Evapotranspiration is often estimated by numerical simulation. However, to produce accurate simulations, these models usually require on-site measurements for parameterization or calibration. We have to make sure that the model realistically reproduces both, the temporal patterns of soil moisture and evapotranspiration. In this study, we combine three sources of information: (i) measurements of sap velocities; (ii) soil moisture; and (iii) expert knowledge on local runoff generation and water balance to define constraints for a “behavioral” forest stand water balance model. Aiming for a behavioral model, we adjusted soil moisture at saturation, bulk resistance parameters and the parameters of the water retention curve (WRC). We found that the shape of the WRC influences substantially the behavior of the simulation model. Here, only one model realization could be referred to as “behavioral”. All other realizations failed for a least one of our evaluation criteria: Not only transpiration and soil moisture are simulated consistently with our observations, but also total water balance and runoff generation processes. The introduction of a multi-criteria evaluation scheme for the detection of unrealistic outputs made it possible to identify a well performing parameter set. Our findings indicate that measurement of different fluxes and state variables instead of just one and expert knowledge concerning runoff generation facilitate the parameterization of a hydrological model.
It is well known that rainfall causes soil erosion in sloping German vineyards, but little is known about the effect of age of plantation on soil erosion, which is relevant to understand and design sustainable management systems. In the Ruwer-Mosel valley, young (1- to 4-years) and old (35- to 38-years after the plantation) vineyards were selected to assess soil and water losses by using two-paired Gerlach troughs over three years (2013–2015). In the young vineyard, the overland flow was 107 L m–1 and soil loss 1000 g m–1 in the year of the plantation, and decreased drastically over the two subsequent years (19 L m–1; 428 g m–1). In the old vineyard, soil (from 1081 g m–1 to 1308 g m–1) and water (from 67 L m–1 to 102 L m–1) losses were 1.2 and 1.63 times higher, respectively, than in the young vineyard.