Full TGIF Record # 313082
Item 1 of 1
DOI:10.21273/HORTSCI15027-20
Web URL(s):https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/55/10/article-p1558.xml?ArticleBodyColorStyles=fullText
    Last checked: 11/23/2020
https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/55/10/article-p1558.xml?ArticleBodyColorStyles=pdf-4377
    Last checked: 11/23/2020
    Requires: PDF Reader
Publication Type:
i
Refereed
Author(s):Wynne, Tamara; Devitt, Dale
Author Affiliation:School of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV
Title:Evapotranspiration of urban landscape trees and turfgrass in an arid environment: Potential trade-offs in the landscape
Source:HortScience. Vol. 55, No. 10, October 2020, p. 1558-1566.
Publishing Information:Alexandria, Virginia: American Society for Horticultural Science
# of Pages:9
Related Web URL:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343785191_Evapotranspiration_of_Urban_Landscape_Trees_and_Turfgrass_in_an_Arid_Environment_Potential_Trade-offs_in_the_Landscape
    Last checked: 11/23/2020
    Notes: Abstract only
Keywords:Author-Supplied Keywords: Evaporation; Planting density; Transpiration; Tree grass water use ratios
Abstract/Contents:"Irrigation in arid urban landscapes can use significant amounts of water. Water conservation must be based on plant species and the ability to meet plant water requirements while minimizing overirrigation. However, actual evapotranspiration (ET) estimates for landscape trees and turfgrass in arid environments are poorly documented, especially direct comparisons to assess potential trade-offs. We conducted research to quantify ET of 10 common landscape tree species grown in southern Nevada and compared these values with the ET of both a warm season and cool season turfgrass species. The trees were grown in a plot with a high-density planting (256 trees/ha). A complete morphological assessment was made on each tree, and monitoring of plant water status was conducted monthly. ET was quantified with a hydrologic balance approach, irrigating based on the previous weeks ET to eliminate a drainage component. Transpiration was estimated with sap-flow sensors, and evaporation was estimated by difference. Although ET in liters revealed no statistical difference based on species, there were many significant differences in tree morphological parameters (P < 0.05), such as found with basal canopy area. When ET was converted to centimeters based on standardizing the ET on a basal canopy area basis, statistically higher ET values (P < 0.05) were generated for three of the trees (Lagerstroemia indica, Gleditsia tricanthos, and Fraxinus velutina Modesto). A clear separation of all tree ET values (lower ET) with turfgrass ET occurred (P < 0.001), with the exception of L. indica. Backward regression analysis revealed that all morphological and physiological parameters were eliminated with the exception of percent cover in predicting ET (cm, R2 = 0.88, P < 0.001). In addition, a highly curvilinear relationship existed between decreasing percent tree cover and ET on a basal canopy area basis (R2 = 0.96, P < 0.001), revealing that smaller trees located within the plot had significantly higher ET (centimeters). Tree-to-grass water use ratios demonstrated that all species except L. indica had ratios significantly below 1.0, indicating that on the basis of this study, landscapes dominated by mature trees irrigated at ET would have lower water use rates than similar areas planted to turfgrass, with the exception of the smaller L. indica. The results suggest that the smaller trees within the higher planting density plot were partially released from a negative feedback on transpiration that occurred in the larger trees based on reduced canopy atmospheric coupling."
Language:English
References:52
Note:Tables
Graphs
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
2020. Evapotranspiration of urban landscape trees and turfgrass in an arid environment: Potential trade-offs in the landscape. HortScience. 55(10):p. 1558-1566.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=313082
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 313082.
Choices for finding the above item:
DOI: 10.21273/HORTSCI15027-20
Web URL(s):
https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/55/10/article-p1558.xml?ArticleBodyColorStyles=fullText
    Last checked: 11/23/2020
https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/55/10/article-p1558.xml?ArticleBodyColorStyles=pdf-4377
    Last checked: 11/23/2020
    Requires: PDF Reader
Find Item @ MSU
MSU catalog number: b2217685a
Find from within TIC:
   Digitally in TIC by record number.
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)