Energy‐Water Asynchrony Principally Determines Water Available for Runoff From Snowmelt in Continental Montane Forests

ABSTRACT Changes in the volume, rate, and timing of the snowmelt water pulse have profound implications for seasonal soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET), groundwater recharge, and downstream water availability, especially in the context of climate change. Here, we present an empirical analysis of water available for runoff using five eddy covariance towers located in continental montane forests across a regional gradient of snow depth, precipitation seasonality, and aridity. We specifically investigated how energy‐water asynchrony (i.e., snowmelt timing relative to atmospheric demand), surface water input intensity (rain and snowmelt), and observed winter ET (winter AET) impact multiple water balance metrics that determine water available for runoff (WAfR). Overall, we found that WAfR had the strongest relationship with energy‐water asynchrony (adjusted r 2 = 0.52) and that winter AET was correlated to total water year evapotranspiration but not to other water balance metrics. Stepwise regression analysis demonstrated that none of the tested mechanisms were strongly related to the Budyko‐type runoff anomaly (highest adjusted r 2 = 0.21). We, therefore, conclude that WAfR from continental montane forests is most sensitive to the degree of energy‐water asynchrony that occurs. The results of this empirical study identify the physical mechanisms driving variability of WAfR in continental montane forests and are thus broadly relevant to the hydrologic management and modelling communities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hydrological Processes
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.15297
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.40

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Energy‐Water Asynchrony Principally Determines Water Available for Runoff From Snowmelt in Continental Montane Forests

Christopher A. Akurugu, A. K. Fox, M. E. Litvak, J. M. Frank et al.
2 citations
Hydrological Processes
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
0.40
article

Energy‐Water Asynchrony Principally Determines Water Available for Runoff From Snowmelt in Continental Montane Forests

Christopher A. Akurugu, A. K. Fox, M. E. Litvak, J. M. Frank, Kori Mooney, Ryan Webb, Greg A. Barron‐Gafford, John F. Knowles, Timothy D. Corrie, Peter D. Blanken, Sean P. Burns, Nana Afua Gyau Frimpong, Alex Fabricus, Jocelyn Gallais
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Changes in the volume, rate, and timing of the snowmelt water pulse have profound implications for seasonal soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET), groundwater recharge, and downstream water availability, especially in the context of climate change. Here, we present an empirical analysis of water available for runoff using five eddy covariance towers located in continental montane forests across a regional gradient of snow depth, precipitation seasonality, and aridity. We specifically investigated how energy‐water asynchrony (i.e., snowmelt timing relative to atmospheric demand), surface water input intensity (rain and snowmelt), and observed winter ET (winter AET) impact multiple water balance metrics that determine water available for runoff (WAfR). Overall, we found that WAfR had the strongest relationship with energy‐water asynchrony (adjusted r 2 = 0.52) and that winter AET was correlated to total water year evapotranspiration but not to other water balance metrics. Stepwise regression analysis demonstrated that none of the tested mechanisms were strongly related to the Budyko‐type runoff anomaly (highest adjusted r 2 = 0.21). We, therefore, conclude that WAfR from continental montane forests is most sensitive to the degree of energy‐water asynchrony that occurs. The results of this empirical study identify the physical mechanisms driving variability of WAfR in continental montane forests and are thus broadly relevant to the hydrologic management and modelling communities.

Hydrological ProcessesVol. 38(10)
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US), University of Wyoming (US), University of Arizona (US), University of New Mexico (US), University of Colorado Boulder (US), Montana State University (US), Rocky Mountain Research Station (US)
National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture, University of Wyoming, U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
0.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.