trees

Riparian Evapotranspiration (ET) Study (SEON) from the Middle Rio Grande River Bosque, New Mexico (1999-2011 ): Soil Thermal Flux, Temperature and Moisture Data

Abstract: 

This study originated with the objective of parameterizing riparian evapotranspiration (ET) in the water budget of the Middle Rio Grande. We hypothesized that flooding and invasions of non-native species would strongly impact ecosystem water use. Our objectives were to measure and compare water use of native (Rio Grande cottonwood, Populus deltoides ssp. wizleni) and non-native (saltcedar, Tamarix chinensis, Russian olive, Eleagnus angustifolia) vegetation and to evaluate how water use is affected by climatic variability resulting in high river flows and flooding as well as drought conditions and deep water tables. Eddy covariance flux towers to measure ET and shallow wells to monitor water tables were instrumented in 1999. Active sites in their second decade of monitoring include a xeroriparian, non-flooding salt cedar woodland within Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge and a dense, monotypic salt cedar stand at Bosque del Apache NWR, which is subject to flood pulses associated with high river flows. This data set includes the soil temperature and moisture data collected during this study.

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

310

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Methods: Three-dimensional eddy covariance: Measures fluxes of latent heat, sensible heat, and momentum, integrated over an area such as a vegetation canopy. High frequency measurements are made of vertical wind speed and water vapor, and their covariance over thirty minutes is used to compute latent heat flux, the heat absorbed by evaporation, from the canopy surface. Latent heat flux (LE) is converted to a direct measurement of evapotranspiration (ET). Simultaneous, high frequency measurements of temperature are used with vertical wind speed to compute the sensible heat flux (H), the heat transfer due to vertical temperature gradients. Measuring net radiation (Rn) and ground heat flux (G), allows the energy balance to be calculated (Rn = LE + H + G), providing a self-check for accuracy and closure error.

Sites: Two Rio Grande riparian locations in P. deltoides forests, two in T. chinensis forests. In each forest type, one of the two sites is prone to flooding from elevated Rio Grande flows, and the other site does not flood. A fifth site was located in a mix of non-native Eleagnus angustifolia (Russian olive) and native Salix exigua (coyote willow) prone to flooding.

Design: Eddy covariance systems were mounted on towers in the turbulent surface layer 2-2.5 m above the canopy. Measurement period was 10 Hz and the covariance period was 30 minutes. Additional energy fluxes were made at 1 Hz and averaged over 30 minutes.

Data sources: 

sev310_bosqueETSoil_20160710.csv

Instrumentation: 

Current Instruments:

*Instrument Name: 3-D Sonic Anemometer
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: CSAT3

*Instrument Name: CO2/H2O Analyzer
*Manufacturer: Li-Cor, Inc. (Lincoln, NE)
*Model Number: LI-7500

*Instrument Name: Net Radiometer
*Manufacturer: Kipp & Zonen (Delft, The Netherlands)
*Model Number: CNR1

*Instrument Name: Barometric Pressure Sensor
*Manufacturer: Vaisala (Helsinki, Finland)
*Model Number: CS105

*Instrument Name: Temperature and Relative Humidity Probe
*Manufacturer: Vaisala (Helsinki, Finland)
*Model Number: HMP45C

*Instrument Name: Wind Sentry (Anemometer and Vane)
*Manufacturer: R.M. Young (Traverse City, MI)
*Model Number: 03001

*Instrument Name: Tipping Bucket Rain Gage
*Manufacturer: Texas Electronics, Inc. (Dallas, TX)
*Model Number: TE525

*Instrument Name: Quantum Sensor (PAR)
*Manufacturer: Li-Cor, Inc. (Lincoln, NE)
*Model Number: LI-190

*Instrument Name: Water Content Reflectometer
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: CS616

*Instrument Name: Soil Heat Flux Plate
*Manufacturer: Radiation and Energy Balance Systems, Inc. (Bellevue, WA)
*Model Number: HFT3

*Instrument Name: Averaging Soil Thermocouple Probe
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: TCAV

*Instrument Name: Measurement and Control System (Datalogger)
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: CR5000

*Instrument Name: Levelogger and Barologger (Water Table)
*Manufacturer: Solinst Canada Ltd. (Georgetown, ON, Canada)
*Model Number: 3001 LT M10 and 3001 LT M1.5

*Instrument Name: Mini-Diver, Cera-Diver, and Baro-Diver (Water Table)
*Manufacturer: Van Essen Instruments ((Delft, The Netherlands)
*Model Number: DI501, DI701, and DI500

Discontinued Instruments:

*Instrument Name: Krypton Hygrometer
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: KH2O

*Instrument Name: Net Radiometer
*Manufacturer: Radiation and Energy Balance Systems, Inc. (Bellevue, WA)
*Model Number: Q-7.1

*Instrument Name: Pyranometer
*Manufacturer: Kipp & Zonen (Delft, The Netherlands)
*Model Number: CM3

*Instrument Name: Micrologger
*Manufacturer: Campbell Scientific, Inc. (Logan, UT)
*Model Number: CR23X

*Instrument Name: Submersible Sensor Pressure Transducer (Water Table)
*Manufacturer: Electronic Engineering Innovations (Las Cruces, NM)
*Model Number: 2.0 (2 m) and 5.0 (4 m)

Water Potential Data From Pinyon-Juniper Forest at Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico

Abstract: 

This dataset consists of profiles of soil water potential measured via in situ thermocouple psychrometers located within a rainfall manipulation experiment in a piñon-juniper woodland. The sensors are centrally located within 40 m x 40 m water addition, water removal, infrastructure control, and ambient control plots. The profiles are installed under each of ten target piñon and juniper trees (five of each species) which were also used for other physiological measurements, as well as at five intercanopy areas. The raw sensor output (in μV) has been temperature-corrected and individual calibration equations applied.

Background: This sensor array is part of a larger experiment investigating the mechanisms of drought-related mortality in the piñon-juniper woodland. Briefly, one hypothesis is that, during periods of extended, very-negative, soil water potential (“drought”) trees experience xylem tensions greater than their threshold for cavitation, lose their hydraulic connection to the soil, dessicate and die. A second hypothesis is that in order to avoid this hydraulic failure, trees restrict water loss via reduction in stomatal conductance which also limits the diffusion of CO2 for photosynthesis, and eventually may starve to death depending on the drought duration. 

The goal of the project is to apply drought stress on an area significantly larger than the scale of individual trees to determine whether hydraulic failure or carbon starvation is a more likely mechanism for mortality under drought conditions. The cover control treatment replicates the microenvironment created under the plastic rainfall removal troughs (slightly elevated soil and air temperatures and relative humidity) without removing ambient precipitation. The water addition treatment is intended to simulate 150% of the 30-yr average rainfall via n = 6 19-mm super-canopy applications during the growing season (April-October). More details on the experiment can be found in Pangle et al. 2012 Ecosphere 3(4) 28 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES11-00369.1). These three treatments, in addition to an ambient control with no infrastructure, are applied to three replicated blocks, one on relatively level terrain, one on a southeast-facing slope, and one on a north-facing slope. The soil psychrometers were installed in the southeast-facing block only, to measure the effectiveness of the treatments on plant-available soil moisture.

For the purposes of comparing soil water potential under various cover types (piñon, juniper, intercanopy), it should be noted that significant tree mortality has occurred on Plot 10. As described below, on 5 August 2008 the site was struck by lightening and many of the soil psychrometers were rendered inoperable. At approximately the same time, four of the five target piñon trees in the southeast-facing drought plot (Plot 10) started browning and it was discovered that they had bark beetle (Ips confusus) galleries and were infected with Ophiostoma fungi. By October 2008 those trees (T1, T2, T4, and T5) had dropped all their needles. Therefore the psychrometers buried under them were no longer located “under trees” after that time. By June 2009 the remaining target piñon (T3) died. By March 2010, one of the target juniper trees (T10) had died. At the time of this writing (April 2011) it is anticipated that more of the juniper trees on P10 will die during this year. 

Data set ID: 

285

Additional Project roles: 

30

Core Areas: 

Keywords: 

Methods: 


Methods:  Within Plots 9-12 of the larger PJ rainfall manipulation experiment, thermocouple psychrometers (Wescor Inc., Logan, UT, USA) were installed. Soil psychrometers profiles were placed under each of the initial ten target trees in each plot, and at the same five intercanopy areas that were instrumented to measure soil and air temperature and soil volumetric water at 5 cm depth. Each profile consisted of sensors at (1) 15 cm; (20) cm; and (3) as deep as could be augered and installed by hand, generally 50-100 cm depth. Sensors were calibrated with four NaCl solutions of known water potential before field deployment.

Sensors are controlled via a Campbell Scientific CR-7 datalogger (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT, USA). The datalogger takes measurements every 3 h but soil water potential does not change that fast and the daytime measurements are generally unusable because of thermal gradients between the datalogger and the sensors, therefore the data presented here are only the 3:00 AM timepoints.

Note that on 5 August 2008 the site was struck by lightening. Many of the soil psychrometers were destroyed by ground current, with the worst damage on the drought and cover control plots where the metal support posts for the infrastructure may have helped to propagate ground current. Some of those sensors were eventually replaced but in the case of the infrastructure plots we were limited to installing new sensors between the plastic troughs because it was impossible to auger under the plastic. Therefore, while the original installation was random with regard to the pattern of plastic domes and troughs, the replacement installation was exclusively outside the plastic and the data may therefore be biased towards wetter microsites.

Instrumentation: 


Instrument Name: thermocouple psychrometer with stainless steel screen

Manufacturer: Wescor, Inc, Logan, UT, USA

Model Number: PST-55

Ecosystem-Scale Rainfall Manipulation in a Piñon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico: Sap Flow Data (2006-2013)

Abstract: 

Climate models predict that water limited regions around the world will become drier and warmer in the near future, including southwestern North America. We developed a large-scale experimental system that allows testing of the ecosystem impacts of precipitation changes. Four treatments were applied to 1600 m2 plots (40 m × 40 m), each with three replicates in a piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and juniper (Juniper monosperma) ecosystem. These species have extensive root systems, requiring large-scale manipulation to effectively alter soil water availability.  Treatments consisted of: 1) irrigation plots that receive supplemental water additions, 2) drought plots that receive 55% of ambient rainfall, 3) cover-control plots that receive ambient precipitation, but allow determination of treatment infrastructure artifacts, and 4) ambient control plots. Our drought structures effectively reduced soil water potential and volumetric water content compared to the ambient, cover-control, and water addition plots. Drought and cover control plots experienced an average increase in maximum soil and air temperature at ground level of 1-4° C during the growing season compared to ambient plots, and concurrent short-term diurnal increases in maximum air temperature were also observed directly above and below plastic structures. Our drought and irrigation treatments significantly influenced tree predawn water potential, sap-flow, and net photosynthesis, with drought treatment trees exhibiting significant decreases in physiological function compared to ambient and irrigated trees.  Supplemental irrigation resulted in a significant increase in both plant water potential and xylem sap-flow compared to trees in the other treatments. This experimental design effectively allows manipulation of plant water stress at the ecosystem scale, permits a wide range of drought conditions, and provides prolonged drought conditions comparable to historical droughts in the past – drought events for which wide-spread mortality in both these species was observed. 

The focus of this study was to determine the effects of rainfall manipulation on our two target tree species.  Therefore, the analysis of the water relations of these trees was an essential component of the project.  Sap-flow within each individual target tree was monitored through the use of Granier probes.  These monitoring efforts provided a window on processes such as transpiration and the night-time re-filling of the xylem tissue.  Drought tolerance and adaptation strategies were also explored by comparing differences in sap-flow rates across treatment types and between species.

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

277

Additional Project roles: 

361
362
363
364
365
366

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Site Description

In total, our study site consisted of 12 experimental plots located in three replicate blocks that varied in slope % and aspect. Slope varied from 0-2% in experimental plots situated in level portions of the site, with steeper grades ranging from 6-18% for plots established on hill-slopes. Soil depth across the site ranged from 20 to ≥ 100 cm, with shallower soil depths occurring on hill-slopes where depth to caliche and/or bed-rock was only 20-30 cm in some instances. 

The study utilized four different experimental treatments applied in three replicate blocks. The four experimental treatments included 1) un-manipulated, ambient control plots, 2) drought plots, 3) supplemental irrigation plots, and 4) cover-control plots that have a similar infrastructure to the drought plots, but remove no precipitation.  The three replicated blocks differed in their slope and aspect. One block of four plots was located on south facing slopes, one on north facing slopes, and one in a flat area of the landscape.  

Experimental Treatment Design 

To effectively reduce water availability to trees, we installed treatments of sufficient size to minimize tree water uptake from outside of the plot. Thus, we constructed three replicated drought structures that were 40 m × 40 m (1600 m2). We targeted a 50% reduction in ambient precipitation through water removal troughs that covered ~50% of the land surface area. Drought plot infrastructure was positioned to insure that targeted Piñon pine and juniper were centrally located within each drought plot to provide the maximum distance between tree stems and the nearest plot boundary. Each drought and cover-control plot consists of 27 parallel troughs running across the 40 m plot. Each trough was constructed with overlapping 3ft ×10 ft (0.91 m × 3.05 m) pieces of thermoplastic polymer sheets (Makloron SL Polycarbonate Sheet, Sheffield Plastics Inc, Sheffield, MA) fixed with self-tapping metal screws to horizontal rails that are approximately waist height and are supported by vertical posts every 2.5-3.5 m. The plastic sheets were bent into a concave shape to collect and divert the precipitation off of the plot. The bending and spacing of the plastic resulted in 0.81 m (32 in) troughs separated by 0.56 m (22 in) walkways. 

Individual troughs often intersected the canopy of trees because of their height. The troughs were installed as close to the bole of the tree as possible without damaging branches in order to maximize the area covered by the plastic across the entire plot. An end-cap was attached to the downstream edge of the trough to prevent water from falling onto the base of the tree. The end-caps were 81 cm × 30 cm and made with the same plastic as the troughs. Each end-cap was fixed to the trough with a 75 cm piece of 20 gauge angle iron cut to match the curve of the bottom of the trough and held in place with self-tapping screws. The plastic junctures were then sealed with acrylic cement (Weld-On #3 epoxy, IPS Corp., Compton, CA). The middle of the end-cap was fitted with a 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC collar to allow water to flow through. A piece of 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC pipe or suction hose (used when the bole of a tree was directly below trough) was then attached to the downstream side of the end-cap, enabling water to flow into the trough on the other side of a tree. End-caps were also placed at the downhill end of the troughs on the edge of the plot and fitted with 90o fittings to divert water down into a 30 cm2 gutter (open on top) that ran perpendicular to the plot. Collected water was then channeled from the gutter into adjacent arroyos for drainage away from the study area. 

We built cover-control infrastructures to investigate the impact of the plastic drought structures independent of changes in precipitation. This was necessary because of the high radiation environment in central New Mexico, in which the clear plastic troughs can effectively act as a greenhouse structure. The cover-control treatment had the same dimensions as the drought plots with one key difference. The plastic was attached to the rails in a convex orientation so precipitation would fall on top of the plastic and then drain directly down onto the plot. The cover-control plots were designed to receive the same amount of precipitation as un-manipulated ambient plots, with the precipitation falling and draining into the walkways between the rows of troughs. Cover-control plots were constructed between June-21-07 and July-24-07; drought plots were constructed between August-09-07 and August-27-07.  The total plastic coverage in each plot is 45% ± 1% of the 1600 m2 plot area due to the variable terrain and canopy cover. A direct test of the amount of precipitation excluded via the plastic troughs was performed over a 2-week period during the summer monsoon season of 2008. Two rainfall collection gutters (7.6 cm width, 6.1 m length) were installed in a perpendicular arrangement across four plastic drought structures and four intervening open walkways. One gutter was located below the troughs (~0.6 m above ground), and the other was located just above (~1.35 m) and offset, to determine the interception of rainfall by the troughs. Rainfall totals collected via the perpendicular gutters were measured using Series 525 tipping bucket rain gauges (Texas Electronics, Dallas, TX). 

Our irrigation system consisted of above-canopy sprinkler nozzles configured to deliver supplemental rainstorm event(s) at a rate of 19 mm hr-1. Our irrigation system is a modified design of the above-canopy irrigation system outlined by Munster et al. (2006). Each of the three irrigation plots has three 2750 gal (10.41 m3) water storage tanks connected in parallel.  These tanks were filled with filtered reverse osmosis (RO) water brought to the site with multiple tractor-trailer trucks. During irrigation events, water is pumped from the tanks through a series of hoses that decrease from 7.62 cm (3 in) main lines out of the tank to 2.54 cm (1 in) hoses attached to 16 equally-spaced sprinklers within the plot. Each sprinkler is 6.1 m (20 ft) tall (2-3 m higher than mean tree height), and fitted with a sprinkler nozzle that creates an even circular distribution of water with a radius of 5 m on the ground. Due to the varying topography, sprinklers located downslope (if unregulated) would receive more pressure than those at the top of a hill and thus spray more water. To mitigate this problem, each sprinkler line was fitted with a pressure gauge and variable globe valve (inline water spigot with precise regulation) equidistant from the top of the sprinkler. Each sprinkler line was then set so that the pressure gauges were equal, thus ensuring equal distribution of water throughout the plot, regardless of elevational differences.  The irrigation systems were tested in October 2007 (2 mm supplemental), and full applications (19 mm) were applied in 2008 on 24-June, 15-July, and 26-August. During the 24-June event, we deployed six ~1 m2 circular trays across one of the irrigation plots to test the spatial variation of the wetting. Data from this test indicated that on average, collection trays received 19.5 (± 2.5) mm of water. 

Site Abiotic Monitoring

We utilized Campbell Scientific dataloggers to continuously monitor and record abiotic conditions and physiological measurements across the site.  All systems were connected to a solar-powered wireless network with NL100 relays (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT).  Plots were instrumented with CR-1000 dataloggers (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT).  Each CR-1000 datalogger was accompanied by AM25T and AM 16/32 multiplexers to expand sensor measurement capacity (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT). The south facing block of experimental plots (the intensive physiology block) was extensively instrumented with sensors to measure both abiotic and plant physiological parameters. The non-intensive experimental plots in the north facing and flat blocks were initially only instrumented to monitor abiotic conditions.  

Plant Physiological Response

Multiple physiological characteristics of ten target trees (five piñon and five juniper) within each of the intensive measurement plots were continually monitored by automated sensors.  Stem sap-flow (JS) was measured using Granier heat dissipation sap flow sensors installed in 2007 in each intensive physiology plot within the south aspect block.  Trees in north facing (plots 5-8) and flat blocks (plots 1-4) were not instrumented with sap-flow sensors during the 2007 or 2008 seasons.  All target trees had two 10mm Granier sap-flow sensors installed in the outermost sapwood (Granier 1987).  Each sensor used the traditional two probe heated and unheated reference design (Granier 1987), with two additional probes located 5 cm to the right side of the primary probes to correct for axial temperature gradients in the stem (Goulden and Field 1994). We found that this compensation for axial temperature gradients is critical to reduce measurement noise resulting from the open-canopy and high radiation environment of this ecosystem.  In addition, stems were wrapped with reflective insulation (Reflectix Inc., Markleville, IN) in an effort to shield sap-flow probes from short term ambient temperature fluctuations and direct solar irradiance.  Sapflow (JS) was calculated according to the methods outlined in Granier (1987) and Goulden and Field (1994). Sapwood depth was generally greater than 10 mm on the majority of instrumented trees, thus only a small % of measurements required a correction due to sensor installation in non-functional stem heartwood (see Clearwater and others 1999).  All data from sap-flow sensors was recorded using Campbell Scientific AM16/32 multiplexers and CR1000 dataloggers (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT).

Statistics 

Statistical tests for treatment differences in stem sap-flow (JS) were analyzed using a linear-effects mixed model with repeated measures.  For the repeated measures analysis, an autoregressive first order [AR(1)] covariance structure was utilized.  Differences between groups and/or treatment means were deemed significant at a threshold α-value of p = 0.05.   All mean values are reported with ± 1 S.E.  

Data Processing and Quality Assurance & Control (QA-QC)

Data processing and QA-QC were performed using either Matlab (The Mathworks, Inc.) or Microsoft Office 2010 Excel (Microsoft Corporation) software.  All raw and/or processed data traces were visually plotted and inspected for noisy, erroneous, or out of range data points or sensors traces.  All removed data points had a “NaN” value assigned.   Despite this QA-QC review and data cleaning, all data sets should still be evaluated for outliers, etc., as standard outlier statistical tests were not performed.

Data sources: 

sev277_pjsapflow06_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow07_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow08_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow09_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow10_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow11_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow12_20150608.txt
sev277_pjsapflow13_20150608.txt

Quality Assurance: 

Data processing and QA-QC were performed using either Matlab (The Mathworks, Inc.) or Microsoft Office 2010 Excel (Microsoft Corporation) software.  All raw and/or processed data traces were visually plotted and inspected for noisy, erroneous, or out of range data points or sensors traces.  All removed data points had a “NaN” value assigned.   Despite this QA-QC review and data cleaning, all data sets should still be evaluated for outliers, etc., as standard outlier statistical tests were not performed.

Additional information: 

Additional notes: The Sapflow Js data-set contains 15 minute interval data from 2006 thru 2012.   Data Qa/Qc has been performed on these files.   PJ day refers to days since start of project (i.e., 1/1/2006).   PJ Timestamp denotes/records each 15 minute interval entry from 1/1/2006.

The treatment classes provided in the file are as follows; ambient (1), drought (2), cover control (3), and irrigation (4).  The experiment used plot aspect as the blocking factor.   There are 3 different replicate blocks and block classifications designated in the files; flat aspect (1), north aspect (2), and south aspect (3).  This will be obvious when viewing the files.

The remaining cols in the data frame are the 15 minute sap-flow data for each tree in a particular plot.   This type of variable is commonly referred to as sapflow density, and it is represented by the symbol/abbreviation JS, in units of (g/m2 s).  

Tree numbers are always grouped by species as follows (regardless of plot); Trees 1-5 are original Pinus edulis, Trees 6-10 are original Juniper monosperma.   When one of these original trees died, an additional tree in the plot was added to retain an adequate sample size over time (i.e., multiple years+).   These additional trees are grouped as follows; Trees 11-15 are “replacement” Pinus edulis, Trees 16-20 are “replacement” Juniper monosperma.  “Replacement” is used here in a more restricted sense, as these additional trees have their separate and unique tree designation number.

So, in differing plots you will have differing numbers of trees depending on; 1) the number of trees for which data was collected, and 2) how many additional “replacement trees” had to be designated due to mortality (or partial mortality) of original trees.  Many plots have n=10 trees, based on the original T1-T5 & T6-10 designation, as these particular plots did not experience mortality.   However, a plot like P10 has a total of n=16 trees.  In P10, the original T1-5 & T6-T10 trees are listed, a replacement Pinon (T11) is listed, and five additional/replacement junipers (T16-T20).   In some cases you will see data present at the same time for both original and replacement junipers (plots 6 & 10).  This is fine, as juniper experiences a slow/partial canopy dieback, so we monitored the original and replacement trees at the same time in these two plots.     Finally, we only provide data on trees for which data was collected (so for example, in some instances you may only have n=4 cols of data for a particular species in a particular plot).  

Ecosystem-Scale Rainfall Manipulation in a Piñon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico: Volumetric Water Content (VWC) at 5 cm Depth Data (2006-2013)

Abstract: 

Climate models predict that water limited regions around the world will become drier and warmer in the near future, including southwestern North America. We developed a large-scale experimental system that allows testing of the ecosystem impacts of precipitation changes. Four treatments were applied to 1600 m2 plots (40 m × 40 m), each with three replicates in a piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and juniper (Juniper monosperma) ecosystem. These species have extensive root systems, requiring large-scale manipulation to effectively alter soil water availability.  Treatments consisted of: 1) irrigation plots that receive supplemental water additions, 2) drought plots that receive 55% of ambient rainfall, 3) cover-control plots that receive ambient precipitation, but allow determination of treatment infrastructure artifacts, and 4) ambient control plots. Our drought structures effectively reduced soil water potential and volumetric water content compared to the ambient, cover-control, and water addition plots. Drought and cover control plots experienced an average increase in maximum soil and air temperature at ground level of 1-4° C during the growing season compared to ambient plots, and concurrent short-term diurnal increases in maximum air temperature were also observed directly above and below plastic structures. Our drought and irrigation treatments significantly influenced tree predawn water potential, sap-flow, and net photosynthesis, with drought treatment trees exhibiting significant decreases in physiological function compared to ambient and irrigated trees.  Supplemental irrigation resulted in a significant increase in both plant water potential and xylem sap-flow compared to trees in the other treatments. This experimental design effectively allows manipulation of plant water stress at the ecosystem scale, permits a wide range of drought conditions, and provides prolonged drought conditions comparable to historical droughts in the past – drought events for which wide-spread mortality in both these species was observed. 

Obviously, one of the important areas of interest in this experiment was the effects of elevated (greater-than-average) and decreased (less-than-average) precipitation levels on soil moisture.  The volumetric water content of the soil was monitored across all twelve plots, all four treatment types, and all three cover types.  The record created through these monitoring activities not only noted the initial “wetting-up” of the soil after a precipitation event but also tracked the “drying-down” of the soil after the event.  The water content of the soil and its associated storage capacity could then provide a frame of reference in which changes in the physiological properties of our two target tree species, such as water potential and sapflow rate, could be interpreted. 

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

276

Additional Project roles: 

206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Site Description

The study utilized four different experimental treatments applied in three replicate blocks. The four experimental treatments included 1) un-manipulated, ambient control plots, 2) drought plots, 3) supplemental irrigation plots, and 4) cover-control plots that have a similar infrastructure to the drought plots, but remove no precipitation.  The three replicated blocks differed in their slope and aspect. One block of four plots was located on south facing slopes, one on north facing slopes, and one in a flat area of the landscape.  

Experimental Treatment Design (see Pangle et al. 2012 for detailed methodology)
To effectively reduce water availability to trees, we installed treatments of sufficient size to minimize tree water uptake from outside of the plot.  Thus, we constructed three replicated drought structures that were 40 m × 40 m (1600 m2). We targeted a 50% reduction in ambient precipitation through water removal troughs that covered ~50% of the land surface area. Drought plot infrastructure was positioned to insure that targeted Piñon pine and juniper were centrally located within each drought plot to provide the maximum distance between tree stems and the nearest plot boundary.  Each drought and cover-control plot consists of 27 parallel troughs running across the 40 m plot. Each trough was constructed with overlapping 3ft ×10 ft (0.91 m × 3.05 m) pieces of thermoplastic polymer sheets (Makloron SL Polycarbonate Sheet, Sheffield Plastics Inc, Sheffield, MA) fixed with self-tapping metal screws to horizontal rails that are approximately waist height and are supported by vertical posts every 2.5-3.5 m. The plastic sheets were bent into a concave shape to collect and divert the precipitation off of the plot. The bending and spacing of the plastic resulted in 0.81 m (32 in) troughs separated by 0.56 m (22 in) walkways.  

Individual troughs often intersected the canopy of trees because of their height. The troughs were installed as close to the bole of the tree as possible without damaging branches in order to maximize the area covered by the plastic across the entire plot. An end-cap was attached to the downstream edge of the trough to prevent water from falling onto the base of the tree.  A piece of 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC pipe or suction hose (used when the bole of a tree was directly below trough) was then attached to the downstream side of the end-cap, enabling water to flow into the trough on the other side of a tree. End-caps were also placed at the downhill end of the troughs on the edge of the plot and fitted with 90 degree fittings to divert water down into a 30 cm2 gutter (open on top) that ran perpendicular to the plot. Collected water was then channeled from the gutter into adjacent arroyos for drainage away from the study area.

We built cover-control infrastructures to investigate the impact of the plastic drought structures independent of changes in precipitation. This was necessary because of the high radiation environment in central New Mexico, in which the clear plastic troughs can effectively act as a greenhouse structure. The cover-control treatment had the same dimensions as the drought plots with one key difference. The plastic was attached to the rails in a convex orientation so precipitation would fall on top of the plastic and then drain directly down onto the plot. The cover-control plots were designed to receive the same amount of precipitation as un-manipulated ambient plots, with the precipitation falling and draining into the walkways between the rows of troughs. Cover-control plots were constructed between June-21-07 and July-24-07; drought plots were constructed between August-09-07 and August-27-07.  The total plastic coverage in each plot is 45% ± 1% of the 1600 m2 plot area due to the variable terrain and canopy cover.

Our irrigation system consisted of above-canopy sprinkler nozzles configured to deliver supplemental rainstorm event(s) at a rate of 19 mm hr-1. Our irrigation system is a modified design of the above-canopy irrigation system outlined by Munster et al. (2006). Each of the three irrigation plots has three 2750 gal (10.41 m3) water storage tanks connected in parallel.  These tanks were filled with filtered reverse osmosis (RO) water brought to the site with multiple tractor-trailer trucks. During irrigation events, water is pumped from the tanks through a series of hoses attached to 16 equally-spaced sprinklers within the plot. Each sprinkler is 6.1 m (20 ft) tall (2-3 m higher than mean tree height), and fitted with a sprinkler nozzle that creates an even circular distribution of water with a radius of 5 m on the ground.  The irrigation systems were tested in October 2007 (2 mm supplemental), and full applications (19 mm) were applied in 2008 on 24-June, 15-July, and 26-August. During subsequent years (2009-2012), a total of four to six irrigation events (19mm each) were applied (please contact Will Pockman and/or Robert Pangle for specific application dates and rates).   

Site Abiotic Monitoring

Site Abiotic Monitoring (please see Pangle et al. 2012 for more detailed methodology) We used Campbell Scientific dataloggers to continuously monitor and record abiotic conditions and physiological measurements across the site. All systems were connected to a solar-powered wireless network with NL100 relays (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT). Plots were instrumented with CR-1000, CR-7, and CR-10X dataloggers (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT). Each CR-1000 datalogger was accompanied by AM25T and AM 16/32 multiplexers to expand sensor measurement capacity (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT). Abiotic conditions were measured under each cover type (n=3-5 locations per cover type): under piñon, juniper, and intercanopy areas between trees. These measurements included; a) soil temperature (TS) at –5 cm depth and shielded air temperature (TA) at 10 cm (above soil surface), both measured with 24 gauge Type–T thermocouples (Omega, Stamford, CT), b) shallow soil volumetric water content (VWC) at –5 cm measured using EC-20 ECH2O probes (Decagon, Pullman, WA), and c) soil VWC at depth using EC-5 soil moisture probes (Decagon, Pullman, WA). Soil VWC profiles had sensors installed at –15 cm, –20 cm, and as deep as possible (down to –100 cm, depending on soil conditions).

Data sources: 

sev276_pjvwc5cm06_20150707.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm07_20150709.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm08_20150708.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm09_20150709.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm10_20150709.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm11_20150709.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm12_20150709.csv
sev276_pjvwc5cm13_20150709.csv

Quality Assurance: 

Data processing and QA-QC were performed using either Matlab (The Mathworks, Inc.) or Microsoft Office 2010 Excel (Microsoft Corporation) software.  All raw and/or processed data traces were visually plotted and inspected for noisy, erroneous, or out of range data points or sensors traces.  All removed data points had a “NaN” value assigned.   Despite this QA-QC review and data cleaning, all data sets should still be evaluated for outliers, etc., as standard outlier statistical tests were not performed.

Additional information: 

The VWC_5cm depth data-set contains 15 minute interval data from 2006 thru 2012.   Data Qa/Qc has been performed on these files.   PJ day refers to days since start of project (i.e., 1/1/2006).   PJ Timestamp denotes/records each 15 minute interval entry from 1/1/2006.


The treatment classes provided in the file are as follows; ambient control (1), drought (2), cover control (3), and irrigation (4).  The experiment used plot aspect as the blocking factor.   There are 3 different replicate blocks and block classifications designated in the files; flat aspect (1), north aspect (2), and south aspect (3).  This will be obvious when viewing the files.


Values are reported in decimal % (in other words, a 0.25 data entry = 25%).  There are three cover types within each plot; 1) VWC (5cm) data under Piñon canopy cover, 2) VWC (5cm) under juniper canopy cover, and 3) VWC (5cm) at inter-canopy locations (i.e., bare, no canopy cover).  The VWC (5cm) data was collected from probes installed/buried at 5cm soil depth.


Detailed information on VWC-5cm header columns for the Tree_Number, SensorID, Species, and Sensor_Location variables.  Tree_Number refers to the label given to each sensor probe (i.e., it is installed beneath a specific target tree or a bare inter-canopy location).  The SensorID is an identifier that provides both the Tree_Number information and the soil depth of the probe.  Species indicates the cover type where the measurement was made; PIED, JUMO, or bare ground/intercanopy (INCA).   And the Sensor_Location simply indicates the depth where the soil moisture (VWC) probe is installed.   


Tree numbers are always grouped by species as follows (regardless of plot); Trees 1-5 are original Pinus edulis, Trees 6-10 are original Juniper monosperma.  B1 through B5 always designate an inter-canopy (i.e., bare) location.  Note, for the VWC_5cm data – there are no or very few “replacement” trees.  All (or most all) VWC_5cm measurements were made original target trees, i,e., the sensor installation positions/locations remained in their original locations regardless of any later tree death or mortality.


Similar to the Sapflow-JS data, there may be differing tree labels (and sample sizes, i.e., n=3, n=4, or n=5) for each cover type in differing plots depending on; 1) the specific target trees under which measurements were made, and 2) the total number of target trees in a given plot under which soil moisture probes were installed (this varies from n=3 to n=5 per cover type for differing plots).    This will be obvious when you view the files for different plots.

Ecosystem-Scale Rainfall Manipulation in a Piñon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico: Water Potential Data (2006-2013)

Abstract: 

Climate models predict that water limited regions around the world will become drier and warmer in the near future, including southwestern North America. We developed a large-scale experimental system that allows testing of the ecosystem impacts of precipitation changes. Four treatments were applied to 1600 m2 plots (40 m × 40 m), each with three replicates in a piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and juniper (Juniper monosperma) ecosystem. These species have extensive root systems, requiring large-scale manipulation to effectively alter soil water availability.  Treatments consisted of: 1) irrigation plots that receive supplemental water additions, 2) drought plots that receive 55% of ambient rainfall, 3) cover-control plots that receive ambient precipitation, but allow determination of treatment infrastructure artifacts, and 4) ambient control plots. Our drought structures effectively reduced soil water potential and volumetric water content compared to the ambient, cover-control, and water addition plots. Drought and cover control plots experienced an average increase in maximum soil and air temperature at ground level of 1-4° C during the growing season compared to ambient plots, and concurrent short-term diurnal increases in maximum air temperature were also observed directly above and below plastic structures. Our drought and irrigation treatments significantly influenced tree predawn water potential, sap-flow, and net photosynthesis, with drought treatment trees exhibiting significant decreases in physiological function compared to ambient and irrigated trees.  Supplemental irrigation resulted in a significant increase in both plant water potential and xylem sap-flow compared to trees in the other treatments. This experimental design effectively allows manipulation of plant water stress at the ecosystem scale, permits a wide range of drought conditions, and provides prolonged drought conditions comparable to historical droughts in the past – drought events for which wide-spread mortality in both these species was observed. 

Water potential measurements were used to monitor the water stress of the two target species across the four treatment regimes.  Sampling for water potentials occurred twice daily.  One set of samples was collected hours before dawn and another set was collected at mid-day.  The predawn readings provided the “least-stressed” tree water content values as they were collected after the trees had returned to equilibrium over the evening and had yet to start transpiring.  The mid-day values, collected after tree-level respiration had been occurring for hours and when the daily temperatures were highest, represented the opposite “most-stressed” scenario. To gauge the effect of the irrigation treatment on the water content of the trees, we sampled water potentials just before and just after irrigation events.   

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

275

Additional Project roles: 

376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Site Description

In total, our study site consisted of 12 experimental plots located in three replicate blocks that varied in slope % and aspect. Slope varied from 0-2% in experimental plots situated in level portions of the site, with steeper grades ranging from 6-18% for plots established on hill-slopes. Soil depth across the site ranged from 20 to ≥ 100 cm, with shallower soil depths occurring on hill-slopes where depth to caliche and/or bed-rock was only 20-30 cm in some instances. 

The study utilized four different experimental treatments applied in three replicate blocks. The four experimental treatments included 1) un-manipulated, ambient control plots, 2) drought plots, 3) supplemental irrigation plots, and 4) cover-control plots that have a similar infrastructure to the drought plots, but remove no precipitation.  The three replicated blocks differed in their slope and aspect. One block of four plots was located on south facing slopes, one on north facing slopes, and one in a flat area of the landscape.  

Experimental Treatment Design 

To effectively reduce water availability to trees, we installed treatments of sufficient size to minimize tree water uptake from outside of the plot. Thus, we constructed three replicated drought structures that were 40 m × 40 m (1600 m2). We targeted a 50% reduction in ambient precipitation through water removal troughs that covered ~50% of the land surface area. Drought plot infrastructure was positioned to insure that targeted Piñon pine and juniper were centrally located within each drought plot to provide the maximum distance between tree stems and the nearest plot boundary.  Each drought and cover-control plot consists of 27 parallel troughs running across the 40 m plot. Each trough was constructed with overlapping 3ft ×10 ft (0.91 m × 3.05 m) pieces of thermoplastic polymer sheets (Makloron SL Polycarbonate Sheet, Sheffield Plastics Inc, Sheffield, MA) fixed with self-tapping metal screws to horizontal rails that are approximately waist height and are supported by vertical posts every 2.5-3.5 m. The plastic sheets were bent into a concave shape to collect and divert the precipitation off of the plot. The bending and spacing of the plastic resulted in 0.81 m (32 in) troughs separated by 0.56 m (22 in) walkways. 

Individual troughs often intersected the canopy of trees because of their height. The troughs were installed as close to the bole of the tree as possible without damaging branches in order to maximize the area covered by the plastic across the entire plot. An end-cap was attached to the downstream edge of the trough to prevent water from falling onto the base of the tree. The end-caps were 81 cm × 30 cm and made with the same plastic as the troughs. Each end-cap was fixed to the trough with a 75 cm piece of 20 gauge angle iron cut to match the curve of the bottom of the trough and held in place with self-tapping screws. The plastic junctures were then sealed with acrylic cement (Weld-On #3 epoxy, IPS Corp., Compton, CA). The middle of the end-cap was fitted with a 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC collar to allow water to flow through. A piece of 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC pipe or suction hose (used when the bole of a tree was directly below trough) was then attached to the downstream side of the end-cap, enabling water to flow into the trough on the other side of a tree. End-caps were also placed at the downhill end of the troughs on the edge of the plot and fitted with 90o fittings to divert water down into a 30 cm2 gutter (open on top) that ran perpendicular to the plot. Collected water was then channeled from the gutter into adjacent arroyos for drainage away from the study area. 

We built cover-control infrastructures to investigate the impact of the plastic drought structures independent of changes in precipitation. This was necessary because of the high radiation environment in central New Mexico, in which the clear plastic troughs can effectively act as a greenhouse structure. The cover-control treatment had the same dimensions as the drought plots with one key difference. The plastic was attached to the rails in a convex orientation so precipitation would fall on top of the plastic and then drain directly down onto the plot. The cover-control plots were designed to receive the same amount of precipitation as un-manipulated ambient plots, with the precipitation falling and draining into the walkways between the rows of troughs. Cover-control plots were constructed between June-21-07 and July-24-07; drought plots were constructed between August-09-07 and August-27-07.  The total plastic coverage in each plot is 45% ± 1% of the 1600 m2 plot area due to the variable terrain and canopy cover. A direct test of the amount of precipitation excluded via the plastic troughs was performed over a 2-week period during the summer monsoon season of 2008. Two rainfall collection gutters (7.6 cm width, 6.1 m length) were installed in a perpendicular arrangement across four plastic drought structures and four intervening open walkways. One gutter was located below the troughs (~0.6 m above ground), and the other was located just above (~1.35 m) and offset, to determine the interception of rainfall by the troughs. Rainfall totals collected via the perpendicular gutters were measured using Series 525 tipping bucket rain gauges (Texas Electronics, Dallas, TX). 

Our irrigation system consisted of above-canopy sprinkler nozzles configured to deliver supplemental rainstorm event(s) at a rate of 19 mm hr-1. Our irrigation system is a modified design of the above-canopy irrigation system outlined by Munster et al. (2006). Each of the three irrigation plots has three 2750 gal (10.41 m3) water storage tanks connected in parallel.  These tanks were filled with filtered reverse osmosis (RO) water brought to the site with multiple tractor-trailer trucks. During irrigation events, water is pumped from the tanks through a series of hoses that decrease from 7.62 cm (3 in) main lines out of the tank to 2.54 cm (1 in) hoses attached to 16 equally-spaced sprinklers within the plot. Each sprinkler is 6.1 m (20 ft) tall (2-3 m higher than mean tree height), and fitted with a sprinkler nozzle that creates an even circular distribution of water with a radius of 5 m on the ground. Due to the varying topography, sprinklers located downslope (if unregulated) would receive more pressure than those at the top of a hill and thus spray more water. To mitigate this problem, each sprinkler line was fitted with a pressure gauge and variable globe valve (inline water spigot with precise regulation) equidistant from the top of the sprinkler. Each sprinkler line was then set so that the pressure gauges were equal, thus ensuring equal distribution of water throughout the plot, regardless of elevational differences.  The irrigation systems were tested in October 2007 (2 mm supplemental), and full applications (19 mm) were applied in 2008 on 24-June, 15-July, and 26-August. During the 24-June event, we deployed six ~1 m2 circular trays across one of the irrigation plots to test the spatial variation of the wetting. Data from this test indicated that on average, collection trays received 19.5 (± 2.5) mm of water. 

Plant Physiological Response 

Multiple physiological characteristics of ten target trees (five piñon and five juniper) within each of the intensive measurement plots were continually monitored by automated sensors or periodic manual measurements. Predawn (PD) and mid-day (MD) plant water potentials were measured with multiple Scholander-type pressure chambers (PMS Instrument Co, Albany, OR) on all target trees. When possible, PD was measured both before and after supplemental irrigation events.  

Data sources: 

sev275_pjwaterpot_20160328.txt

Quality Assurance: 

Data processing and QA-QC were performed using either Matlab (The Mathworks, Inc.) or Microsoft Office 2010 Excel (Microsoft Corporation) software.  All raw and/or processed data traces were visually plotted and inspected for noisy, erroneous, or out of range data points or sensors traces.  All removed data points had a “NaN” value assigned.   Despite this QA-QC review and data cleaning, all data sets should still be evaluated for outliers, etc., as standard outlier statistical tests were not performed.

Additional information: 

Additional notes: The water potential data-set contains periodic tree level water potential data from 2006 thru 2012.  Measurements were made at either predawn or midday.  Data Qa/Qc has been performed on these files.   PJ day refers to days since start of project (i.e., 1/1/2006).
 
The treatment classes provided in the file are as follows; ambient (1), drought (2), cover-control (3), and irrigation (4).  The experiment used plot aspect as the blocking factor.   There are 3 different replicate blocks and block classifications designated in the files; flat aspect (1), north aspect (2), and south aspect (3).  This will be obvious when viewing the files.

Tree numbers are always grouped by species as follows (regardless of plot); Trees 1-5 are original Pinus edulis, Trees 6-10 are original Juniper monosperma.   When one of these original trees died, an additional tree in the plot was added to retain an adequate sample size over time (i.e., multiple years+).   These additional trees are grouped as follows; Trees 11-15 are “replacement” Pinus edulis, Trees 16-20 are “replacement” Juniper monosperma.  “Replacement” is used here in a more restricted sense, as these additional trees have their separate and unique tree designation number.

So, in differing plots you will have differing numbers of trees depending on; 1) the number of trees for which data was collected, and 2) how many additional “replacement trees” had to be designated due to mortality (or partial mortality) of original trees.  Many plots have n=10 trees, based on the original T1-T5 & T6-10 designation, as these particular plots did not experience mortality.   However, a plot like P10 has a total of n=16 trees.  In P10, the original T1-5 & T6-T10 trees are listed, a replacement Pinon (T11) is listed, and five additional/replacement junipers (T16-T20).   In some cases you will see data present at the same time for both original and replacement junipers (plots 6 & 10).  This is fine, as juniper experiences a slow/partial canopy dieback, so we monitored the original and replacement trees at the same time in these two plots.  Finally, we only provide data on trees for which data was collected (so for example, in some instances you may only have n=4 cols of data for a particular species in a particular plot).  

Ecosystem-Scale Rainfall Manipulation in a Piñon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico: Soil Temperature Data (2006-2013)

Abstract: 

Climate models predict that water limited regions around the world will become drier and warmer in the near future, including southwestern North America. We developed a large-scale experimental system that allows testing of the ecosystem impacts of precipitation changes. Four treatments were applied to 1600 m2 plots (40 m × 40 m), each with three replicates in a piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and juniper (Juniper monosperma) ecosystem. These species have extensive root systems, requiring large-scale manipulation to effectively alter soil water availability.  Treatments consisted of: 1) irrigation plots that receive supplemental water additions, 2) drought plots that receive 55% of ambient rainfall, 3) cover-control plots that receive ambient precipitation, but allow determination of treatment infrastructure artifacts, and 4) ambient control plots. Our drought structures effectively reduced soil water potential and volumetric water content compared to the ambient, cover-control, and water addition plots. Drought and cover control plots experienced an average increase in maximum soil and air temperature at ground level of 1-4° C during the growing season compared to ambient plots, and concurrent short-term diurnal increases in maximum air temperature were also observed directly above and below plastic structures. Our drought and irrigation treatments significantly influenced tree predawn water potential, sap-flow, and net photosynthesis, with drought treatment trees exhibiting significant decreases in physiological function compared to ambient and irrigated trees. Supplemental irrigation resulted in a significant increase in both plant water potential and xylem sap-flow compared to trees in the other treatments. This experimental design effectively allows manipulation of plant water stress at the ecosystem scale, permits a wide range of drought conditions, and provides prolonged drought conditions comparable to historical droughts in the past – drought events for which wide-spread mortality in both these species was observed. 

Soil temperature impacts both the abiotic and biotic processes at our site. The rate of evaporation, soil water content, VPD, and many other environmental factors are directly or indirectly affected by the temperature of the system. By monitoring the soil temperature at our site, we were able to determine its influence on the target trees and their associated physiological functions. Differences in soil temperature between plots can be impacted by the drought and cover-control structures used in our rainfall-manipulation treatments. Therefore, measuring soil temperatures in all three cover types and all four treatment regimes also allowed us to tease-out the temperature differences that were an artifact of the treatment structures as opposed to the actual treatments. 

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

274

Additional Project roles: 

248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Site Description

In total, our study site consisted of 12 experimental plots located in three replicate blocks that varied in slope % and aspect. Slope varied from 0-2% in experimental plots situated in level portions of the site, with steeper grades ranging from 6-18% for plots established on hill-slopes. Soil depth across the site ranged from 20 to ≥ 100 cm, with shallower soil depths occurring on hill-slopes where depth to caliche and/or bed-rock was only 20-30 cm in some instances. 

The study utilized four different experimental treatments applied in three replicate blocks. The four experimental treatments included 1) un-manipulated, ambient control plots, 2) drought plots, 3) supplemental irrigation plots, and 4) cover-control plots that have a similar infrastructure to the drought plots, but remove no precipitation.  The three replicated blocks differed in their slope and aspect. One block of four plots was located on south facing slopes, one on north facing slopes, and one in a flat area of the landscape.  

Experimental Treatment Design 

To effectively reduce water availability to trees, we installed treatments of sufficient size to minimize tree water uptake from outside of the plot. Thus, we constructed three replicated drought structures that were 40 m × 40 m (1600 m2). We targeted a 50% reduction in ambient precipitation through water removal troughs that covered ~50% of the land surface area. Drought plot infrastructure was positioned to insure that targeted Piñon pine and juniper were centrally located within each drought plot to provide the maximum distance between tree stems and the nearest plot boundary.  Each drought and cover-control plot consists of 27 parallel troughs running across the 40 m plot. Each trough was constructed with overlapping 3ft ×10 ft (0.91 m × 3.05 m) pieces of thermoplastic polymer sheets (Makloron SL Polycarbonate Sheet, Sheffield Plastics Inc, Sheffield, MA) fixed with self-tapping metal screws to horizontal rails that are approximately waist height and are supported by vertical posts every 2.5-3.5 m. The plastic sheets were bent into a concave shape to collect and divert the precipitation off of the plot. The bending and spacing of the plastic resulted in 0.81 m (32 in) troughs separated by 0.56 m (22 in) walkways. 

Individual troughs often intersected the canopy of trees because of their height. The troughs were installed as close to the bole of the tree as possible without damaging branches in order to maximize the area covered by the plastic across the entire plot. An end-cap was attached to the downstream edge of the trough to prevent water from falling onto the base of the tree. The end-caps were 81 cm × 30 cm and made with the same plastic as the troughs. Each end-cap was fixed to the trough with a 75 cm piece of 20 gauge angle iron cut to match the curve of the bottom of the trough and held in place with self-tapping screws. The plastic junctures were then sealed with acrylic cement (Weld-On #3 epoxy, IPS Corp., Compton, CA). The middle of the end-cap was fitted with a 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC collar to allow water to flow through. A piece of 3 in (7.62 cm) PVC pipe or suction hose (used when the bole of a tree was directly below trough) was then attached to the downstream side of the end-cap, enabling water to flow into the trough on the other side of a tree. End-caps were also placed at the downhill end of the troughs on the edge of the plot and fitted with 90o fittings to divert water down into a 30 cm2 gutter (open on top) that ran perpendicular to the plot. Collected water was then channeled from the gutter into adjacent arroyos for drainage away from the study area. 

We built cover-control infrastructures to investigate the impact of the plastic drought structures independent of changes in precipitation. This was necessary because of the high radiation environment in central New Mexico, in which the clear plastic troughs can effectively act as a greenhouse structure. The cover-control treatment had the same dimensions as the drought plots with one key difference. The plastic was attached to the rails in a convex orientation so precipitation would fall on top of the plastic and then drain directly down onto the plot. The cover-control plots were designed to receive the same amount of precipitation as un-manipulated ambient plots, with the precipitation falling and draining into the walkways between the rows of troughs. Cover-control plots were constructed between June-21-07 and July-24-07; drought plots were constructed between August-09-07 and August-27-07.  The total plastic coverage in each plot is 45% ± 1% of the 1600 m2 plot area due to the variable terrain and canopy cover. A direct test of the amount of precipitation excluded via the plastic troughs was performed over a 2-week period during the summer monsoon season of 2008. Two rainfall collection gutters (7.6 cm width, 6.1 m length) were installed in a perpendicular arrangement across four plastic drought structures and four intervening open walkways. One gutter was located below the troughs (~0.6 m above ground), and the other was located just above (~1.35 m) and offset, to determine the interception of rainfall by the troughs. Rainfall totals collected via the perpendicular gutters were measured using Series 525 tipping bucket rain gauges (Texas Electronics, Dallas, TX). 

Our irrigation system consisted of above-canopy sprinkler nozzles configured to deliver supplemental rainstorm event(s) at a rate of 19 mm hr-1. Our irrigation system is a modified design of the above-canopy irrigation system outlined by Munster et al. (2006). Each of the three irrigation plots has three 2750 gal (10.41 m3) water storage tanks connected in parallel.  These tanks were filled with filtered reverse osmosis (RO) water brought to the site with multiple tractor-trailer trucks. During irrigation events, water is pumped from the tanks through a series of hoses that decrease from 7.62 cm (3 in) main lines out of the tank to 2.54 cm (1 in) hoses attached to 16 equally-spaced sprinklers within the plot. Each sprinkler is 6.1 m (20 ft) tall (2-3 m higher than mean tree height), and fitted with a sprinkler nozzle that creates an even circular distribution of water with a radius of 5 m on the ground. Due to the varying topography, sprinklers located downslope (if unregulated) would receive more pressure than those at the top of a hill and thus spray more water. To mitigate this problem, each sprinkler line was fitted with a pressure gauge and variable globe valve (inline water spigot with precise regulation) equidistant from the top of the sprinkler. Each sprinkler line was then set so that the pressure gauges were equal, thus ensuring equal distribution of water throughout the plot, regardless of elevational differences.  The irrigation systems were tested in October 2007 (2 mm supplemental), and full applications (19 mm) were applied in 2008 on 24-June, 15-July, and 26-August. During the 24-June event, we deployed six ~1 m2 circular trays across one of the irrigation plots to test the spatial variation of the wetting. Data from this test indicated that on average, collection trays received 19.5 (± 2.5) mm of water.  During subsequent years (2009-2012), a total of four to six irrigation events (19mm each) were applied (please contact Will Pockman and/or Robert Pangle for specific application dates and rates).

Site Abiotic Monitoring

We utilized Campbell Scientific dataloggers to continuously monitor and record abiotic conditions and physiological measurements across the site.  All systems were connected to a solar-powered wireless network with NL100 relays (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT).  Plots were instrumented with CR-1000, CR-7, and CR-10X dataloggers (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT).  Each CR-1000 datalogger was accompanied by AM25T and AM 16/32 multiplexers to expand sensor measurement capacity (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT). Abiotic conditions were measured under each cover type (n=3-5 locations per cover type): under piñon, juniper, and intercanopy areas between trees.  These measurements included; a) soil temperature (TS) at –5 cm depth and shielded air temperature (TA) at 10 cm (above soil surface), both measured with 24 gauge Type–T thermocouples (Omega, Stamford, CT), b) shallow soil volumetric water content (VWC) at –5 cm measured using EC-20 ECH2O probes (Decagon, Pullman, WA), and c) soil VWC at depth using EC-5 soil moisture probes (Decagon, Pullman, WA).  Soil VWC profiles had sensors installed at –15 cm, –20 cm, and as deep as possible (down to –100 cm, depending on soil conditions).

Data sources: 

sev274_pjsoiltemp06_20140122.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp07_20140124.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp08_20140124.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp09_20140127.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp10_20140127.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp11_20140127.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp12_20150702.txt
sev274_pjsoiltemp13_20150702.txt

Quality Assurance: 

Data processing and QA-QC were performed using either Matlab (The Mathworks, Inc.) or Microsoft Office 2010 Excel (Microsoft Corporation) software.  All raw and/or processed data traces were visually plotted and inspected for noisy, erroneous, or out of range data points or sensors traces.  All removed data points had a “NaN” value assigned.   Despite this QA-QC review and data cleaning, all data sets should still be evaluated for outliers, etc., as standard outlier statistical tests were not performed.

Additional information: 

The Plot Temperature data-set contains 15 minute interval data from 2006 thru 2012.   Data Qa/Qc has been performed on these files.   PJ day refers to days since start of project (i.e., 1/1/2006).   PJ Timestamp denotes/records each 15 minute interval entry from 1/1/2006.

The treatment classes provided in the file are as follows; ambient control (1), drought (2), cover control (3), and irrigation (4).  The experiment used plot aspect as the blocking factor.   There are 3 different replicate blocks and block classifications designated in the files; flat aspect (1), north aspect (2), and south aspect (3).  This will be obvious when viewing the files.

Detailed information on header columns for the SensorID, Tree_Name, Species, and Sensor_Location variables.   SensorID refers to the label given to each thermocouple probe (it is installed beneath a target tree or a bare inter-canopy location).   The tree name is an identifier that provides both the SensorID information and the location of probe as either a soil temperature or air temperature measurement.  Species indicates the cover type where the measurement was made; PIED, JUMO, or bare ground/intercanopy (INCA).   And the Sensor_Location simply indicates weather the reported value is a soil or air temperature value (in Celsius degrees).  

Tree numbers are always grouped by species as follows (regardless of plot); Trees 1-5 are original Pinus edulis, Trees 6-10 are original Juniper monosperma.  B1 through B5 always designate an inter-canopy (i.e., bare) location.  Note, For the Tsoil and Tair data – there are no “replacement” trees.  All temperature measurements were made original target trees, i,e., the temperature probe installation positions/locations remained in their original locations regardless of any later tree death or mortality.

Similar to the Sapflow-JS data, there may be differing tree labels (and sample sizes, i.e., n=3, n=4, or n=5) for each cover type in differing plots depending on; 1) the specific target trees under which measurements were made, and 2) the total number of target trees in a given plot under which thermocouples were installed (this varies from n=3 to n=5 per cover type for differing plots).    This will be obvious when you view the files for different plots.

Ecosystem-Scale Rainfall Manipulation in a Piñon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico: Meteorological Data (2006-2013)

Abstract: 

Climate models predict that water limited regions around the world will become drier and warmer in the near future, including southwestern North America. We developed a large-scale experimental system that allows testing of the ecosystem impacts of precipitation changes. Four treatments were applied to 1600 m2 plots (40 m × 40 m), each with three replicates in a piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and juniper (Juniper monosperma) ecosystem. These species have extensive root systems, requiring large-scale manipulation to effectively alter soil water availability.  Treatments consisted of: 1) irrigation plots that receive supplemental water additions, 2) drought plots that receive 55% of ambient rainfall, 3) cover-control plots that receive ambient precipitation, but allow determination of treatment infrastructure artifacts, and 4) ambient control plots. Our drought structures effectively reduced soil water potential and volumetric water content compared to the ambient, cover-control, and water addition plots. Drought and cover control plots experienced an average increase in maximum soil and air temperature at ground level of 1-4° C during the growing season compared to ambient plots, and concurrent short-term diurnal increases in maximum air temperature were also observed directly above and below plastic structures. Our drought and irrigation treatments significantly influenced tree predawn water potential, sap-flow, and net photosynthesis, with drought treatment trees exhibiting significant decreases in physiological function compared to ambient and irrigated trees. Supplemental irrigation resulted in a significant increase in both plant water potential and xylem sap-flow compared to trees in the other treatments. This experimental design effectively allows manipulation of plant water stress at the ecosystem scale, permits a wide range of drought conditions, and provides prolonged drought conditions comparable to historical droughts in the past – drought events for which wide-spread mortality in both these species was observed.

A micrometeorological station was used to document the climatic conditions at the study site.  Monitoring the ambient environment in this way allowed us to more easily determine which tree growth responses were driven by changes in the native climate as opposed to those resulting from the rainfall manipulation treatments.  Environmental factors such as temperature, relative humidity, and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) have a huge impact on the physiological processes that are being explored in this project.  The data collected by the station created a local climatic record which was needed to provide the context in which the treatment effects can be examined and sensor readings can be interpreted.

Data set ID: 

273

Additional Project roles: 

367

Core Areas: 

Keywords: 

Methods: 

A CR-10X datalogger was used to record data from a micrometeorological tower centrally located in an open intercanopy area of the study site. This tower recorded precipitation with a Series 525 rain gauge (Texas Electronics, Dallas, TX), net radiation with a Kipp and Zonen NK-LITE net radiometer (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT), photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) with a LI-190SA sensor (Li-Cor, Lincoln, NE), windspeed and direction monitored with a 05103-L R.M. Young wind monitor (Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT), and air temperature and RH% with a Vaisala HMP45C sensor. During winter months the rain gauge was fitted with a snow adaptor to thaw snow and record the total amount in mm rain. All met-station measurements were made at a height of 1-3 m above ground depending on the sensor array in question. 

Data sources: 

sev273_pjmet_20130508.csv

Comparative Hydraulic Performance of Piñon and Juniper in a Rainfall Manipulation Experiment at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico

Abstract: 

From 2000-2003, extreme drought  across the Southwestern US resulted in widespread tree mortality: piñon pine (Pinus edulis) experienced up to 95% mortality while juniper (Juniperus monosperma) mortality was 25% or less at surveyed sites.  Field data have shown repeatedly that piñon typically exhibits isohydric regulation of leaf water potential, maintaining relatively constant leaf water potentials even as soil water potentials fluctuate, while juniper is anisohydric, allowing leaf water potential to decline during drought.  The goal of this study was to elucidate functional consequences of these two contrasting hydraulic strategies.  The study was conducted in the context of a rainfall manipulation experiment in piñon-juniper woodland at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge and LTER in central New Mexico, USA, sampling trees in irrigation (~150% ambient rainfall), drought (50% ambient), cover control (ambient rainfall with similar drought infrastructure) and ambient control plots.  To quantify tissue and shoot level hydraulic performances we measured sapwood area-specific (KS, kg•m-1•s-1•MPa-1) and leaf area-specific (KL, g•m-1•s-1•MPa-1) hydraulic conductivity in similar sized distal branches, and we calculated AS:AL (sapwood area to leaf area ratio) to compare shoot level allocation.

Samples collected at predawn and midday both exhibited significant trends between species and across treatments.  Between species, juniper possessed significantly higher KS compared to piñon in all plots except irrigation, and higher KL than piñon in all plots.  Across treatments, irrigated juniper exhibited higher KS and KL relative to ambient and droughted plants, while irrigated piñon exhibited higher KS relative to ambient, drought and cover control plants, and irrigated and ambient piñon had higher KL than droughted and cover control plants.  Junipers did not modify AS:AL across treatments, while irrigated piñon had significantly lower AS:AL compared to all other plots.  Thus, under current climatic conditions in the Sevilleta, piñon and juniper achieve similar shoot hydraulic performances, but through different strategies: juniper maximizes xylem conductivity, while piñon maximizes xylem supply to leaves.  If climate change in the Southwest results in increased aridity, piñon could be vulnerable to extirpation from its current distribution in lower elevation PJ woodlands, as juniper demonstrates superior hydraulic capability at both the tissue and shoot level under drought conditions.

 

Core Areas: 

Data set ID: 

255

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Shoot ΨW

One shoot from each target tree was harvested between 0430-0545h and between 1200-1400h, to get predawn and midday water potential (referred to hereafter as ΨPD and ΨMD, respectively). Samples were placed in plastic bags containing a small segment of moist paper towel to prevent further dessication, which were placed in coolers out of direct sunlight in the interim time between collection and processing (between 15-60 minutes). Water potential (ΨW) [u1]was measured using a pressure chamber (PMS, Corvallis, OR).

Stem Hydraulics

After ΨW was measured, shoots were placed in humid plastic bags and allowed to equilibrate for 24 hours in a refrigerator.  Shoots were then trimmed underwater to remove peripheral embolized tissue and inserted into a steady state flow meter to measure hydraulic conductivity, Kh, kg•m-1•s-1•MPa-1 (see Hudson et al. 2010 for a full explanation of method).  In brief, the steady state flowmeter operates on the Ohm’s Law analogy of hydraulic transport (Tyree 1997), and solves for Kh by knowing the pressure gradient and the flow rate of sap surrogate (20 mM KCl, Zwieniecki et al. 2001) through the flowmeter, and measuring the pressure drop across the sample stem segment.  Hydraulic conductivity was calculated as flow through the sample segment divided by the pressure gradient across the sample segment. Sapwood cross-sections and distal leaf areas were measured for each sample to normalize Kh at tissue level (KS, sapwood area specific hydraulic conductivity, kg•m-1•s-1•MPa-1) and shoot level (KL, leaf area specific hydraulic conductivity, g•m-1•s-1•MPa-1). AS:AL was calculated for each species by dividing each sample’s sapwood area by distal leaf area.


Instrumentation: 

Instrument Name: Pressure Chamber    

Manufacturer: PMS Instrument Company    

Model Number: 1505D    


Instrument Name:  Gage model pressure transducer (0-15 psig range)    

Manufacturer:  Omega Engineering, INC.

Model number: PX26-015GV

Contributions of Soil Communities to Ecosystem Respiration and Greenhouse Gas Emmisions in a Piñon-Juniper Woodland at the Sevilleta National Widlife Refuge, New Mexico (2011)

Abstract: 

Global climate change processes, especially prolonged droughts and increasingly high temperatures, are significantly affecting numerous arid ecosystems across the state of New Mexico.  One of the more adversely affected ecosystems in New Mexico is piñon-juniper woodland (PJ), which includes areas near Mountainair, New Mexico, USA.  Because changes in ambient temperature and decreases in water availability show pervasive effects on the above-ground status of existing PJ woodlands in New Mexico, it seems likely that the effects of changes in these two master variables will manifest themselves within soil processes such as soil organic matter (SOM) decomposition rates and soil respiration rates, as well as nutrient cycling rates and availabilities to both plants and soil microbial communities. 

We conducted analyses of soil physicochemical properties and soil fungal biomass via soil ergosterol content, as well as evaluating the activity rates of multiple hydrolytic exoenzymes, which are indicative of fungal activity in soils.  Samples were collected from multiple tree-to-tree competition gradients that were identified in May/June of 2011.  These gradients were established based on the type of mycorrhizal fungus types expected to occupy the soil community established beneath the canopy of a focal tree, with there being two focal trees in each gradient.  Gradients were established between two live piñon trees (Pinus edulis), two juniper trees (Juniperus monosperma), a live piñon and live juniper, and a dead piñon and live juniper.  We only sampled from under live trees at the control site.

In order to obtain these samples, we collected soil samples from two different sites in a PJ woodland located within the boundaries of the Deer Canyon ranch. Changes in soil conditions were captured by sampling from the two sites at multiple times throughout the summer of 2011.  We collected samples from Dr. Marcy Litvak’s girdled PJ woodland eddy-flux tower site in June, July, August and finally in late September.  We also collected samples from Dr. Litvak’s control PJ woodland tower site in June and September of 2011.  Significant differences in the activity rates of the hydrolytic exoenzymes alanine aminopeptidase, alkaline phosphatase, β-d-glucosidase, and β-N-acetyl glucosaminidase were observed within soils collected at multiple times from June through September when comparing the observed rates of activities under the trees in the live piñon to live piñon gradients vs. the juniper to juniper gradients.  These differences were observed in samples from multiple dates at the girdled site without there being significant differences in soil fungal biomass across seasons or study sites.  Continued work with the established sites on a year-to-year basis could provide an insight into how the fungal communities within New Mexican PJ woodlands will respond to future changes in soil conditions as global climate change processes advance in New Mexico.

Data set ID: 

250

Core Areas: 

Additional Project roles: 

266
267

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Experimental design: Randomized complete block design was established at 2 different study sites, girdled piñon-juniper (PJ) woodland and non-girdled (control) PJ woodland.  In late May, 2011, we set-up each study site to contain six complete blocks (plots), each with multiple tree-to-tree gradients.  At the girdled PJ site, each plot included five different tree-to-tree gradients: Live pine to live pine, live pine to dead pine, live pine to live juniper, dead pine to live juniper, and live juniper to live juniper.  At the control PJ site we also established 6 blocks (plots); however, at this site there were only three gradients: Live pine to live juniper, dead pine to live juniper, and live juniper to live juniper.

Setting up plots:  Plots and gradients were established by marking sampling locations with orange flagging tape and pin-flags by Daniel Warnock and Kimberly Elsenbroek on May 19 and 23, 2011. 

Sample collection, allocation and storage: Soil samples were collected monthly from the girdled PJ woodland to establish two pre-monsoonal (dry) season time points, with samples collected on June 6, 2011 and June 15, 2011 considered as being from single time point.  Soil samples collected on July 20, 2011 represented our second dry season time point.  Soil samples for our two post-monsoon moisture time points were collected on August 15, 2011 and September 28, 2011.  As with the girdled site, soils sample from the control PJ woodland site  were collected both before and after the onset of the monsoon season.  However, unlike the girdled PJ woodland site, we only have one pre-monsoon time point June 29, 2011 and one post monsoon time point, September 15, 2011. 

All soil samples were collected by combining three 0-10cm sub-samples into the same zipper-locking plastic storage bag.  Samples were collected from three different locations within each tree-to tree gradient.  Two of the three samples were collected from locations within 30cm of the trunk of each of the two focal trees within a gradient.  The other sample for each gradient was collected from a point at the center of a zone formed by the edges of the canopies from the two competing focal trees.  All samples were then transported to the lab for refrigeration.  

Within 24-72 hours of sample collection, 5mL sub-samples were taken from each bulked soil sample and placed into individual Corning 15mL screw-cap centrifuge tubes.  Each tube was then filled to the 10mL mark with an 0.8% KOH in Methanol solution.  These tubes were placed in the fridge for storage until analyzed for ergosterol content. After preparation of the samples for ergosterol analyses, 1g samples were placed into 125mL round Nalgene bottles for analyses of fungal exoenzyme actitity (EEA) rates from each sample.  All enzyme activity assays were performed within 1 to 5 days after collection. Further, for all but the final post-monsoonal time points, assays were performed within 2 to 3 days of sample collection. 

After all of the fresh, refrigerated samples were alloquated for ergosterol and EEA analyses we placed the remaining quantities of soil for each sample into labeled paper bags for air-drying on a lab bench.  After 1-2 weeks, 30g of each sample was placed into a labeled plastic bag for shipping to Ithaca, New York, USA for analyses of soil-physicochemical properties.  While taking the 30g sub-samples, a separate 5g sub-sample from the air-dried sample was placed into a labeled, no. 1 coin-envelope for storage until analysis of soil hyphal abundance.   After all sub-sampling was completed any remaining soil was kept in its sample bag and stored in the lab.

Hydrolytic exoenzyme activity (EEA) assays: All hydrolytic EEA assays were performed as follows: Each 125mL sample bottle was partially filled with 50mM sodium bicarbonate buffer solution and homogenized using a Kinematica Polytron CH 6010 (Lucerne, Switzerland).  Upon homogenization, sample bottles were filled to 125mL with buffer solution.  Sample bottles were then set aside until placement in black, 96-well, micro-plates.  At the time of placement, each sample suspension was poured into a glass crystalizing dish where it was stirred at high speed into the appropriate columns within each micro-plate.  These columns included a quench control (200 uL sample suspension + 50uL MUB or methylcoumrin substrate control), a sample control (200uL sample suspension + 50uL 50mM bicarbonate buffer) and an assay column (200uL suspension + 50ul 200mM substrate).  Samples were pipetted into four sets of plates with each set analyzing the activity rates of a single hydrolytic enzyme.  These enzymes included alanine amino peptidase, alkaline phosphatase, β-d-glucosidase, and N-acetyl-β-d-glucosiminidase.  Further, all three samples from a single gradient within a single plot were added to the same plate (e.g., all samples from the live-pine-to-live-pine gradient from plot one were pipetted into a single plate for analyzing the activity of the enzyme alkaline-phospotase.

Ultimately our plate layout was completed as follows usingt two other columns for substrate controls:  In column one, we added 200uL buffer and 50uL of a substrate standard, which accounts for the fluorescence emitted by either the MUB, or the methylcoumarin group that is a component of the substrate solution added to the assay wells.  In column six of each plate was a substrate control, which is a solution of 200uL buffer and 50uL of one the four different substrates used in our hydrolytic EEA assays.   Columns 3-5 were our quench controls, which accounts for the quantity of fluorescence emitted by the MUB or methylcoumarin molecule absorbed by the particles in the soil suspension itself.  Columns 7-9 were the sample controls and  account for the amount of fluorescence emitted by the soil suspension + buffer solution added to each well.  Finally, columns 10-12 were our assay wells.  From these wells we could determine enzyme activity by measuring the fluorescence emitted by the MUB or methylcoumarin molecules cleaved off of the substrates initially added to each well.  The substrates included in these assays included: 7-amino-4-methylcoumarin (Sigma-Aldrich), 4-MUB-phosphate (Sigma-Aldrich), 4-MUB-β-d-glucoside (Sigma-Aldrich), and 4-MUB-N-acetyl-β-d-glucosiminide (Sigma-Aldrich). 

Because the intrinsic EEA rates varied across our targeted exoenzymes, assay plates were scanned for flourscence in sets of two.  Alanine aminopeptidase plates and alkaline phosphatase plates were scanned twice, first at 30-40 minutes after substrate addion and again at 50-80 minutes after substrate addition.  β-d-glucosidase, and N-acetyl-β-d-glucosiminidase plates were all scanned at 3-4 hours after substrate addition.  The timing of the second enzyme activity time point depended on expected soil moisture conditions.  Here, the post monsoon soils were allowed to incubate for a total of 5-6 hours prior to the second scan and the pre-monsoon plates were incubated for a total of 7-9 hours. 

Fungal biomass measurements: Fungal biomass was quantified by measuring the concentration of ergosterol in a sub-sample taken from each soil sample collected from June to September.   Within 24-72 hours of sample collection, 5mL sub-samples were taken from each bulked soil sample and placed into individual Corning 15mL screw-cap centrifuge tubes.  Each tube was filled to the 10mL mark with an 0.8% KOH in methanol solution.  Tubes were refrigerated for storage until analyzed for fungal biomass by measuring the ergosterol content within each sample.  Ergosterol concentration for each sample was determined using HPLC with 100% methanol as the solvent at a flow rate of 1.5mL/ minute and a c-18 column.  Ergosterol was quantified by measuring the peak height that passed through a detector set to measure absorbance at 282nm, at 3.7min after the sample was injected into the column.  The height of each peak was then converted into μg ergosterol/g soil and finally converted to mg fungal biomass/ g soil by applying a conversion factor.  

 

Instrumentation: 

I

* Instrument Name: Polytron

* Manufacturer: Kinematica

* Model Number: CH 6010

* Instrument Name: GeoXT  

* Manufacturer: Trimble

* Model Number: GeoExplorer 3000 series

* Instrument Name: fmax         

* Manufacturer: Molecular devices

* Model Number: type 374


* Instrument Name: versamax tunable micro-plate reader

* Manufacturer: molecular devices

* Model Number: ?


* Instrument Name: SSI 222D isocratic HPLC pump          

* Manufacturer: SSI  

* Model Number: 222D


* Instrument Name: Thermo Seperation Products AS 1000 autosampler     

* Manufacturer: Thermo Seperation Products           

* Model Number: AS 1000


* Instrument Name: Acutect 500 UV/Vis Wavelength detector      

* Manufacturer: Acutect        

* Model Number: 500


* Instrument Name: HP 3396 series iii integrator                              

* Manufacturer: Hewlitt Packard

* Model Number:  3396

Additional information: 

Girdled and control PJ woodland: 34.36N, 106.27W.

Girdled PJ woodland sampled: 6/June/2011, 15/June/2011, 20/July/2011, 15/Aug/2011, 28/Sept/2011.

Control PJ woodland sampled: 29/June/2011, 15/Sept/2011.

Piñon Pine (Pinus edulis) Responses of Annual Growth to Water Availability in a Pinyon-Juniper Forest at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico

Abstract: 

Increased incidence of large-scale forest die-off attributed to drought has been observed globally over the past decade, raising concern about the future stability of forests as carbon sinks.  To understand the mechanistic basis of semi-arid woodland responses to drought, we measured annual increment growth from branches of Pinus edulis in a rainfall manipulation experiment at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge and LTER site in central New Mexico, USA. We collected 4 branches from each of five trees growing in drought, irrigation, cover control, and ambient control plots at a site in the Los Pinos Mountains.  We measured annual branch elongation, stem diameter, sapwood area, and leaf area.  We compared these structural data to fluctuations in annual precipitation across treatments to understand how such variation in available water influence branch growth.  Rainfall manipulation produced clear differences among treatment groups, with drought trees exhibiting shorter stem lengths, decreased stem and sapwood diameters, and decreased leaf area production than control treatments.  Irrigated trees displayed increased stem length, stem diameter, sapwood diameter, and leaf area production relative to ambient controls.  The net effect of these responses is a likely shift in the allometric relationships, such as hydroactive xylem and absorbing root area.

Additional Project roles: 

18
19
20

Data set ID: 

248

Core Areas: 

Keywords: 

Methods: 

Branch sampling, four small branches were removed from each of five target trees per plot according to aspect (North, South, East, West). 

Experimental design:  Single block from complete block design.

Plots:  Four plots of varying treatments (Irrigation, Drought, Cover control, Ambient control) were used from preexisting study, each 40m X 40m.

Sampling:  Samples taken according to aspect (North, South, East, West) on all pinon target trees within one replicate block.

Measurements:  Stem length, two perpendicular midpoint diameter, and two perpendicular sapwood diameters were taken for each growth increment for each sample using digital callipers. Needles from each age cohort were scanned and leaf area was estimated using ImageJ software.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - trees