Search for: All records

Abstract Stormwater is a vital resource and dynamic driver of terrestrial ecosystem processes. However, processes controlling interactions during and shortly after storms are often poorly seen and poorly sensed when direct observations are substituted with technological ones. We discuss how human observations complement technological ones and the benefits of scientists spending more time in the storm. Human observation can reveal ephemeral storm-related phenomena such as biogeochemical hot moments, organismal responses, and sedimentary processes that can then be explored in greater resolution using sensors and virtual experiments. Storm-related phenomena trigger lasting, oversized impacts on hydrologic and biogeochemical processes, organismal traits or functions, and ecosystem services at all scales. We provide examples of phenomena in forests, across disciplines and scales, that have been overlooked in past research to inspire mindful, holistic observation of ecosystems during storms. We conclude that technological observations alone are insufficient to trace the process complexity and unpredictability of fleeting biogeochemical or ecological events without the shower thoughts produced by scientists’ human sensory and cognitive systems during storms. 

Terrestrial lidar scans were captured using a BLK360 scanner (Leica Geosystems, Norcross, GA, USA) which has a range of 0.5 – 45 m and measurement rate up to 680,000 points s−1 at the high-resolution setting. A georeferenced, 3-D point cloud of the study site was generated from 12 scans, approximately 50 m apart in both horizontal directions. Scans were performed in orientations intended to maximize branch exposure to the scanner and to scan during optimal weather conditions to minimize occlusion of features due to noise or movement generated by wind. Scan co-registration was done in Leica Geosystem’s Cyclone Register 360 software using its Visual Simultaneous Localization and Mapping algorithm (Visual SLAM) and resulted in relatively low overall co-registration error ranging from 0.005-0.009 m. From this study site point cloud, manual straight-line measurements from the ground to the sensors were made using Leica’s Cyclone Register 360 software. 

The attached datasets are from the publication: Drought decreases water storage capacity of two arboreal epiphytes with differing ecohydrological traits. Canopy epiphytes, plants that grow on trees, can have a significant influence on canopy water storage, interception, and precipitation fluxes. However, the drought response of the plants at a foliar level may influence their ability to store and capture rainfall. We experimentally tested the effects of leaf desiccation on water storage (Smax) and relevant leaf properties of two canopy epiphytes common in coastal maritime forests in Georgia, U.S.A. Full methodological information can be found in the publication listed under "Related Resources." 

As watersheds are complex systems that are difficult to directly study, the streams that drain them are often sampled to search for watershed “signals.” These signals include the presence and/or abundance of isotopes, types of sediment, organisms (including pathogens), chemical compounds associated with ephemeral biogeochemical processes or anthropogenic impacts, and so on. Just like watersheds can send signals via the streams that drain from them, we present a conceptual analysis that suggests plant canopies (equally complex and hard-to-study systems) may send similar signals via the precipitation that drains down their stems (stemflow). For large, tall, hard-to-access tree canopies, this portion of precipitation may be modest, often <2%; however, stemflow waters, like stream waters, scour a large drainage network which may allow stemflow to pick up various signals from various processes within and surrounding canopies. This paper discusses some of the signals that the canopy environment may impart to stemflow and their relevance to our understanding of vegetated ecosystems. Being a conceptual analysis, some examples have been observed; most are hypothetical. These include signals from on-canopy biogeochemical processes, seasonal epi-faunal activities, pathogenic impacts, and the physiological activities of the canopy itself. Given stemflow's currently limited empirical hydrological, ecological and biogeochemical relevance to date (mostly due to its modest fraction in most forest water cycles), future work on the possible “signals in stemflow” may also motivate more natural scientists and, perhaps some applied researchers, to rigorously monitor this oft-ignored water flux.