skip to main content
Idioma:

Opposite Effects of Climate and Land Use Changes on the Annual Water Balance in the Amazon Arc of Deforestation

Cavalcante, R. B. L. ; Pontes, P. R. M. ; Souza‐Filho, P. W. M. ; Souza, E. B.

Water resources research, 2019-04, Vol.55 (4), p.3092-3106 [Periódico revisado por pares]

Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    Opposite Effects of Climate and Land Use Changes on the Annual Water Balance in the Amazon Arc of Deforestation
  • Autor: Cavalcante, R. B. L. ; Pontes, P. R. M. ; Souza‐Filho, P. W. M. ; Souza, E. B.
  • Assuntos: Annual ; Annual runoff ; Anthropogenic factors ; Budyko hypothesis ; Climate ; Climate and human activity ; Climate and land use ; Climate change ; Climate effects ; Climate variability ; Deforestation ; Deforestation effects ; Dependence ; Elasticity ; Evapotranspiration ; Forest effects ; Forests ; Human influences ; Hydrology ; Itacaiúnas River basin ; Land use ; Man-induced effects ; Methods ; Minimum streamflow ; Precipitation ; Regrowth ; Resource management ; River basins ; River flow ; Rivers ; Runoff ; Runoff coefficient ; Statistical analysis ; Stream discharge ; Stream flow ; Streamflow changes ; trend detection ; Variability ; Vegetation ; Vegetation regrowth ; Water availability ; Water balance ; Water resources ; Water resources management ; Water storage ; Water yield
  • É parte de: Water resources research, 2019-04, Vol.55 (4), p.3092-3106
  • Descrição: The hydrological effects of forest cover loss are difficult to discern in the case of large‐scale basins with gradual changes and difficult to isolate when climate variability is also present. In the present study, we evaluated the effects of climate variability and human activity on the annual streamflow in a basin in the Amazon arc of deforestation. We statistically analyzed the components of the annual water balance and monthly streamflow and used the currently used Tomer‐Schilling, elasticity, and decomposition of Budyko‐type curve methods to separate climate‐induced changes and anthropogenic effects. Annual series of the monthly maximum and minimum streamflow, total streamflow, and total reference evapotranspiration presented statistically significant increasing trends. No significant trend was observed for precipitation. The greatest change in the average annual runoff coefficient was observed between the first (1973–1984) and second (1985–1994) analyzed periods. Even with the continuous reduction in the forested area, the third (1994–2004) and fourth analyzed periods (2003–2016) showed only relatively small changes, most likely due to the intensity of slash‐and‐burn activities and vegetation regrowth. The methods showed that deforestation was the primary cause of the streamflow changes, but with different intensities, and a small recuperation was observed in the last analyzed period. On average, the annual water yield would increase between 26% and 58% after the first time interval without the opposite effect of climate variability, which must be considered in basin management. Future research should focus on analyzing the water storage and the dependence of the precipitation‐runoff relationship from the climate. Plain Language Summary The effects of deforestation on water availability are difficult to discern in the case of large river basins and when there are also changes in the climate. We evaluated the effects of both, climate variability and human activities, on the annual average river flow in a water basin situated in the most deforested region of the Amazon biome. Statistical analyzes showed that there were significant increases in the average annual flow of the river and in the annual reference evapotranspiration (determined by the climate) during the years after the beginning of deforestation in the region, but not in precipitation. The greatest change in the percentage of precipitation that turns into streamflow was observed between the first (1973–1984) and second (1985–1994) analyzed periods. Even with the continuous of deforestation in the basin, the other periods (1994–2004 and 2003–2016) showed only relatively small changes, most likely due to vegetation regrowth. Three different methods showed that deforestation was the primary cause of the streamflow change, but annual streamflow would be between 26% and 58% greater without the opposite effect of climate. These results must be considered in the management of water resources in the region. Key Points Comparison of three methods to separate land use and climate‐induced effects on streamflow in the Itacaiúnas River basin was shown We analyze that the intensity of slash‐and‐burn activities and vegetation regrowth, in addition to forested area, can help to explain the results The methods show that deforestation is the primary cause of streamflow changes, but with different intensities
  • Editor: Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
  • Idioma: Inglês
Voltar para lista de resultados
Ir para página anteriorAnterior Resultado  2 AvançarIr para próxima página

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.