridional temperature reversal.

Progression of the withdrawal date

6. Interannual variation ofbroad scale Asian monsoon(WangandLinho 2002)(Kawamuraetal.1998)

zSouthward migration of the monsoon withdrawal datezNorthward migration over East Asia

z The meridional temperature gradient (MTG) :Driving force of Asian monsoon
z The MTG value: broad scale monsoon index

Atmospheric circulation and convections
occurring before strong summer monsoon

Interannual variation of summer monsoon
rainfall over Indochina Peninsulaz La Nina phase: higher SST from western North Pacific to
North Indian Ocean accompanied by strong convectionz Suppressed convection to the west of the TP
z Strong meridional thermal gradient in pre-monsoon period

Westward-propagating tropical cyclones
including Typhoon(Takahashietal.2014)z The interannual variation of summer (MJJAS) rainfall overThailand depends on the frequency of westward propagating
tropical cyclones (TCs) including Typhoon.

(Takahashietal.2014)z Zonally-elongated high precipitation anomalies
from western North Pacific to India

References:
1. Kawamura, R., 1998: A possible mechanism of the Asian summer monsoon-ENSO coupling, J. Meteorol.
Soc. Japan, 76, 1009-1027.
2. Li, C.F. and M. Yanai, 1996: The onset and interannual variability of the Asian summer monsoon in
relation to land sea thermal contrast, J.Clim. 9, 358-375.
3. Murakami, T. and J. Mastsumoto, 1994: Summer Monsoon over the Asian Continent and Western North
Pacific, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan, 72, 719-745.
4. Takahashi, H., H. Fujinami, T. Yasunari , J. Matsumoto and S. Baimoung, 2014: Role of tropical cyclone
activity along the monsoon trough on the 2011 Thai flood and interannual variation in seasonal, J. Clim., inrevision.
5. Tanaka, H., and Co-authors, 2007: Surface flux and atmospheric boundary layers observations from the
LAPS project over the middle of the Huaihe River basins in China, Hydrological Processes, 21, 1997-2008.
6. Salby, M. L., 1996: Fundamentals of Atmospheric Physics, Dmowska, R. and Holton, JR.Eds, Academic
Press, 1-627.
7. Shinoa, T. and Uyeda, H., 2002: Effective factors in the development of deep convective clouds over thewet region of eastern China during the summer monsoon season, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan, 80 , 1395-1414.
8. Wang, B. and LinHo, 2002: Rainy season of the Asian-Pacific summer monsoon, J. Clim. 15, 386-398.
9. Shinoda, T. and Uyeda, H., 2005: Structure of moist layer and sources of water over the southern region far
from the Meiyu/Baiu front, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan, 83 , 137-152.
10. Ueda, H., 2005: Air-Sea coupled process involved in Stepwise Seasonal Evolution of the Asian Summer
Monsoon, Geophysical Review of Japan, 78, 825-841.
11. Webster, P. J., 1987: The elementary monsoon, Monsoons, Fein, J. S. and Stephens, P. L. Eds., Wiley andSons, 3–32.
12. Yasunari, T, K. Saito and K. Takata, 2006: Relative roles of large-scale orography and land surface
processes in the global hydroclimate. Part I: Impacts on monsoon systems and the tropics, Journal of
Hydrometeorology, 7, 626-641.