Comparison of atmospheric water vapour δ18O and δ2H estimated using evaporation pan, rainfall equilibrium and continuous measurements

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorCrawford, Jen_AU
dc.contributor.authorAzcurra, CSen_AU
dc.contributor.authorHughes, CEen_AU
dc.contributor.authorGibson, JJen_AU
dc.contributor.authorParkes, SDen_AU
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-21T04:50:01Zen_AU
dc.date.available2021-04-21T04:50:01Zen_AU
dc.date.issued2019-09en_AU
dc.date.statistics2021-03-11en_AU
dc.description.abstractFor a period of 16 months in Sydney, Australia, the variations of 2H/1H and 18O/16O in atmospheric vapour (δ2HA and δ18OA) were estimated using an evaporation pan method as well as using the isotopic precipitation-equilibrium approach. These calculations were then compared with δ2HA values measured at 10 m above ground surface using a Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (FTIR). As pan isotopic composition was available on a weekly time scale, the evaporation rates were measured daily, and the atmospheric variables were available hourly, the weekly time scale was used to calculate the arithmetic averages of the atmospheric variables that were used in the estimation of the pan-derived δ2HA. Good agreement (r = 0.7, P-value = 0.00) was found between the pan-derived and the FTIR measured δ2HA for weekly intervals, although individual differences ranged from −25.0 to 20.4‰, with the absolute difference averaging 8.0‰. A sensitivity analysis showed that the determination of δ2HA is most sensitive to air temperature, relative humidity and the isotopic composition of the pan water. While the precipitation-equilibrium approach only appears to be representative of atmospheric conditions close to times of precipitation events, the pan-derived isotopic composition of atmospheric vapour was found to be closer to the FTIR averages over longer periods including intervals with no precipitation. Overall, this means that the pan method is far more effective for uninterrupted estimation of δ2HA and δ18OA of atmospheric water vapour, as required for water budget studies, than the precipitation-equilibrium method, and it is more cost effective and robust than continuous measurement. Crown Copyright © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.en_AU
dc.identifier.citationCrawford, J., Azcurra, C. S., Hughes, C. E., Gibson, J. J., & Parkes, S. D. (2019). Comparison of atmospheric water vapour δ18O and δ2H estimated using evaporation pan, rainfall equilibrium and continuous measurements. Journal of Hydrology, 576, 551-560. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.06.056en_AU
dc.identifier.issn0022-1694en_AU
dc.identifier.journaltitleJournal of Hydrologyen_AU
dc.identifier.pagination551-560en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.06.056en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://apo.ansto.gov.au/dspace/handle/10238/10680en_AU
dc.identifier.volume576en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherElsevier B. V.en_AU
dc.subjectDeuteriumen_AU
dc.subjectOxygenen_AU
dc.subjectAtmospheric precipitationsen_AU
dc.subjectEvaporationen_AU
dc.subjectIsotopesen_AU
dc.subjectNew South Walesen_AU
dc.subjectAustraliaen_AU
dc.subjectFourier transform spectrometersen_AU
dc.titleComparison of atmospheric water vapour δ18O and δ2H estimated using evaporation pan, rainfall equilibrium and continuous measurementsen_AU
dc.typeJournal Articleen_AU
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1-s2.0-S0022169419306031-main.pdf
Size:
1.86 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles