Differences in rainfall interception loss between beech and oak forest stands in a Mediterranean mountain catchment

Canopy interception is a key component of forest hydrology, influencing soil moisture and water availability. This study quantified throughfall and stemflow in beech (Fagus sylvatica) and oak (Quercus robur) stands on opposing slopes within a 44 km2 Mediterranean mountain catchment in central Italy. Over nearly three years, more than 200 precipitation events were monitored in four plots. Relative interception loss averaged 38.7% in oak and 30.6% in beech stands during moderate events. Despite higher canopy cover and leaf area index (LAI) in beech, oak showed greater interception across growing (42.2% vs. 33.2%) and dormant (32.5% vs. 26.0%) seasons. This contrast persisted under leaf-off conditions, when LAI converged between species, indicating that interception is governed by canopy properties beyond leaf area. An adapted LAI-based analytical model systematically underestimated observed losses and failed to reproduce the oak-beech difference. Interception thus emerges from the coupled control of canopy structure and local energy availability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hydrological Sciences Journal
Published
2026-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2026.2740191
Primary Topic
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Differences in rainfall interception loss between beech and oak forest stands in a Mediterranean mountain catchment

Daniele Penna, Christian Massari, Silvia Barbetta, Marco Donnini et al.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
article

Differences in rainfall interception loss between beech and oak forest stands in a Mediterranean mountain catchment

Daniele Penna, Christian Massari, Silvia Barbetta, Marco Donnini, Matteo Verdone, Marco Dionigi, Paolo Filippucci, Domenico De Santis, Thomas Holmes, Diego G. Miralles
article en

Abstract

Canopy interception is a key component of forest hydrology, influencing soil moisture and water availability. This study quantified throughfall and stemflow in beech (Fagus sylvatica) and oak (Quercus robur) stands on opposing slopes within a 44 km2 Mediterranean mountain catchment in central Italy. Over nearly three years, more than 200 precipitation events were monitored in four plots. Relative interception loss averaged 38.7% in oak and 30.6% in beech stands during moderate events. Despite higher canopy cover and leaf area index (LAI) in beech, oak showed greater interception across growing (42.2% vs. 33.2%) and dormant (32.5% vs. 26.0%) seasons. This contrast persisted under leaf-off conditions, when LAI converged between species, indicating that interception is governed by canopy properties beyond leaf area. An adapted LAI-based analytical model systematically underestimated observed losses and failed to reproduce the oak-beech difference. Interception thus emerges from the coupled control of canopy structure and local energy availability.

Hydrological Sciences Journal
Goddard Space Flight Center (US), Oregon State University (US), National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (US), Ghent University Hospital (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
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.

Differences in rainfall interception loss between beech and oak forest stands in a Mediterranean mountain catchment — Daniele Penna, Christian Massari, et al. · Hydrological Sciences Journal (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS