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-cb9f654ff-c75p9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-08T02:36:47.145Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Interactions between Precipitation and Vegetation Canopies

from Part III - Coupling Hillslope Geomorphology, Soils, Hydrology, and Ecosystems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2016

By
Alexandra G. Ponette-González ,
Holly A. Ewing  and
Kathleen C. Weathers
Edited by
Edward A. Johnson  and
Yvonne E. Martin
Alexandra G. Ponette-González
Affiliation:
University of North Texas
Holly A. Ewing
Affiliation:
Bates College
Kathleen C. Weathers
Affiliation:
Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies
Edward A. Johnson
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Yvonne E. Martin
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access

Summary

Introduction

When we see a tropical rainforest, intensively managed cropland, or grazed pasture from a distant view (Figure 7.1), we are seeing a critical component of the ecosystem – the vegetation canopy. At the most basic level, vegetation canopies are composed of leaves, twigs, branches, and often epiphytes (plants that grow on other plants, such as bryophytes, ferns, lichens, and orchids, and generally access water and nutrients from the atmosphere). However, many would agree that canopies are more than just a simple collection of these components (Parker, 1995). This relatively thin boundary between the atmosphere and biosphere regulates exchanges of matter, energy, and information across the air-land interface and has been the subject of significant research in biogeoscience, ecology, geoinformatics, and atmospheric science over the past three decades (Lovett and Lindberg, 1993; Parker et al., 1995; Baldocchi et al., 2002; Lefsky et al., 2002; Nadkarni et al., 2011).

In this chapter, we examine the canopy as a locus for interaction with the atmosphere – primarily with precipitation. How do vegetation canopies influence the form, amount, and chemical composition of precipitation inputs to ecosystems? What methods are used to measure and model precipitation-canopy interactions? What role do geographic factors play in altering spatial and temporal patterns of precipitation inputs to and underneath canopies? To answer these questions, we look to studies from around the globe, particularly those in forests, the vegetation type whose canopies have been most widely studied. After a brief description of vegetation canopies, we review common materials emitted to the atmosphere and the ways in which they are deposited before exploring the interactions that take place within the canopies themselves.

Vegetation Canopies

In the study of precipitation-canopy interactions, it is useful to think about the canopy as a three-dimensional porous layer with passive and active surfaces (Parker, 1995). Canopy structure – the position, extent, quantity, type, and connectivity of the aboveground components – can be described using a variety of metrics, including maximum tree height, canopy cover, and leaf area index (leaf area per ground area), to name a few (Parker, 1995). Often, canopies are described in terms of their aerodynamic roughness, which refers to how the physical surface at the top of the canopy interacts with the atmosphere, and which is related to the height, density, and distribution of canopy elements (Oke, 1987).

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
A Biogeoscience Approach to Ecosystems , pp. 215 - 253
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aber, J. D. and Melillo, J. M. (2001). Terrestrial Ecosystems,. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
Adlassnig, W., Steinhauser, G., Peroutka, M. et al. (2009). Expanding the menu for carnivorous plants: uptake of potassium, iron and manganese by carnivorous pitcher plants. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 67(12), 2117–22.Google Scholar
Adriaenssens, S., Staelens, J., Wuyts, K. et al. (2011). Foliar nitrogen uptake from wet deposition and the relation with leaf wettability and water storage capacity. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 219(1–4), 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. B., Baumgardner, R. E., Mohnen, V. A. et al. (1999). Cloud chemistry in the eastern United States, as sampled from three high-elevation sites along the Appalachian Mountains. Atmospheric Environment, 33(30), 5105–14.Google Scholar
Andreae, M. O. (1983). Soot carbon and excess fine potassium: long-range transport of combustion-derived aerosols. Science, 220(4602), 1148–51.Google Scholar
Aneja, V. P., Schlesinger, W. H. and Erisman, J.W. (2008). Farming pollution. Nature Geoscience, 1(7), 409–11.Google Scholar
Asbury, C. E., McDowell, W. H., Trinidad-Pizarro, R. et al. (1994). Solute deposition from cloudwater to the canopy of a Puerto Rican montane forest. Atmospheric Environment, 28(10), 1773–80.Google Scholar
Asner, G. P., Scurlock, J. M. O. and Hicke, J. A. (2003). Global synthesis of leaf area index observations: implications for ecological and remote sensing studies. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12(3), 191–205.Google Scholar
Ataroff, V. and Rada, F. (2000). Deforestation impact on water dynamics in a Venezuelan Andean cloud forest. Ambio, 29(7), 440–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avila, A. and Rodrigo, A. (2004). Trace metal fluxes in bulk deposition, throughfall and stemflow at two evergreen oak stands in NE Spain subject to different exposure to the industrial environment. Atmospheric Environment, 38(2), 171–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldocchi, D. D., Wilson, K. B. and Gu, L. (2002). How the environment, canopy structure and canopy physiological functioning influence carbon, water and energy fluxes of a temperate broad-leaved deciduous forest—an assessment with the biophysical model CANOAK. Tree Physiology, 22(15–16), 1065–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, T. S., Lamb, B. K., Guenther, A. et al. (1992). Sulfur emissions to the atmosphere from natural sources. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, 14(1–4), 315–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bator, A. and Collett, J. L. (1997). Cloud chemistry varies with drop size. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 102(D23), 28071–8.Google Scholar
Bäumler, R. and Zech, W. (1997). Atmospheric deposition and impact of forest thinning on the throughfall of mountain forest ecosystems in the Bavarian Alps. Forest Ecology and Management, 95(3), 243–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H. and Taylor, G. (2000). Particulate pollution capture by urban trees: effect of species and windspeed. Global Change Biology, 6(8), 995–1003.Google Scholar
Beier, C., and Gundersen, P. (1989). Atmospheric deposition to the edge of a spruce forest in Denmark. Environmental Pollution, 60(3), 257–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonan, G. B. (2008). Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science, 320(5882), 1444–9.Google Scholar
Bruijnzeel, L. A., Mulligan, M. and Scatena, F. N. (2011). Hydrometeorology of tropical montane cloud forests: emerging patterns. Hydrological Processes, 25(3), 465–98.Google Scholar
Burgess, S. S. O. and Dawson, T. E. (2004). The contribution of fog to the water relations of Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don): foliar uptake and prevention of dehydration. Plant, Cell, and Environment, 27(8), 1023–34.Google Scholar
Butterbach-Bahl, K., Baggs, E. M., Dannenmann, M. et al. (2013). Nitrous oxide emissions from soils: how well do we understand the processes and their controls? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1621), 20130122.Google Scholar
Campo-Alves, J. (2003). Nutrient availability and fluxes along a toposequence with tropical dry forest in Mexico. Agrociencia, 37, 211–19.Google Scholar
Cantú Silva, I. and González Rodríguez, H. (2001). Interception loss, throughfall and stemflow chemistry in pine and oak forests in northeastern Mexico. Tree Physiology, 21(12–13), 1009–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlyle-Moses, D. E. (2004). Throughfall, stemflow, and canopy interception loss fluxes in a semi-arid Sierra Madre Oriental matorral community. Journal of Arid Environments, 58(1–4), 181–202.Google Scholar
Carroll, G. C. (1980). Forest canopies: complex and independent subsystems. In Forests: Fresh Perspectives from Ecosystem Analysis, ed. Waring, R. H.. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press, pp. 87–107.
CASTNET (Clean Air Status and Trends Network). 2014. NADP (National Atmospheric Deposition Program). http://epa.gov/castnet/javaweb/totaldep.html
Chadwick, O. A., Derry, L. A., Vitousek, P. M. et al. (1999). Changing sources of nutrients during four million years of ecosystem development. Nature, 397(6719), 491–7.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, A. C. (1975). The movement of particles in plant communities. In Vegetation and the Atmosphere, ed. Monteith, J. L.. London: Academic Press, pp. 155–203.
Gomez-Guerrero, A. Chavez-Aguilar, G., Fenn, M. E. et al. (2008). Foliar nitrogen uptake in simulated wet deposition in Abies religiosa . Interciencia, 33(6), 429–34.Google Scholar
Clark, D. L., Nadkarni, N. M. and Gholz, H. L. (1998a). Growth, net production, litter decomposition, and net nitrogen accumulation by epiphytic bryophytes in a tropical montane forest. Biotropica, 30(1), 12–23.Google Scholar
Clark, K. L., Nadkarni, N. M. and Gholz, H. L. (2005). Retention of inorganic nitrogen by epiphytic bryophytes in a tropical montane forest. Biotropica, 37(3), 328–36.Google Scholar
Clark, K. L., Nadkarni, N. M., Schaefer, D. et al. (1998b). Cloud water and precipitation chemistry in a tropical montane forest, Monteverde, Costa Rica. Atmospheric Environment, 32(9), 1595–1603.Google Scholar
Cleavitt, N. L., Ewing, H. A., Weathers, K. C. et al. (2011). Acidic atmospheric deposition interacts with tree type and impacts the cryptogamic epiphytes in Acadia National Park, Maine, USA. The Bryologist, 114(3), 570–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cogbill, C. V. and Likens, G. E. (1974). Acid precipitation in the northeastern United States. Water Resources Research, 10(6), 1133–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coxson, D. S. and Nadkarni, N. M. (1995). Ecological roles of epiphytes in nutrient cycles of forest ecosystems. In Forest Canopies, ed. Lowman, M. and Nadkarni, N. M.. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 495–543.
Cronan, C. S. and Reiners, W. A. (1983). Canopy processing of acidic precipitation by coniferous and hardwood forests in New England. Oecologia, 59 (2–3), 216–23.Google Scholar
Das, R., Lawrence, D., D'Odorico, P. et al. (2011). Impact of land use change on atmospheric P inputs in a tropical dry forest. Journal of Geophysical Research-Biogeosciences, 116(G1), doi:10.1029/2010JG001403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Mello, W. (2001). Precipitation chemistry in the coast of the Metropolitan Region of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Environmental Pollution, 14(2), 235–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Schrijver, A., Geudens, G., Augusto, L. et al. (2007). The effect of forest type on throughfall deposition and seepage flux: a review. Oecologia, 153(3), 663–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
del-Val, E., Armesto, J. J., Barbosa, O. et al. (2006). Rain forest islands in the Chilean semiarid region: fog-dependency, ecosystem persistence and tree regeneration. Ecosystems, 9(4), 598–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dezzeo, N. and Chacón, N. (2006). Nutrient fluxes in incident rainfall, throughfall, and stemflow in adjacent primary and secondary forests of the Gran Sabana, southern Venezuela. Forest Ecology and Management, 234(1–3), 392–401.Google Scholar
Draaijers, G. P. J., Erisman, J. W., Van Leeuwen, N. F. M. et al. (1997). The impact of canopy exchange on differences observed between atmospheric deposition and throughfall fluxes. Atmospheric Environment, 31(3), 387–97.Google Scholar
Driscoll, C. T., Lawrence, G. B., Bulger, A. J. et al. (2001). Acidic deposition in the Northeastern United States: sources and inputs, ecosystem effects, and management strategies. Bioscience, 51(3), 180–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunne, T. and Leopold, L. B. (1978). Water in Environmental Planning. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman Co.
Eaton, J. S., Likens, G. E. and Bormann, H. (1973). Throughfall and stemflow in a northern hardwood forest. The Journal of Ecology, 61(2), 495–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewing, H. A., Weathers, K. C., Templer, P. H. et al. (2009). Fog water and ecosystem function: heterogeneity in a California redwood forest. Ecosystems, 12(3), 417–33.Google Scholar
Falconer, R. E. and Falconer, P. D. (1980). Determination of cloud water acidity at a mountain observatory in the Adirondack Mountains of New York State. Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans and Atmospheres, 85(C12), 7465–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenn, M. E., Bytnerowicz, A. and Liptzin, D. (2012). Nationwide maps of atmospheric deposition are highly skewed when based solely on wet deposition. BioScience, 62(7), 621.Google Scholar
Fenn, M. E., Ross, C. S., Schilling, S. L. et al. (2013). Atmospheric deposition of nitrogen and sulfur and preferential canopy consumption of nitrate in forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 302, 240–53.Google Scholar
Fenn, M. E., Sickman, J. O., Bytnerowicz, A. et al. (2009). Methods for measuring atmospheric nitrogen deposition inputs in arid and montane ecosystems of western North America. Developments in Environmental Science, 9, 179–228.Google Scholar
Ford, E. D. and Deans, J. D. (1978). The effects of canopy structure on stemflow, throughfall, and interception loss in a young Sitka Spruce plantation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 15(2), 905–17.Google Scholar
Forti, M. C., Boulet, R., Melfi, A. J., et al. (2000). Hydrogeochemistry of a small catchment in Northeastern Amazonia: a comparison between natural with deforested parts of the catchment (Serra do Navio, Amapá State, Brazil). Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 118(3–4), 263–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaige, E., Dail, D. B., Hollinger, D. Y. et al. (2007). Changes in canopy processes following whole-forest canopy nitrogen fertilization of a mature spruce-hemlock forest. Ecosystems, 10(7), 1133–47.Google Scholar
Galloway, J. N. (2004). The global nitrogen cycle. In Treatise on Geochemistry, Volume 8. Biogeochemistry, ed. Holland, H. D.. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, pp. 557–83.
Galloway, J. N., Dentener, F. J., Capone, D. G. et al. (2004). Nitrogen cycles: past, present, and future. Biogeochemistry, 70(2), 153–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, J. N., Leach, A. M., Bleeker, A. et al. (2013). A chronology of human understanding of the nitrogen cycle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1621), 20130120.Google Scholar
Galloway, J. N., Townsend, A. R., Erisman, J. W. et al. (2008). Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science, 320(5878), 889–92.Google Scholar
Gotsch, S. G., Asbjornsen, H., Holwerda, F. et al. (2014). Foggy days and dry nights determine crown-level water balance in a seasonal tropical montane cloud forest. Plant, Cell and Environment, 37(1), 261–72.Google Scholar
Graham, W. F. and Duce, R. A. (1979). Atmospheric pathways of the phosphorus cycle. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 43(8), 1195–1208.Google Scholar
Griffith, K. T., Ponette-González, A. G., Curran, L. M. et al. (2015). Assessing the influence of topography and canopy structure on Douglas-fir throughfall with LiDAR and empirical data in the Santa Cruz Mountains, USA. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(5), 1–13.Google Scholar
Hafkenscheid, R. 2000. Hydrology and biogeochemistry of tropical montane rain forests of contrasting stature in the Blue Mountains, Jamaica. Dissertation. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Häger, A. and Dohrenbusch, A. (2011). Hydrometeorology and structure of tropical montane cloud forests under contrasting biophysical conditions in north-western Costa Rica. Hydrological Processes, 25(3), 392–401.Google Scholar
Hedin, L. O., Granat, L., Likens, G. E. et al. (1994). Steep declines in atmospheric base cations in regions of Europe and North America. Nature, 367, 351–4.Google Scholar
Hietz, P., Wanek, W., Wania, R. et al. (2002). Nitrogen-15 natural abundance in a montane cloud forest canopy as an indicator of nitrogen cycling and epiphyte nutrition. Oecologia, 131(3), 350–5.Google Scholar
Holder, C. D. (2007). Leaf water repellency of species in Guatemala and Colorado (USA) and its significance to forest hydrology studies. Journal of Hydrology, 336(1–2), 147–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölscher, D., Köhler, L., Leuschner, C. and Kappelle, M. (2003) Nutrient fluxes in stemflow and throughfall in three successional stages of an upper montane rain forest in Costa Rica. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 19(05), 557–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, A. and Iroumé, A. (2001). Variability of annual rainfall partitioning for different sites and forest covers in Chile. Journal of Hydrology, 248(1–4), 78–92.Google Scholar
Huebert, B. J. and Robert, C. H. (1985). The dry deposition of nitric acid to grass. Journal of Geophysical Research- Atmospheres, 90(D1), 2085–90.Google Scholar
Jickells, T., Baker, A. R., Cape, J. N. et al. (2013). The cycling of organic nitrogen through the atmosphere. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1621), 20130115.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W. and Lindberg, S. E. (1992). Atmospheric Deposition and Nutrient Cycling: A Synthesis of the Integrated Forest Study. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRef
Johnson, M. S. and Lehmann, J. (2006). Double-funneling of trees: stemflow and root-induced preferential flow. Ecoscience, 13(3), 324–33.Google Scholar
Kellman, M. and Roulet, N. (1990). Stemflow and throughfall in a tropical dry forest. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 15(1), 55–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, V. R., Weathers, K. C., Lovett, G. M. et al. (2009). Effect of climate change between 1984 and 2007 on precipitation chemistry at a site in northeastern USA. Environmental Science and Technology, 43(10), 3461–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klopatek, J. M., Barry, M. J. and Johnson, D. W. (2006). Potential canopy interception of nitrogen in the Pacific Northwest, USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 234(1), 344–54.Google Scholar
Lai, I.-L., Schroeder, W. H., Wu, J.-T. et al. (2007). Can fog contribute to the nutrition of Chamaecyparis obtusa var. formosana? Uptake of a fog solute tracer into foliage and transport to roots. Tree Physiology, 27(7), 1001–9.Google Scholar
Lang, G. E., Reiners, W. A. and Heier, R. K. (1976). Potential alteration of precipitation chemistry by epiphytic lichens. Oecologia, 25(3), 229–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larcher, W. (1995). Physiological Plant Ecology,. New York: Springer.CrossRef
Lefsky, M. A. (2010). A global forest canopy height map from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer and the Geoscience Laser Altimeter System. Geophysical Research Letters, 37(15), doi:10.1029/2010GL043622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefsky, M. A., Cohen, W. B., Parker, G. G. et al. (2002). Lidar remote sensing for ecosystem studies. BioScience, 52(1), 19–30.Google Scholar
Levia, D. and Frost, E. (2003). A review and evaluation of stemflow literature in the hydrologic and biogeochemical cycles of forested and agricultural ecosystems. Journal of Hydrology, 274(1–4), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levia, D. and Frost, E. (2006). Variability of throughfall volume and solute inputs in wooded ecosystems. Progress in Physical Geography, 30(5), 605–32.Google Scholar
Levia, D. F., Keim, R. F., Carlyle-Moses, D. E. et al. (2011). Throughfall and stemflow in wooded ecosystems. In Forest Hydrology and Biogeochemistry, ed. Levia, D. F., Carlyle-Moses, D. and Tanaka, T.. New York: Springer, pp. 425–43.CrossRef
Likens, G. E. and Bormann, F. H. (1974). Acid rain: a serious regional environmental problem. Science, 184(4142), 1171–9.Google Scholar
Likens, G. E., Driscoll, C. T., Buso, D. C. et al. (1994). The biogeochemistry of potassium at Hubbard Brook. Biogeochemistry, 25(2), 61–125.Google Scholar
Likens, G. E., Driscoll, C. T., Buso, D. C. et al. (1998). The biogeochemistry of calcium at Hubbard Brook. Biogeochemistry, 41(2), 89–173.Google Scholar
Likens, G. E., Driscoll, C. T., Buso, D. C. et al. (2002). The biogeochemistry of sulfur at Hubbard Brook. Biogeochemistry 60(3), 235–316.Google Scholar
Lilienfein, J. and Wilcke, W. (2004). Water and element input into native, agri- and silvicultural ecosystems of the Brazilian savanna. Biogeochemistry, 67(2), 183–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Limm, E. B., Simonin, K. A., Bothman, A. G. et al. (2009). Foliar water uptake: a common water acquisition strategy for plants of the redwood forest. Oecologia, 161(3), 449–59.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S. E. and Garten, C. T. (1988). Sources of sulfur in forest canopy throughfall. Nature, 336(6195), 148–51.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S. E. and Lovett, G. M. (1985). Field measurements of particle dry deposition rates to foliage and inert surfaces in a forest canopy. Environmental Science and Technology, 19(3), 238–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, S. E. and Lovett, G. M. (1992). Deposition and forest canopy interactions of airborne sulfur: results from the Integrated Forest Study. Atmospheric Environment, 26a(8), 1477–92.Google Scholar
Lindberg, S. E., Cape, J. N., Garten, C. T. et al. (1992). Can sulfate fluxes in forest canopy throughfall be used to estimate atmospheric sulfur deposition: a summary of recent results. In Precipitation Scavenging and Atmosphere-Surface Exchange, vol. 3, ed. Schwartz, S. E.. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing, pp. 1367–78.
Lindberg, S. E., Lovett, G. M., Richter, D. D. et al. (1986). Atmospheric deposition and canopy interactions of major ions in a forest. Science, 231, 141–5.Google Scholar
Lovett, G. M. (1988). A comparison of methods for estimating cloud water deposition to a New Hampshire (U.S.A.) subalpine forest. In Acid Deposition at High Elevation Sites, ed. Unsworth, M. H. and Fowler, D.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 309–20.
Lovett, G. M. (1994). Atmospheric deposition of nutrients and pollutants in North America: an ecological perspective. Ecological Applications, 4(4), 629–50.Google Scholar
Lovett, G. M. and Kinsman, J. D. (1990). Atmospheric pollutant deposition to high-elevation ecosystems. Atmospheric Environment, 24A, 2767–86.Google Scholar
Lovett, G. M. and Lindberg, S. E. (1993). Atmospheric deposition and canopy interactions of nitrogen in forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 23(8), 1603–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M. and Reiners, W. A. (1986). Canopy structure and cloud water deposition in subalpine coniferous forests. Tellus, 38B, 319–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Likens, G. E., Buso, D. C. et al. (2005). The biogeochemistry of chlorine at Hubbard Brook, New Hampshire, USA. Biogeochemistry, 72(2), 191–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Lindberg, S. E., Richter, D. D. et al. (1985). The effects of acidic deposition on cation leaching from three deciduous forest canopies. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 15(6), 1055–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Reiners, W. A. and Olson, R. K. (1982). Cloud droplet deposition in subalpine balsam fir forests - hydrological and chemical inputs. Science, 218(4579), 1303–4.Google Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Tear, T. H., Evers, D. C. et al. (2009). Effects of air pollution on ecosystems and biological diversity in the eastern United States. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1162, 99–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Thompson, A. W., Anderson, J. B. et al. (1999). Elevational patterns of sulfur deposition at a site in the Catskill Mountains, New York. Atmospheric Environment, 33(4), 617–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovett, G. M., Traynor, M. M., Pouyat, R. V., et al. (2000). Atmospheric deposition to oak forests along an urban-rural gradient. Environmental Science & Technology, 34(20), 4294–4300.Google Scholar
Lu, Z., Streets, D. G., de Foy, B. et al. (2013). Ozone monitoring instrument observations of interannual increases in SO2 emissions from Indian coal-fired power plants during 2005–2012. Environmental Science and Technology, 47(24), 13993–14000.Google Scholar
Macinnis-Ng, C. M. O., Flores, E. E., Müller, H. et al. (2012). Rainfall partitioning into throughfall and stemflow and associated nutrient fluxes: land use impacts in a lower montane tropical region of Panama. Biogeochemistry, 111(1–3), 661–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macinnis-Ng, C. M. O., Flores, E. E., Müller, H. et al. (2014). Throughfall and stemflow vary seasonally in different land-use types in a lower montane tropical region of Panama. Hydrological Processes, 28(4), 2174–84.Google Scholar
Matson, P. A., McDowell, W. H., Townsend, A. R. et al. (1999). The globalization of N deposition: ecosystem consequences in tropical environments. Biogeochemistry, 46(1–3), 67–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalzik, B. and Stadler, B. (2005). Importance of canopy herbivores to dissolved and particulate organic matter fluxes to the forest floor. Geoderma, 127(3), 227–36.Google Scholar
Moncrieff, J. B., Jarvis, P. G. and Valentini, R. (2000). Canopy fluxes. In Methods in Ecosystem Science, ed. Sala, O. E.. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 161–180.
Moran, J. M. (2010). Climate Studies: Introduction to Climate Science,. Washington, DC: American Meteorological Society.
Morisette, J. T., Richardson, A. D., Knapp, A. K. et al. (2008). Tracking the rhythm of the seasons in the face of global change: phenological research in the 21st century. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(5), 253–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, D. M., Gordon, A. G. and Gordon, A. W. (2003). Patterns of canopy interception and throughfall along a topographic sequence for black spruce dominated forest ecosystems in northwestern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 33(6), 1046–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musselman, K. N., Molotch, N. P. and Brooks, P. D. (2008). Effects of vegetation on snow accumulation and ablation in a mid-latitude sub-alpine forest. Hydrological Processes, 22(15), 2767–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadkarni, N. M. (1984). Epiphyte biomass and nutrient capital of a Neotropical elfin forest. Biotropica, 16(4), 249–56.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, N. M. (1986). The nutritional effects of epiphytes on host trees with special reference to alteration of precipitation chemistry. Selbyana, 9, 44–51.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, N. M. and Sumera, M. M. (2004). Old-growth forest canopy structure and its relationship to throughfall interception. Forest Science, 50(3), 290–8.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, N. M., Parker, G. G. and Lowman, M. D. (2011). Forest canopy studies as an emerging field of science. Annals of Forest Science, 68(2), 217–24.Google Scholar
Nadkarni, N. M., Schaefer, D., Matelson, T. J. et al. (2004). Biomass and nutrient pools of canopy and terrestrial components in a primary and a secondary montane cloud forest, Costa Rica. Forest Ecology and Management, 198(1–3), 223–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naeth, M. A., Bailey, A. W., Chanasyk, D. S. et al. (1991). Water holding capacity of litter and soil organic matter in mixed prairie and fescue grassland ecosystems of Alberta. Journal of Range Management, 44(1), 13–17.Google Scholar
Nepstad, D. C., Moutinho, P., Dias, M. B. et al. (2002). The effects of partial throughfall exclusion on canopy processes, aboveground production, and biogeochemistry of an Amazon forest. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 107(D20), doi:10.1029/2001JD000360.Google Scholar
Newman, E. I. (1995). Phosphorus inputs to terrestrial ecosystems. Journal of Ecology, 83, 713–26.Google Scholar
Nihlgård, B. (1970). Precipitation, its chemical composition and effect on soil water in a beech and a spruce forest in South Sweden. Oikos, 21(2), 208–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oke, T. R. (1987). Boundary Layer Climates,. London: Methuen.
Okin, G. S., Mahowald, N., Chadwick, O. A. et al. (2004). Impact of desert dust on the biogeochemistry of phosphorus in terrestrial ecosystems. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 18(2), doi:10.1029/2003GB002145.Google Scholar
Olson, D. M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E. D. et al. (2001). Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: A new map of life on Earth. BioScience, 51(11), 933–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, R. K., Reiners, W. A. and Lovett, G. M. (1985). Trajectory analysis of forest canopy effects on chemical flux in throughfall. Biogeochemistry, 1(4), 361–73.Google Scholar
Pardo, L. H., Fenn, M. E., Goodale, C. L. et al. (2011). Effects of nitrogen deposition and empirical nitrogen critical loads for ecoregions of the United States. Ecological Applications, 21(8), 3049–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. G. (1995). Structure and microclimate of forest canopies. In Forest Canopies, ed. Parker, G. G., Lowman, M. D. and Nadkarni, N. M.. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 73–106.
Parker, G. G., Lowman, M. D. and Nadkarni, N. M. (1995). Forest Canopies. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pérez-Suárez, M., Fenn, M. E., Cetina-Alcalá, V. M. et al. (2008). The effects of canopy cover on throughfall and soil chemistry in two forest sites in the Mexico City air basin. Atmosfera, 21(1), 83–100.Google Scholar
Pilegaard, K. (2013). Processes regulating nitric oxide emissions from soils. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 36(1621), 20130126.Google Scholar
Ponette-González, A. G., Weathers, K. C. and Curran, L. M. (2010a). Tropical land-cover change alters biogeochemical inputs to ecosystems in a Mexican montane landscape. Ecological Applications, 20(7), 1820–37.Google Scholar
Ponette-González, A. G., Weathers, K. C. and Curran, L. M. (2010b). Water inputs across a tropical montane landscape in Veracruz, Mexico: synergistic effects of land cover, rain and fog seasonality, and interannual precipitation variability. Global Change Biology, 16(3), 946–63.Google Scholar
Ponette-González, A. G., Marín-Spiotta, E. M., Brauman, K. A. et al. (2014). Hydrologic connectivity in the high-elevation tropics: heterogeneous responses to land change. BioScience, 64(2), 92–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiners, W. A. and Olson, R. K. (1984). Effects of canopy components on throughfall chemistry: an experimental analysis. Oecologia, 6(3), 320–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigo, A., Ávila, A. and Rodá, F. (2003). The chemistry of precipitation, throughfall and stemflow in two holm oak (Quercus ilex L.) forests under a contrasted pollution environment in NE Spain. The Science of the Total Environment, 305(1–2), 195–205.Google Scholar
Scheer, M. B. (2011). Mineral nutrient fluxes in rainfall and throughfall in a lowland Atlantic rainforest in southern Brazil. Journal of Forest Research, 16(1), 76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlesinger, W. H. and Bernhardt, E. S. (2013). Biogeochemistry: an Analysis of Global Change,. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schlesinger, W. H. and Jasechko, S. (2014). Transpiration in the global water cycle. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 189, 115–7.Google Scholar
Schwarz, M. T., Oelmann, Y. and Wilcke, W. (2011). Stable N isotope composition of nitrate reflects N transformations during the passage of water through a montane rain forest in Ecuador. Biogeochemistry, 102(1–3), 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillett, S. C. and Van Pelt, R. (2007). Trunk reiteration promotes epiphytes and water storage in an old-growth redwood forest canopy. Ecological Monographs, 77(3), 335–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simkin, S. M., Lewis, D. N., Weathers, K. C. et al. (2004). Determination of sulfate, nitrate, and chloride in throughfall using ion-exchange resins. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 153, 343–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonin, K. A., Santiago, L. S. and Dawson, T. E. (2009). Fog interception by Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don) crowns decouples physiology from soil water deficit. Plant, Cell and Environment, 32(7), 882–92.Google Scholar
Staelens, J., De Schrijver, A. and Verheyen, K. (2007). Seasonal variation in throughfall and stemflow chemistry beneath a European beech (Fagus sylvatica) tree in relation to canopy phenology. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37(8), 1359–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staelens, J., De Schrijver, A., Van Avermaet, P. et al. (2005). A comparison of bulk and wet-only deposition at two adjacent sites in Melle (Belgium). Atmospheric Environment, 39(1), 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staelens, J., De Schrijver, A., Verheyen, K. et al. (2008). Rainfall partitioning into throughfall, stemflow, and interception within a single beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) canopy: influence of foliation, rain event characteristics, and meteorology. Hydrological Processes, 22(1), 33–45.Google Scholar
Staelens, J., Herbst, M., Hölscher, D. et al. (2011). Seasonality of hydrological and biogeochemical fluxes. In Forest Hydrology and Biogeochemistry, ed. Levia, D. F., Carlyle-Moses, D. and Tanaka, T.. New York: Springer, pp. 521–39.CrossRef
Stanton, D. E., Armesto, J. J. and Hedin, L. O. (2014) Ecosystem properties self-organize in response to a directional fog-vegetation interaction. Ecology, 95(5), 1203–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storck, P., Lettenmaier, D. P. and Bolton, S. M. (2002). Measurement of snow interception and canopy effects on snow accumulation and melt in a mountainous maritime climate, Oregon, United States. Water Resources Research, 38(11), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, M. A., Reis, S., Riddick, S. N. et al. (2013). Towards a climate-dependent paradigm of ammonia emission and deposition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368(1621), 20130166.Google Scholar
Toba, T. and Ohta, T. (2005). An observational study of the factors that influence interception loss in boreal and temperate forests. Journal of Hydrology, 313(3–4), 208–20.Google Scholar
Tobón Marin, C. T., Bouten, W. and Sevink, J. (2000). Gross rainfall and its partitioning into throughfall, stemflow and evaporation of intercepted water in four forest ecosystems in western Amazonia. Journal of Hydrology, 237(1–2), 40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripler, C. E., Kaushal, S. S., Likens, G. E. et al. (2006). Patterns in potassium dynamics in forest ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 9(4), 451–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, M. H. and Crossley, A. (1987). Capture of wind-driven cloud by vegetation. In Pollutant Transport and Fate in Ecosystems, ed. Coughtrey, P. J., Martin, M. H. and Unsworth, M. H.. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, pp. 125–37.
Van Breemen, N., Burrough, P. A., Velthorst, E. J. et al. (1982). Soil acidification from atmospheric ammonium sulphate in forest canopy throughfall. Nature, 299, 548–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vance, E. D. and Nadkarni, N. M. (1990). Microbial biomass and activity in canopy organic matter and the forest floor of a tropical cloud forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 22(5), 677–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veatch, W., Brooks, P. D., Gustafson, J. R. et al. (2009). Quantifying the effects of forest canopy cover on net snow accumulation at a continental, mid-latitude site. Ecohydrology, 2(2), 115–28.Google Scholar
Vitousek, P. M. and Howarth, R. W. (1991). Nitrogen limitation on land and in the sea: how can it occur? Biogeochemistry, 13(2), 87–115.Google Scholar
Vitousek, P. M., Porder, S., Houlton, B. Z. et al. (2010). Terrestrial phosphorus limitation: mechanisms, implications, and nitrogen-phosphorus interactions. Ecological Applications, 20(1), 5–15.Google Scholar
Warneck, P. (1988). Chemistry of the Natural Atmosphere. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Weathers, K. C. (1999). The importance of cloud and fog in the maintenance of ecosystems. Trends in Evolution and Ecology, 14(6), 214–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weathers, K. C. and Ewing, H. A. (2013). Element cycling. In Fundamentals of Ecosystem Science, ed. Weathers, K. C., Strayer, D. L. and Likens, G. E.. Amsterdam, Boston: Academic Press/Elsevier, pp. 97–108.CrossRef
Weathers, K. C. and Likens, G. E. (1997). Clouds in southern Chile: an important source of nitrogen to nitrogen-limited ecosystems? Environment Science and Technology, 31, 210–3.Google Scholar
Weathers, K. C. and Lovett, G. M. (1998). Acid deposition research and ecosystem science: synergistic successes. In Successes, Limitations, and Frontiers in Ecosystem Science, ed. Pace, M. L. and Groffmann, P. M.. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 195–219.
Weathers, K. C. and Ponette-González, A. G. (2011). Atmospheric deposition. In Forest Hydrology and Biogeochemistry: Synthesis of Past Research and Future Directions, ed. Levia, D. F., Carlyle-Moses, D. and Tanaka, T.. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 357–70.
Weathers, K. C., Cadenasso, M. L. and Pickett, S. T. A. (2001). Forest edges as nutrient and pollutant concentrators: potential synergisms between fragmentation, forest canopies, and the atmosphere. Conservation Biology, 15(6), 1506–14.Google Scholar
Weathers, K. C., Likens, G. E. and Butler, M. S. (2006a). Acid rain. In Environmental and Occupational Medicine, ed. Rom, W. N. and Markowitz, S. B.. Philadelpha, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, pp. 1507–20.
Weathers, K. C., Likens, G. E., Bormann, F. H. et al. (1988). Cloudwater chemistry from ten sites in North America. Environmental Science and Technology, 22, 1018–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weathers, K. C., Lovett, G. M. and Likens, G. E. (1995). Cloud deposition to a spruce forest edge. Atmospheric Environment, 29(6), 665–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weathers, K. C., Lovett, G. M., Likens, G. E. et al. (1998). Cloud water in southern Chile: whence come the nutrients. In First International Conference on Fog and Fog Collection, ed. Schemenauer, R. S. and Bridgman, H. A.. Ottawa, Canada: IDRC, pp. 313–5.
Weathers, K. C., Lovett, G. M., Likens, G. E. et al. (2000a). Cloudwater inputs of nitrogen to forest ecosystems in southern Chile: forms, fluxes, and sources. Ecosystems, 3(6), 590–5.Google Scholar
Weathers, K. C., Lovett, G. M., Likens, G. E. et al. (2000b). The effect of landscape features on deposition to Hunter Mountain, Catskill Mountains, New York. Ecological Applications, 10(2), 528–40.Google Scholar
Weathers, K. C., Simkin, S. M., Lovett, G. M. et al. (2006b). Empirical modeling of atmospheric deposition in mountainous landscapes. Ecological Applications, 16(4), 1590–1607.Google Scholar
Wedepohl, K. (1995). The composition of the continental crust. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 59(7), 1217–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesely, M. L. and Hicks, B. B. (2000). A review of the current status of knowledge on dry deposition. Atmospheric Environment, 34(12), 2261–82.Google Scholar
Wilcke, W., Leimer, S., Peters, T. et al. (2013). The nitrogen cycle of tropical montane forest in Ecuador turns inorganic under environmental change. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 27(4), 1194–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winkler, U. and Zotz, G. (2010). ‘And then there were three’: highly efficient uptake of potassium by foliar trichomes of epiphytic bromeliads. Annals of Botany, 106(3), 421–7.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, A., Wilcke, W. and Elsenbeer, H. (2007) Spatial and temporal patterns of throughfall quantity and quality in a tropical montane forest in Ecuador. Journal of Hydrology, 343(1–2), 80–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, A., Zimmermann, B. and Elsenbeer, H. (2009). Rainfall redistribution in a tropical forest: spatial and temporal patterns. Water Resources Research, 45(11), doi:10.1029/2008WR007470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, B., Zimmermann, A., Scheckenbach, H. L. et al. (2013). Changes in rainfall interception along a secondary forest succession gradient in lowland Panama. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(11), 4659–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org 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
×