Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:13:55.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stem Flow on Western Juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) Trees

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

James A. Young ,
Raymond A. Evans  and
Debra A. Easi
James A. Young
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., and statistician, Univ. of Nevada, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512
Raymond A. Evans
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., and statistician, Univ. of Nevada, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512
Debra A. Easi
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., and statistician, Univ. of Nevada, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Stem flow is the water from precipitation that is intercepted by plant canopies and conveyed down the outside of stems to wet the soil at the base of the plant. For western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis Hook.) trees, stem flow was only a small fraction of the precipitation intercepted by the canopy. However, this moisture may be important in the nutrient flux of the trees. The first stem flow in the fall after the summer drought was enriched in nitrate-nitrogen although the quantity of nitrogen per unit area was small. The combination of favorable moisture and temperature conditions at the base of the tree leads to litter decay and nitrification. The root system of the trees had many fine roots in the area that received stem flow. Canopy interception and stem flow should be taken into consideration in application of soil active herbicides for control of western juniper.

Keywords

Tree controlnutrient cyclingcanopy interception
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , May 1984 , pp. 320 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 by the Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

1. Birkeland, P. W. 1974. Pedology, weathering and geomorphological research. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. 285 pp.Google Scholar
2. Bremer, J. M. and Mulvaney, C. S. 1982. Permanganate-reduced iron modification of Kjeldahl method to include nitrate and nitrite. pp. 619–620 in Page, A. L., ed. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Am. Assoc. Agron. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
3. Eaton, J. S., Likens, G. E., and Bormann, F. H. 1973. Throughfall and stem flow chemistry in a northern hardwood forest. J. Ecol. 61:495–508.Google Scholar
4. Gersper, P. L. and Holowaychuk, N. 1970. Effects of stem flow water on a Miami soil under a beech tree: I. Morphological and physical properties. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc: 34:779–786.Google Scholar
5. Gersper, P. L. and Holowaychuk, N. 1970. Effects of stem flow water on a Miami soil under a beech tree: II. Chemical properties. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc: 34:786–794.Google Scholar
6. Gersper, P. L. and Holowaychuk, N. 1971. Some effects of stem flow from forest canopy trees on chemical properties of soil. Ecology 52:691–702.Google Scholar
7. Golterman, H. L. and Clymo, R. S. 1969. Methods for chemical analysis of fresh water. I.B.H. Handbook No. 8. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, England. 172 pp.Google Scholar
8. Hart, G. E. and Parent, D. R. 1974. Chemistry of throughfall under Douglas fir and Rocky Mountain juniper. Am. Midl. Nat. 92:191–201.Google Scholar
9. Helvey, J. D. and Patric, J. H. 1965. Canopy and litter interception of rainfall by hardwoods of Eastern United States. Water Resour. Res. 1:193–206.Google Scholar
10. Henderson, G. S., Harris, W. F., Todd, D. E. Jr., and Grizzard, T. 1977. Quantity and chemistry of throughfall as influenced by forest type and season. J. Ecol. 65:365–374.Google Scholar
11. Kittredge, J. 1948. Forest influences. McGraw-Hill, New York. 394 pp.Google Scholar
12. Reiners, W. A. 1972. Nutrient content of canopy throughfall in Minnesota forests. Oikos 23:14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Robinson, J. W. 1966. Atomic absorption spectroscopy. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York. 204 pp.Google Scholar
14. Skau, C. M. 1964. Interception, throughfall, and stem flow in Utah and alligator juniper cover types of northern Arizona. For. Sci. 10:283–287.Google Scholar
15. Tiedemann, A. R., Helvey, J. D., and Anderson, T. D. 1980. Effects of chemical defoliation of an Abies grandis habitat on amounts and chemistry of throughfall and stem flow. J. Environ. Qual. 9:320–328.Google Scholar
16. Wood, E. D., Armstrong, F.A.J., and Richards, F. A. 1967. Determination of nitrate in sea water by cadmium copper reduction to nitrate. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 47:23–31.Google Scholar
17. Young, J. A. and Evans, R. A. 1981. Demography and fire history of a western juniper stand. J. Range Manage. 34:501–506.Google Scholar
18. Young, J. A., Evans, R. A., Budy, J., and Torrell, A. 1982. Cost of controlling maturing western juniper trees. J. Range Manage. 35:437–442.Google Scholar
19. Zinke, P. J. 1962. The pattern of influence of individual forest trees on soil properties. Ecology 43:130–131.Google Scholar