an analysis of snowpack losses due to ...sublimation of intercepted and sub‐canopy snow using eddy...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO SUBLIMATION AT HUBBARD BROOK EXPERIMENTAL FOREST
Joseph P. Molloy
Center for the Environment, Plymouth State University
![Page 2: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline • Introduction • Previous studies • Research Question • Methods • Results
• Sublimation losses 2007-2012 • Seasonal and Daily Variability • Sensitivity Analysis • Sublimation losses 1986-2011
• Discussion • Conclusions • Outreach
![Page 3: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
This phenomena is understudied in the northeast.
http://www.sciencecases.org/weather_forecasting/weather_forecasting_notes.asp
![Page 4: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Bailey et al. 2003 P = Q +ET
Where P= Precipitation = 1,326 mm year-1
Q= Runoff = 833 mm year -1
ET= Evapotranspiration = 493 mm year -1
http://www.geotimes.org/aug03/feature_hubbard.html
![Page 5: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Pugh, Evan, and Eric Small. 2012. “The Impact of Pine Beetle Infestation on Snow Accumulation and Melt in the Headwaters of the Colorado River.” Ecohydrology 5 (4) (July): 467–477.
![Page 6: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
http://sercblog.si.edu/?p=378
![Page 7: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What causes Snow Water Equivalent (SWE) losses due to sublimation? • Sublimation was driven by an imbalance between
saturation vapor pressure in the immediate vicinity of an ice surface (Neumann et al. 2009)
• Sublimation has a significant effect on the water balance in an alpine area where wind induced transport is frequent and efficient (Strasser et al. 2007)
• Sublimation most correlated with wind speed and specific humidity (Hood et al. 1999)
![Page 8: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Wind Induced Transport • In Germany: 70% of annual snowfall was sublimated by
wind transport along a high ridge.
![Page 9: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Eddy Covariance Technique • Molotch et al. 2007 • Niwot Ridge- Colorado • 40 day study
• Below canopy: 0.41mm day -1
• Above canopy: 0.71 mm day -1
• Sub canopy sublimation is dependent on the partitioning of sensible and latent heat fluxes in the canopy.
![Page 10: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Aerodynamic Profile Method • Niwot Ridge- Colorado • Hood et al. 1999 • Aerodynamic profile method
• Uses observations from 2 heights above snowpack
• Seasonal study • Net snow accumulation:1308 mm year -1
• Summer time precipitation: 203 mm year -1
• Total SWE loss due to sublimation: 193 mm year-1
![Page 11: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Aerodynamic Profile Method
Hood et al. 1999
-November- Sublimation losses most correlated with wind speed -February- Sublimation losses most correlated with specific humidity
![Page 12: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Aerodynamic Profile Method
Hood et al. 1999 -15% of seasonal water budget -13% of annual water budget
Hood et al. 1999
![Page 13: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Bulk Profile Method • Fassnacht 2010
• Uses one set of observations above the snowpack.
• Average monthly precipitation: 88.9 mm month-1
• Average monthly sublimation 22.7 mm month-1
![Page 14: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Research Questions • What is the magnitude of snowpack losses due to
sublimation losses at Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest during the most recent winters? • 2007-2012
• How have these calculated sublimation losses changed
historically? • 1986-2011
![Page 15: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Data Sources • NRCS- National Resources Conservation Service
• SCAN- Soil Climate Analysis Network • Average daily and hourly
• Temperature (T) • Relative Humidity (RH) • Wind Speed (Ua) • Atmospheric Pressure (P) • Soil Moisture
• HBEF- Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest • Averaged daily
• Vapor pressure • Temperate • Wind Speed • SWE depth
• NCDC-National Climatic Data Center • Average Daily
• Atmospheric Pressure
![Page 16: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Study Site • Northern Research Station of
the USDA Forest Service • 3,160 hectares. • SCAN site: 451 meters above
sea level. • Surround forest:
• Sugar maple (Acer saccharum),
• American beech (Faugs gradnifolia),
• Yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis)
• (Bailey et al. 2003).
![Page 17: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Methods • A bulk profile method was used to calculate a mass
transport from the snowpack • Required 1 set of observations from above the snow surface
• T, Ua, RH, and P were used to calculate: eb, eo, and ρa • Fassnacht 2010 Where:
FE= Mass transport from snowpack ρa= Density of air ko= Von Karmon constant P= Atmospheric pressure ua= Wind speed za= Height of wind speed obs. zb= Height of vapor pressure obs. zo= Roughness length eb=Vapor pressure of ambient air eo= Saturated vapor pressure
FE is then multiplied by the latent heat of sublimation ~2850 kJ/ kg
![Page 18: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Methods • SCAN Site- Winters of 2007-2012
• Daily averaged data, and hourly data
• A sensitivity analysis was performed on T, eb, Ua, ZO, and P. • Increase and decrease variables by 10%, 25%, and 50%.
• HBEF and NCDC winters of 1986-2011 • Using a hypsometric equation to estimate the pressure differences
between HBEF and KCON.
![Page 19: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Methods • Hypsometric Equation (Bluestein 1992)
Where: P1= P at HBEF Rd= Gas constant Tv= Virtual temperature at HBEF Z2= Elevation at HBEF Z1= Elevation at KCON P2= P at KCON
![Page 20: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Results Number of
Sublimating Days
Sum of loss per winter
(daily mean obs) [mm]
Mean Loss per day due to
Sublimation [mm/day]
Winter Precipitation [mm/ winter]
Max snowpack SWE [mm]
2007 91 59.2 0.65 508 137.2
2008 55 45.1 0.81 497 284.5
2009 111 71.6 0.64 470 203.2
2010 81 64.7 0.79 518 88.9
2011 113 83.7 0.75 552 200.6
2012 90 59.6 0.66 494 139.7
Recall at HBEF: P= 1,326 mm year-1
Q= 833 mm year -1 ET= 493 mm year -1
![Page 21: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Winter 2007
SWE Loss: 11 mm Calculated Loss: 10.5 mm
![Page 22: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Winter 2011
SWE Loss: 12 mm Calculated Loss: 9.5 mm
![Page 23: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Seasonal Variation
Maximum Sublimation Loss [mm/day]
Date
2007 6.24 April 1 2008 3.74 Jan 31 2009 2.25 Mar 26 2010 3.92 Mar 5 2011 3.74 Feb 27 2012 4.88 Mar 31
![Page 24: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Sensitivity Analysis
Variable +50% +25% +10% Initial -10% -25% -50%
T 16.4 8.81 3.61 -- 3.93 10.2 20.2
eb 67.9 47.8 21.7 -- 24.5 61.2 122.6
w 41.9 20.9 8.42 -- 8.42 20.9 41.9
zo 12.2 6.41 2.72 -- 2.81 7.31 16.1
Increase and decrease variables by 10%, 25%, and 50%
![Page 25: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Sensitivity Analysis
T eb
Ua Zo
![Page 26: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Historical Daily Variation Mann-Kendall: τ = -0.226 2-sided p-value =< 0.00 Slope= 0.02 mm day-1 year-1 for the 23 year period.
![Page 27: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Historical Daily Variation
![Page 28: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Historical Annual Variation Mann-Kendall: τ = -0.76 2-sided p-value < 0.00 Slope= -1.33 mm winter-1 year-
1 for the 23 year period.
![Page 29: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Discussion • Water Budget implications • Downward Trend • Comparison with other studies • Changing Winters
![Page 30: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Water Budget • According to recent studies at HBEF, approximately 61%
of annual precipitation leaves runoff and 39% leaves the system as evapotranspiration (Campbell et al. 2007)
• Annual Water Budget (Oct 2010- Oct 2011). • 1450 mm of annual precipitation • 84 mm of sublimation 5.5%
• Seasonal Water Budget (First snow accumulation- final melt) • 550 mm of winter precipitation • 84 mm of sublimation 15.2%
• On average (2007-2012) about 12%
![Page 31: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Downward Trend- Temperature
Sen Slope=0.00 ºC winter-1 year-1 for the 23 year period
![Page 32: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Downward Trend- Wind speed
No Statistical Change to Wind Speed!
![Page 33: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Downward Trend- Vapour Pressure
Sen Slope=0.14 kPa winter-1 year-1 for the 23 year period
![Page 34: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Downward Trend- RH
Sen Slope =0.75 % winter-1 year-1 for the 23 year period
Or about 20% increase since 1986
![Page 35: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Downward Trend- Vapour Pressure Deficit
Sen Slope=0.02 kPa day-1 year-1 for the 23 year period
![Page 36: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Comparison with other studies
• HBEF- 2007-2012 • Mean sublimation loss: 64 mm winter-1
• 12% of winter water budget • Mean sublimation loss: 0.71 mm day-1 • Mean sublimation days: 85 days
• Niwot Ridge- Hood et al 1999 • Net Sublimation: 195 mm winter-1
• 15% of winter water budget • Niwot Ridge- Molotch et al. 2007
• Mean sublimation loss: 0.71 mm day-1
• Total (40 day study): 53 mm winter-1
• Syracuse, NY Fassnacht 2004 • Mean sublimation loss: 22 mm month-1
• Losses account for nearly 30% of monthly precipitation
![Page 37: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Changing Winters
Campbell et al. 2007
-
![Page 38: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Conclusions • Sublimation winters of 2007-2012
• Average of 64 mm winter-1
• Average of 0.71 mm day-1
• Sublimation winters of 1986-2011 • Average of 103 mm winter-1
• Average of 1.21 mm day-1
• Downward Trend explained by: • Increase in eo since 1986 • Decrease in wind speed since 1986
![Page 39: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Outreach • Work will be submitted to the Journal of Hydrometeorology. • New watershed hydrology blog
• http://jpmolloy.blogs.plymouth.edu/
![Page 40: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Acknowledgements • Thanks to:
• My friends and family for their support through this process. • Plymouth State University- CFE • USDA- Forest Service • Committee Members
• Eric Hoffman • John Campbell • Jennifer Jacobs
• Advisor • Mark Green
![Page 41: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Works Cited • Bailey, Amey Schenck, James W Hornbeck, John L Campbell, and Christopher Eagar. 2003. Hydrometeorological Database for Hubbard
Brook Experimental Forest: 1955-2000. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/5406. • Burakowski, E., and C. Wake. 2009. “The Changing Character of Winter Climate in the Northeast United States.” • Bluestein, Howard. 1992. Synoptic- Dynamic Meteorology in Midlatitudes. Volume 1. Oxford University Press pp. 57-60. • Campbell, John L., Charles T. Driscoll, Christopher Eagar, Gene E. Likens, Thomas G. Siccama, Chris E. Johnson, Timothy J. Fahey, et al.
2007. Long-term Trends from Ecosystem Research at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/13119. • Campbell, John L., Charles T. Driscoll, Afshin Pourmokhtarian, and Katharine Hayhoe. 2011. “Streamflow responses to past and projected
future changes in climate at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire, United States.” Water Resources Research 47 (2) (February 11)
• Fassnacht, S.R., 2004. Estimating alter-shielded gauge snowfall undercatch, snowpack sublimation, and blowing snow transport at six sites in the coterminous United States. Hydrological Processes, 18(18): 3481-3492
• Fassnacht, S.R. 2010. “Temporal Changes in Small Scale Snowpack Surface Roughness Length for Sublimation Estimates in Hydrological Modeling.” Journal of Geographical Research 36 (1): 43–57.
• Gelfan, A N, J W Pomeroy, and L S Kuchment. 2004. “Modeling Forest Cover Influences on Snow Accumulation, Sublimation, and Melt.” Journal of Hydrometeorology 5 (5): 785–803. 1525-7541(2004)
• Hood, Eran, Mark Williams, and Don Cline. 1999. “Sublimation from a Seasonal Snowpack at a Continental, Mid-latitude Alpine Site.” Hydrological Processes 13 (September 1): 1781–1797.
• Light, P. (1941). Analysis of high rates of snow-melting, Trans. AGU 195-205 • Molotch, Noah P, Peter D Blanken, Mark W Williams, Andrew A Turnipseed, Russell K Monson, and Steven A Margulis. 2007. “Estimating
Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567–1575. • Montesi, James, Kelly Elder, R. A. Schmidt, and Robert E. Davis. 2004. “Sublimation of Intercepted Snow Within a Subalpine Forest Canopy
at Two Elevations.” Journal of Hydrometeorology 5 (5) (October): • Neumann, Thomas A., Mary R. Albert, Chandler Engel, Zoe Courville, and Frank Perron. 2009. “Sublimation Rate and the Mass-transfer
Coefficient for Snow Sublimation.” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (1-2) (January 15): 309–315. • Oke, T.R. 1987. Boundary Layer Climate, 2nd ed., Routledge, 435 pp. • Pugh, Evan, and Eric Small. 2012. “The Impact of Pine Beetle Infestation on Snow Accumulation and Melt in the Headwaters of the Colorado
River.” Ecohydrology 5 (4) (July): 467–477. • Strasser, U., M. Bernhardt, M. Weber, G. E. Liston, and W. Mauser. 2007. “Is Snow Sublimation Important in the Alpine Water Balance?”
The Cryosphere Discussions 1 (2) (September 6): 303–350. • Sverdrup, H. U. 1936. The eddy conductivity of the air over a smooth snow field, Geofysike Publikasjoner, 11(7), 1-69. • Urie, D. H. 1966. “Influence of Forest Cover on Snowpack and Ground‐Water Rechargea.” Ground Water 4 (1) (January 1): 5–9.
![Page 42: AN ANALYSIS OF SNOWPACK LOSSES DUE TO ...Sublimation of Intercepted and Sub‐canopy Snow Using Eddy Covariance Systems.” Hydrological Processes 21 (12) (June 15): 1567– 1575](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042410/5f2859574b931018221cfc32/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Questions