|
|
|
Effects of preferential flow on soil-water and
surface runoff in a forested watershed in China |
| Jinhua CHENG 1, Hongjiang ZHANG 1, Yun CHENG 1, Youyan ZHANG 2, Yuhu SHI 3, |
| 1.School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University,
Beijing 10083, China; 2.Research Institute of Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry,
Beijing 100091, China; 3.Forestry Science Institute of Hubei Province, Wuhan 430079,
China; |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Preferential flow is a runoff mechanism intermediate between matrix flow and surface flow, transmitting water at high velocity through the subsurface zone. To assess the effect of preferential flow on soil-water flow and surface runoff in a forested watershed, precipitation and volumes of preferential flow, matrix flow and surface runoff were measured over a period of four years in a forested watershed in the Three Gorges area of southern China. Results show that preferential-flow hydrographs have gentler rises and steeper recessions than those for matrix flow and surface runoff. Preferential flow as a percentage of soil-water flow ranged from 2.40% to 8.72% and the maximum preferential-flow velocity exceeded as much as 5600 times that of matrix flow. This shows that preferential flow plays an important role in the movement of soil water. Preferential flow has a significant effect on peak surface runoff by increasing the surface runoff rate and accelerating the appearance of peak surface runoff. Preferential flow can also prolong the duration of surface runoff. Surface runoff was observed to be positively correlated with preferential flow. The greater the sum of rainfall amount and antecedent precipitation is, the greater the effect of preferential flow on surface runoff is.
|
| Keywords
forest hydrology
Three Gorges of Yangtze River
preferential flow
matrix flow
surface runoff
|
|
Issue Date: 05 June 2009
|
|
|
Anderson S H, Peyton R L, Gantzer G J(1990). Evaluation of constructed and naturalmacropores using X-ray computed tomography. Geoderma, 46: 13―29
doi: 10.1016/0016-7061(90)90004-S
|
|
Beven K J, Germann P F(1982). Macroporesand water flow in soils. Water Resour Res, 18: 1311―1325
doi: 10.1029/WR018i005p01311
|
|
Bouma J(1991). Influence of soil macroporosity on environmental quality. Adv Agron, 46: 1–39
doi: 10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60577-5
|
|
Bouma J, Jongerius A, Boersma O, Jager A, Schoonderbeek D(1977). The functionof different types of macropores during saturated flow through fourswelling soil horizons. Soil Sc Soc AmJ, 41: 945–950
|
|
Carey S K, Woo M K(2000). The roleof soil pipes as a slope runoff mechanism, Subarctic Yukon, Canada. J Hydrol, 233: 206―222
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00234-1
|
|
Cui P, Yang K, Chen J(2003). Relationship between occurrence ofdebris flow and antecedent precipitation, taking the Jiangjia gullyas an example. Sci Soil Water Conserv, 1(1): 11―15
|
|
Dekker L W, Ritsema C J(1993). Preferentialflow paths in a water-repellent clay soil with grass cover. Water Resour Res, 32: 1239―1249
doi: 10.1029/96WR00267
|
|
Dekker L W, Ritsema C J, Wendroth O, Jarvis N, Oostindie K, Pohl W, Larsson M, Gaudet J P(1999). Moisturedistributions and wetting rates of soils at experimental fields inthe Netherlands, France, Sweden, and Germany. J Hydrol, 215: 4―22
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00258-3
|
|
Elsenbeer H, Lack A, Cassel K(1995). Chemical fingerprints of hydrologicalcompartments and flow paths at La Cuenca, western Amazonia. Water Resour Res, 31: 3051―3058
doi: 10.1029/95WR02537
|
|
Elsenbeer H, Lack A(1996). Hydrometricand hydrochemical evidence for fast flowpaths at La Cuenca, westernAmazonia. J Hydrol, 180: 237―250
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(95)02889-7
|
|
Flury M, Flühler H, Jury W A, Leuenberger J(1994). Susceptibility of soils to preferential flow of water:a field study. Water Resour Res, 30: 1945―1954
doi: 10.1029/94WR00871
|
|
Hendriks R F A, Oostindie K, Hamminga P(1999). Simulation of bromide tracer andnitrogen transport in a cracked clay soil with the FLOCR/ANIMO modelcombination. J Hydrol, 215: 94―115
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00264-9
|
|
Hu G X, Xu W, Liu Y Q(2003). Heat transfer and gas flow throughfeed stream within horizontal pipe. TransPor Med, 52: 371―387 (in Chinese)
doi: 10.1023/A:1023557027308
|
|
Jones J A A(1987). The effects of soil piping on contributing area anderosion pattern. Earth Surf Proc Landf, 12: 229―248
doi: 10.1002/esp.3290120303
|
|
Kirkby M J(1988). Hillslope runoff process and models. J Hydrol, 100: 315―339
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(88)90190-4
|
|
Kitahara H(1992). The property of pipe flow in forest stand. J Jap Soc Hydrol Water Res, 5(1): 15―25
|
|
Kitahara H(1994). A study on the characteristics of soil pipes influencingwater movement in forested slopes. BullFor Prod Res Instit, 367: 63―115
|
|
McDonnell J J(1990). A rationale for old water discharge through macroporesin a steep, humid catchment. Water ResourRes, 26: 2821―2832
|
|
Muscutt A D, Wheater H S, Reynolds B(1990). Stormflow hydrochemistry of a smallWelsh upland catchment. J Hydrol, 116: 239―249
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(90)90125-H
|
|
Ritsema C J, Dekker L W, Hendrickx J M H, Hamminga W(1993). Preferential flow mechanism in a water-repellent sandysoil. Water Resour Res, 29: 2183―2193
doi: 10.1029/93WR00394
|
|
Sidle R C, Tsuboyama Y, Noguchi S, Hosoda I, Fujieda M, Simizu T(1995). Seasonal hydrologic response at variousspatial scales in a small forested catchment, Hitachi Ohta. J Hydrol, 168: 227―250
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(94)02639-S
|
|
Sidle R C, Tsuboyama Y, Noguchi S, Hosoda I, Fujieda M, Simizu T(2000). Stormflow generation in steep forestedheadwaters: a linked hydrogeomorphic paradigm. Hydrol Proc, 14: 369―385
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(20000228)14:3<369::AID-HYP943>3.0.CO;2-P
|
|
Tanaka T(1992). Storm runoff processes in a small forested drainagebasin. Environ Geol Water Sci, 19: 179―191
doi: 10.1007/BF01704085
|
|
Tsuboyama Y, Sidle R C, Noguchi S, Hosoda I(1994). Flow and solute transport through the soil matrix andmacropores of a hillslope segment. WaterResour Res, 30: 879―890
doi: 10.1029/93WR03245
|
|
Uchida T, Kosugi K, Mizuyama T(1999). Runoff characteristics of pipeflowand effects of pipeflow on rainfall-runoff phenomena in a mountainouswatershed. J Hydrol, 222: 18―36
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(99)00090-6
|
|
Walsh R P D, Howells K A(1988). Soilpipes and their role in runoff generation and chemical denudationin humid tropical catchment in Dominica. Earth Surf Proc Landf, 13: 9―17
doi: 10.1002/esp.3290130103
|
|
Wang Z, Feyen J, Ritsema C J(1998). Susceptibility and predictabilityof conditions for preferential flow. WaterResour Res, 34: 2169―2182
doi: 10.1029/98WR01761
|
|
Wesley W S, John T W(2006). Preferentialflow estimates to an agricultural tile drain with implications forglyphosate transport. J Environ Qual, 35(5): 1825―1835
doi: 10.2134/jeq2006.0068
|
|
Weyman D R(1970). Throughflow on hillslopes and its relation to the streamhydrograph. Bull Intl Assoc Sci Hydrol, 15: 25―33
|
|
Wilson C M, Smart P L(1984). Pipesand pipe flow processes in an upland catchment, Wales. Catena, 11: 145―158
|
|
Zhang H J, Wang Y J(2000). The pipeflowexperiment in the granite slope of the Three Gorges area, YangtzeRiver. J Beijing For Univ, 22(5): 53―57 (in Chinese)
|
|
Zhang H J, Cheng Y, Shi Y H(2001). The pipeflow characteristics in thegranite slope of the Three Gorges area, Yangtze River, China. J Soil Water Conserv, 15(1): 5―8 (in Chinese)
|
|
Zhang H J, Shi Y H, Cheng Y(2002). Movement properties of the pipe flowalong granite slope of the Three Gorges area on Yangtze River in China. For Stud China, 4(1): 35―43
|
|
Zhang H J, Cheng Y, Shi Y H(2003) Characteristics of soil pipes andtheir influence on pipeflow in the forestland of the Three Gorgesarea, Yangtze River, China. Resour EnvironYangtze River, 12(1): 55―60 (in Chinese)
|
|
Zhang H J, He F, Shi Y H, Cheng J H(2005). Effect of pipe flow on interflow on granite slope in Three Gorgesarea of Yangtze River. Sci Soil Water Conserv, 3(1): 38―42 (in Chinese)
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
