
The most common models for estimating rainfall interception are physical-based models, of which Gash models are the most widely used. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the efficiency of revised Gash models in estimating the rainfall interception of Fagus orientalis Lipsky in Siahkal forests, Gilan province. During the one-year measurement period in the study plot (March 2015 to March 2016), gross rainfall, throughfall, and stemflow values were collected and the amount of rainfall interception was computed. For modeling rainfall interception, Gash-1 and Gash-2 models were selected, and the performance of these two models was evaluated during time scales: annual, leafed, and leafless periods. The results showed that in general, canopy and trunk echohydrological parameters were obviously different amongst time scales. In all time scales studied, the Gash-2 model performs better than the Gash-1 model, and the most appropriate performance of Gash-2 model is in estimating annual interception (estimation error: +8.8%; efficiency coefficient: 0.92). In summary, it can be said that forest ecohydrological processes in deciduous broadleaf stands should be studied separately during different time scales, because the ecohydrological response of canopy cover in different time scales is varied. Also, different models in different time scales do not have the same performance. Hence, further studies are needed to determine the efficient models in each time scale of each forest stands, and by obtaining the appropriate model, we can help to accurately estimate the interception in Hyrcanian forests.
leafless period, forest ecohydrology, Forestry, SD1-669.5, leafed period, rainfall partitioning
leafless period, forest ecohydrology, Forestry, SD1-669.5, leafed period, rainfall partitioning
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
