A Comparison of Three Methods to Estimate Evapotranspiration in Two Contrasting Loblolly Pine Plantations: Age-Related Changes in Water Use and Drought Sensitivity of Evapotranspiration Components

Increasing variability of rainfall patterns requires detailed understanding of the pathways of water loss from ecosystems to optimize carbon uptake and management choices. In the current study we characterized the usability of three alternative methods of different rigor for quantifying stand-level evapotranspiration (ET), partitioned ET into tree transpiration (T), understory transpiration, interception, and soil evaporation (ES) and determined their sensitivity to drought, and evaluated the reliability of soil moisture measurements by taking into account deep soil moisture dynamic. The analyses were conducted in an earlyand in a mid-rotation stand of loblolly pine, the predominant species of southern US forest plantations. The three alternative methods for estimating ET were the eddy covariance measurements of water vapor fluxes (ETEC), the water table fluctuation (ETWT), and the soil moisture fluctuation (ETSM). On annual and monthly scales, the three methods agreed to within 10–20%, whereas on a daily scale, the values of ETSM and ETEC differed by up to 50% and ETSM and ETWT differed by up to 100%. The differences between the methods were attributed to root water extraction below measurement depth and to the sampling at different spatial scales. Regardless of the method used, ET at the early-rotation site was 15–30% lower than that at the mid-rotation site. The dry years did not affect ET at the mid-rotation site but reduced significantly ET at the early-rotation site. Soil moisture trends revealed the importance of measuring water content at several depths throughout the rooting zone because less than 20% of the water is stored in the top 30 cm of soil. Annually, ES represented approximately 9 and 14% of ETEC at the mid-rotation site and the early-rotation site, respectively. At the mid-rotation site, T accounted for approximately 70% of ETEC. Canopy interception was estimated to be 5–10% of annual precipitation and 6–13% of total ETEC. At the early-rotation site, T accounted for only 35% of ETEC. At this site, transpiration from subdominant trees and shrubs represented 40–45% of ETEC, indicating that understory was a significant part of the water budget. We concluded that the eddy covariance method is best for estimating ET at the fine temporal scale (i.e., daily), but other soil moisture and water table-based methods were equally reliable and cost-effective for quantifying seasonal ET dynamics. FOR. SCI. 58(5):497–512.