Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T12:01:32.339Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

28 - Comparison of passive fog gages for determining fog duration and fog interception by a Puerto Rican elfin cloud forest

from Part III - Hydrometeorology of tropical montane cloud forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2011

By
F. Holwerda ,
L. A. Bruijnzeel  and
F.N. Scatena
Edited by
L. A. Bruijnzeel ,
F. N. Scatena  and
L. S. Hamilton
F. Holwerda
Affiliation:
VU University, Netherlands
L. A. Bruijnzeel
Affiliation:
VU University, the Netherlands
F.N. Scatena
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania, USA
L. A. Bruijnzeel
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
F. N. Scatena
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
L. S. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

ABSTRACT

Between 5 March and 10 May 2001, the performance of three types of passive fog gages (wire harp WH, standard fog collector SC, and Juvik gage JU) was compared at a wind-exposed Puerto Rican elfin cloud forest site. The gages were used to determine the timing and duration of fog and of fog-induced crown drip. Gage to canopy conversion factors were derived from the ratio between throughfall, and fog collected by the respective gages during periods with fog-only and negligible evaporation loss. The fog gages indicated very similar timing and fog duration, presumably because dense fog prevailed for 75–80% of the time and winds were generally sufficiently strong (4–5 m s−1). Resulting gage-to-canopy factors were 0.12 for WH and SC, and 0.10 for JU. Estimating fog interception by the canopy using these conversion factors gave very similar values for the three gage types (mean rates of 0.15 ± 0.01 mm hour−1). Throughfall typically started about 5 hours after the fog gages indicated the beginning of a fog event. This time lag probably reflects the filling of the storage capacity of the canopy, because wet canopy evaporation was negligible. Integrating the estimated fog interception rates over the time lag suggested an average value of 0.4 mm for the canopy storage capacity during events with fog-only.

Type
Chapter
Information
Tropical Montane Cloud Forests
Science for Conservation and Management
 , pp. 275 - 281
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baynton, H. W. (1968). Ecology of an elfin forest in Puerto Rico. II. Microclimate of Pico Del Oeste. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 49: 419–430.Google Scholar
Beswick, K. M., Hargreaves, K. J., Gallagher, M. W., Choularton, T. W., and Fowler, D. (1991). Size-resolved measurements of cloud droplet deposition velocity to a forest canopy using an eddy-correlation technique. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 117: 623–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briscoe, C. B. (1966). Weather in the Luquillo Mountains of Puerto Rico. Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico: Institute of Tropical Forestry.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S., Lugo, A. E., Silander, S., and Liegel, L. (1983). Research History and Opportunities in the Luquillo Experimental Forest. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruijnzeel, L. A., Eugster, W., and Burkard, R. (2005). Fog as an input to the Hydrological cycle. In Encyclopaedia of Hydrological Sciences, eds. Anderson, M. G. and McDonnell, J. J., pp. 559–582. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Chang, S. C., Lai, I. L., and Wu, J. T. (2002). Estimation of fog deposition on epiphytic bryophytes in a subtropical montane forest ecosystem in northeastern Taiwan. Atmospheric Research 64: 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García-Martinó, A. R., Warner, G. S., Scatena, F. N., and Civco, D. L. (1996). Rainfall, runoff and elevation relationships in the Luquillo Mountains of Puerto Rico. Caribbean Journal of Science 32: 413–424.Google Scholar
García-Santos, G. (2007). An ecohydrological and soils study in a montane cloud forest in the National Park of Garajonay, La Gomera (Canary Islands, Spain). PhD Thesis, VU University Ámsterdam, Ámsterdam, The Netherlands. [http://www.falw.vu.nl/nl/onderzoek/earth-sciences/geo-environmental-science-and-hydrology/hydrology-dissertations/index.asp].
Goodman, J. (1985). The collection of fog drip. Water Resources Research 21: 392–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölscher, D., Köhler, L., Dijk, A. I. J. M., and Bruijnzeel, L. A. (2004). The importance of epiphytes to total rainfall interception by a tropical montane rain forest in Costa Rica. Journal of Hydrology 292: 308–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holwerda, F., Burkard, R., Eugster, W. E., et al. (2006). Estimating fog deposition at a Puerto Rican elfin cloud forest site: comparison of the water budget and eddy covariance methods. Hydrological Processes 20: 2669–2692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joslin, J. D., Mueller, S. F., and Wolfe, M. H. (1990). Test of models of cloudwater deposition to forest canopies using artificial and living collectors. Atmospheric Environment 24A: 2893–2903.Google Scholar
Juvik, J. O. and Ekern, P. C.. (1978). A Climatology of Mountain Fog on Mauna Loa, Hawai'i Island, Technical Report No. 118. Honolulu, HI: Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawai'i.Google Scholar
Juvik, J. O., and Nullet, D. (1995a). Comments on “a proposed standard fog collector for use in high elevation regions.”Journal of Applied Meteorology 34: 2108–2110.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juvik, J. O., and Nullet, D. (1995b). Relationships between rainfall, cloud-water interception and canopy throughfall in a Hawaiian montane forest. In Tropical Montane Cloud Forests, eds. Hamilton, L. S., Juvik, J. O., and Scatena, F. N., pp. 165–182. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteith, J. L. (1965). Evaporation and the environment. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology 19: 245–269.Google ScholarPubMed
Schellekens, J., Bruijnzeel, L. A., Wickel, A. J., Scatena, F. N., and Silver, W. L. (1998). Interception of horizontal precipitation by elfin cloud forest in the Luquillo Mountains, eastern Puerto Rico. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Fog and Fog Collection, eds. Schemenauer, R. S. and Bridgman, H. A., pp. 29–32. Ottawa, Canada: IDRC.Google Scholar
Schemenauer, R. S. (1986). Acidic deposition to forests: the 1985 Chemistry of High Elevation Fog (CHEF) Project. Atmosphere–Ocean 24: 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schemenauer, R. S., and Cereceda, P. (1994). A proposed standard fog collector for use in high-elevation regions. Journal of Applied Meteorology 33: 1313–1322.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schemenauer, R. S., and Cereceda, P. (1995). Reply to comments by Juvik and Nullet (1995). Journal of Applied Meteorology 34: 2111–2112.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schemenauer, R. S., and Joe, P. I. (1989). The collection efficiency of a large fog collector. Atmospheric Research 24: 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vong, R. J., Sigmon, J. T., and Mueller, S. F. (1991). Cloud water deposition to Appalachian forests. Environmental Science and Technology 25: 1014–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, P. L. (1972). Cloud moisture interception in the Luquillo Mountains in Puerto Rico. Caribbean Journal of Science 12: 129–144.Google Scholar
Weaver, P. L. (1995). The colorado and dwarf forests of Puerto Rico's Luquillo Mountains. In Tropical Forests: Management and Ecology, eds. Lugo, A. E. and Lowe, C., pp. 109–141. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×