Uncertainty in sap flow of Brazilian mahogany determined by the heat ratio method
Alisson Macendo Amaral , Frederico Antonio Loureiro Soares , Lucas Melo Vellame , Marconi Batista Teixeira
Journal of Forestry Research ›› 2020, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (4) : 1457 -1466.
Uncertainty in sap flow of Brazilian mahogany determined by the heat ratio method
The tropical arboreal species Brazilian mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) is very important economically and ecologically, for which understanding ecophysiological variables such as sap flow will improve understanding of the species and its cultivation. This paper aims to measure uncertainties (U) involved in the application of the heat ratio method for determining sap flow in Brazilian mahogany using sets of heating probes and thermometers installed on plants of 18 months of age, cultivated in Yellow Latosol, under a weighing lysimeter and located in a protected environment. The uncertainty in sap flow was calculated as the combination of uncertainty in the thermal diffusivity (U k), conductive section (U Sc) and corrected sap velocity (U Vc). U k had greater weight in determining the flow of sap in Brazilian mahogany, when compared to U Sc and U Vc. The thermal diffusivity during the cycle, or period evaluated, must be adjusted to improve the accuracy of the heat ratio method because the sap flow overestimated transpiration by 15.0%. When soil water was optimal In addition, the vapor pressure deficit linearly and indirectly influenced the SF with a difference of 14.6%.
Heat pulse / Diffusivity / Reliability / Transpiration / Vapor pressure deficit
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
Chambers JQ, Gimenez B, Jardine K, Negron Juarez RI, Cobello LO, Fontes C, Dawson TE, Higuchi N (2017) Vapor pressure deficit and sap velocity dynamic coupling in canopy dominant trees in the Amazon basin. American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting 383–385. Available in https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm17/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/290374. Accessed 13 July 2020 |
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
De Paula MT, Santos Filho BG, Cordeiro YEM, Conde RA, Neves PAPFG (2013) Ecofisiologia do mogno brasileiro (Swietenia macrophylla King) em sistemas agroflorestais no município de Santa Bárbara-PA. Enciclopedia Biosfera 9:813–824. Available in http://www.conhecer.org.br/enciclop/2013a/agrarias/Ecofisiologia.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2020 |
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
Inmetro (2008) A Estimativa da Incerteza de Medição Pelos Métodos do ISO GUM 95 e de Simulação de Monte Carlo. Nota técnica 02:33. Available in http://www.inmetro.gov.br/metcientifica/mecanica/pdf/ISOGUM95_MonteCarlo.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2020 |
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
Leão NVM (2011) Colheita de Sementes e Produção de Mudas de Espécies Florestais Nativas. Embrapa Amaz Orient 1–52. https://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/bitstream/doc/920713/1/DOC374.pdf. Access in July 13 2020 |
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
Morton D, Ghayvat H, Mukhopadhyay SC, Green S (2016) Sensors and instrumentation to measure Sap flow in small stem plants. In: IEEE international instrumentation and measurement technology conference proceedings, Taipei, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/I2MTC.2016.7520519 |
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
Silva OMC, Santana LS, Stevens TPB, Souza DC, Finoti ACL (2018) Curva de secagem em madeira de Pinus caribaea VAR. HONDURENSIS. Agrar Acad 5(9):140–152. https://doi.org/10.18677/Agrarian_Academy_2018a14 |
| [35] |
Simunek JJ, Jacques D, Langergraber G, Bradford SA, Šejna M, Genuchten MT (2013) Numerical modeling of contaminant transport using HYDRUS and its specialized modules. J Indian Inst Sci (93)2:265–284. http://journal.library.iisc.ernet.in/index.php/iisc/article/view/1224/2474 |
| [36] |
Sinclair TR (2017) Limited-transpiration rate under elevated atmospheric vapor pressure deficit. In: Sinclair T (ed) Water-conservation traits to increase crop yields in water-deficit environments. Springer Briefs in Environmental Science, pp 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56321-3_3 |
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |