Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-94
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-94
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
23 Apr 2024
| 23 Apr 2024
Status: this discussion paper is a preprint. It has been under review for the journal Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS). The manuscript was not accepted for further review after discussion.
Characteristics of dew on leaves of typical plants in Loess Hill and Gully Region of China
Abstract. Dew plays an important role as a non-precipitation input to the hydrological cycle and vegetation recovery in semi-arid ecosystems. To clarify the characteristics of dew on plant leaves, typical plants such as Tribulus, Hippophae and Elm were selected in the hilly and gully region of the Loess Plateau in China. The dew amount of typical plant leaves by manual weighing measurement was combined with automatic observation data from leaf wetness sensors (LWS) further to realize the automatic observation of dew on the leaf surface. The results showed that the cumulative dew amount on Tribulus, Hippophae and Elm from May to October in 2022 was in the order of Tribulus (17.46 mm) > Hippophae (11.14 mm) > Elm (5.88 mm), and the difference in the amount was mainly related to the leaf inclination angle and the microstructure of the leaf blade. Dew mainly occurred from 22:00 to 9:00 the next day on a daily scale, and was mainly concentrated in July–October during the year. The dew amount on the leaves of the three plants was less than the amount of rainfall, but the dew frequency was higher than that of rainfall. It was more favorable for the dew formation when the relative humidity is greater than 80.0 %, the difference between air temperature and dewpoint was less than 2 °C, and the wind speed was less than 1.0 m/s. In addition, there was more dew on the first day after a rainfall than on the day before due to sufficient moisture.
How to cite. Jia, Z., Li, G., Jin, C., Xing, J., Chang, Y., Liu, P., and Chen, D.: Characteristics of dew on leaves of typical plants in Loess Hill and Gully Region of China, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-94, 2024.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Download & links
Download & links
- Preprint
(1799 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor
| : Report abuse
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2024-94', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 May 2024
- Introduction section: In this section, the authors need to specify the scientific problems and highlight the innovations and academic contributions of the study.
- Figure 1: The line of “Provincial boundary” should be the boundary of Yan’an City, but not the one of Shaanxi Province.
- Section 2.2: Please give out the field pictures of the three plants of Tribulus, Hippophae, and Elm from different angles. It is better to include their pictures in different growth period.
- Section 2.3: Why did the authors place the sensors/equipments of ATMOS14, WSD01, and ECRN-100 at 0.2 m, 1.0 m, and 1.6 m, respectively above the ground? Are there any standards to do that?
- Figure 2(a): Please give out the date/time when you took the photo.
- Line 103: Why are the number (5 and 10) different for these three plants? Did you collect leaves everyday?
- Equation (1): Please give out the unit of Si in the explanation section of the equation.
- Equation (4): I feel that this equation is incorrect. For example, when Wdmax=Wdmin and both are not zero, the result Dd=0 is obviously unrealistic.
- Section 3.5: Are there other factors affecting dew formation? In Section 2.2, it is apparent that the heights of these three types of plants differ. When collecting leaves, are the heights of the leaves from the ground the same? Does height also affect the amount of dew?
- Section 3.5.1: The installation height of the WSD01 anemometer is fixed (1 meter above the ground), which is approximately the same as the height of the Hippophae, but differs from the heights of other trees. Therefore, is it appropriate to quantify the formation of dew for these three types of trees using the same wind speed?
- The manuscript only considers the amount of dew in three typical days, which is not representative enough. More daily calculation results should be added.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-94-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2024-94/hess-2024-94-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2024-94', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Jun 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2024-94/hess-2024-94-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
Status: closed
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor
| : Report abuse
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2024-94', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 May 2024
- Introduction section: In this section, the authors need to specify the scientific problems and highlight the innovations and academic contributions of the study.
- Figure 1: The line of “Provincial boundary” should be the boundary of Yan’an City, but not the one of Shaanxi Province.
- Section 2.2: Please give out the field pictures of the three plants of Tribulus, Hippophae, and Elm from different angles. It is better to include their pictures in different growth period.
- Section 2.3: Why did the authors place the sensors/equipments of ATMOS14, WSD01, and ECRN-100 at 0.2 m, 1.0 m, and 1.6 m, respectively above the ground? Are there any standards to do that?
- Figure 2(a): Please give out the date/time when you took the photo.
- Line 103: Why are the number (5 and 10) different for these three plants? Did you collect leaves everyday?
- Equation (1): Please give out the unit of Si in the explanation section of the equation.
- Equation (4): I feel that this equation is incorrect. For example, when Wdmax=Wdmin and both are not zero, the result Dd=0 is obviously unrealistic.
- Section 3.5: Are there other factors affecting dew formation? In Section 2.2, it is apparent that the heights of these three types of plants differ. When collecting leaves, are the heights of the leaves from the ground the same? Does height also affect the amount of dew?
- Section 3.5.1: The installation height of the WSD01 anemometer is fixed (1 meter above the ground), which is approximately the same as the height of the Hippophae, but differs from the heights of other trees. Therefore, is it appropriate to quantify the formation of dew for these three types of trees using the same wind speed?
- The manuscript only considers the amount of dew in three typical days, which is not representative enough. More daily calculation results should be added.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-94-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2024-94/hess-2024-94-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2024-94', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Jun 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2024-94/hess-2024-94-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Zhifeng Jia, 13 Jun 2024
Viewed
Total article views: 374 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 23 Apr 2024)
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 285 | 69 | 20 | 374 | 16 | 16 |
- HTML: 285
- PDF: 69
- XML: 20
- Total: 374
- BibTeX: 16
- EndNote: 16
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 376 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 376 with geography defined
and 0 with unknown origin.
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
1
Latest update: 20 Nov 2024
School of Water and Environment, Chang‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Subsurface Hydrology and Ecological Effects in Arid Region, Ministry of Education, Chang ‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Eco-hydrology and Water Security in Arid and Semi-arid Regions of the Ministry of Water Resources, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Ge Li
School of Water and Environment, Chang‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Subsurface Hydrology and Ecological Effects in Arid Region, Ministry of Education, Chang ‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Eco-hydrology and Water Security in Arid and Semi-arid Regions of the Ministry of Water Resources, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Cheng Jin
School of Water and Environment, Chang‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Subsurface Hydrology and Ecological Effects in Arid Region, Ministry of Education, Chang ‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Eco-hydrology and Water Security in Arid and Semi-arid Regions of the Ministry of Water Resources, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Jun Xing
School of Civil Engineering, Chang‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Yingjie Chang
School of Water and Environment, Chang‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Subsurface Hydrology and Ecological Effects in Arid Region, Ministry of Education, Chang ‘an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Key Laboratory of Eco-hydrology and Water Security in Arid and Semi-arid Regions of the Ministry of Water Resources, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
Pengcheng Liu
Xi‘an Water (Group) Lijiahe Reservoir Management Company, Xi’an 710055, China
Danzi Chen
No.203 Research Institute of Nuclear Industry, China Nuclear Geology, China National Nuclear Corporation, Xi’an 710100, China
Short summary
We selected three typical plants, such as Tribulus, Hippophae and Elm, to measure leaf dew by manual weighing and leaf wetness sensor in China. The results showed that three leaves had significant differences in dew amount. The dew mainly appeared in the night from 22:00 to 9:00, peaking at around 6:00, and was concentrated in July–October. There was more dew on the first day after rainfall than on the day before. Compared to rainfall, dew frequency is higher though dew amount is less.
We selected three typical plants, such as Tribulus, Hippophae and Elm, to measure leaf dew by...