HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Reynolds, B. Articles by Neal, C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Reynolds, B. Articles by Neal, C. Agricola Articles by Reynolds, B. Articles by Neal, C.

Trough Versus Funnel Collectors for Measuring Throughfall Volumes

Inst. of Terrestrial Ecology, Bangor Res. Unit, UCNW, Deiniol Road, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, UK;

C. Neal

Inst. of Hydrology, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, Oxon, OX9 6BB, UK.

^* Corresponding author.

ABSTRACT

Throughfall was collected, at fortnightly intervals, for 1 yr beneath mature stands of Sitka spruce [Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.] and Japanese larch [Larix kaempferi (Lamb.) Carr.] using arrays of troughs and funnels. There was no statistically significant difference between the annual total amounts of throughfall collected by the troughs and the funnels. Analysis of the fortnightly data revealed a small bias toward a lower catch by the troughs, although for any given fortnight, quite large differences might occur. Discussion of the results in relation to a recent paper by Kostelnik et al. concludes that there is insufficient evidence on which to reject funnels in favor of troughs for throughfall studies.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. F. Levia Jr. and E. E. Frost Variability of throughfall volume and solute inputs in wooded ecosystems Progress in Physical Geography, October 1, 2006; 30(5): 605 - 632. [Abstract] [PDF]