Geology topics

Kimberly Samuels-Crow

Publications and source records attributed to Kimberly Samuels-Crow.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Precipitation pulse dynamics are not ubiquitous: A global meta-analysis of plant and ecosystem carbon- and water-related pulse responses

Ecosystem responses to precipitation pulses (“pulse responses”) exert a large control over global carbon, water, and energy cycles. However, it is unclear how the timing and magnitude of pulse responses will vary across ecosystems as precipitation regimes shift under accelerating climate change. To address this issue, this study evaluates how plants and ecosystems respond to precipitation pulses and explores potential implications of altered precipitation regimes for the carbon and water cycles. In particular, we conducted a global meta-analysis to quantify the magnitude and timing of plant and ecosystem carbon-related ( A net , NPP, GPP, R eco , R bg ) and water-related (ET, T, Ψ, g s ) responses to 587 precipitation pulses. By analyzing pulse-response metrics published in the primary literature, we evaluated the characteristics of those pulse responses. We assessed whether precipitation pulses lead to a classic pulse response (i.e., a hump-shaped response as described by the pulse-reserve framework), a linear pulse response, a combination of classic and linear, or a lack of a pulse response. If a pulse response occurred, we explored the factors that drove its timing, magnitude, and speed. Our meta-analyses revealed that the classic, hump-shaped response is not ubiquitous, as it only accounted for 52% of the pulse responses. However, when a pulse response did occur, carbon-related responses to precipitation pulses were larger in magnitude (e.g., larger peak) than water-related pulse responses at relatively arid sites. However, at relatively mesic sites, this relationship reversed (i.e., water-related responses to precipitation pulses were larger than carbon-related responses). Additionally, larger precipitation pulse amounts increased water-related response magnitudes more than carbon-related response magnitudes across both arid and mesic sites. Therefore, under future precipitation intensification, carbon-related responses to precipitation pulses may become more decoupled from water-related pulse responses in wetter biomes but more coupled to water-related pulse responses in drier biomes.

Global Change Biology↗

USGS2025

Filling the gaps: A Bayesian mixture model for imputing missing soil water content data

Soil water content (SWC) data are central to evaluating how soil moisture varies over time and space and influences critical plant and ecosystem functions, especially in water-limited drylands. However, sensors that record SWC at high frequencies often malfunction, leading to incomplete timeseries and limiting our understanding of dryland ecosystem dynamics. We developed an analytical approach to impute missing SWC data, which we tested at six eddy flux tower sites along an elevation gradient in the southwestern United States. We impute missing data as a mixture of linearly interpolated SWC between the observed endpoints of a missing data gap and SWC simulated by an ecosystem water balance model (SOILWAT2). Within a Bayesian framework, we allowed the relative utility (mixture weight) of each component (linearly interpolated vs. SOILWAT2) to vary by depth, site and gap characteristics. We explored “fixed” weights versus “dynamic” weights that vary as a function of cumulative precipitation, average temperature, and time since the start of the gap. Both models estimated missing SWC data well (R2 = 0.70–0.88 vs. 0.75–0.91 for fixed vs. dynamic weights, respectively), but the utility of linearly interpolated versus SOILWAT2 values depended on site and depth. SOILWAT2 was more useful for more arid sites, shallower depths, longer and warmer gaps and gaps that received greater precipitation. Overall, the mixture model reliably gap-fills SWC, while lending insight into processes governing SWC dynamics. This approach to impute missing data could be adapted to accommodate more than two mixture components and other types of environmental timeseries.

New Mexico↗

USGS2022

What drought means for southwestern landscapes

Introduction Each year, more than 20,000 people raft the Grand Canyon, many of whom will experience this iconic landscape for the first and only time. Visitors to our region for their once-in-a-lifetime Grand Canyon experience might be surprised to see forests and wetlands in addition to deserts. While locals are seeing changes to the Colorado Plateau woodlands, many visitors may not be able to distinguish between our normal desert landscapes (we have cactus!) and the increasingly dry and hot conditions we have experienced in recent decades. Helping visitors see these drought impacts could help communicate that climate change is not a problem for future generations but something affecting us now. The southwestern US (“Southwest”) is one of many dry regions around the world located within about 30 degrees of the equator. As global temperatures rise, these dry zones are getting drier and are likely expanding1. Dryland expansion and aridification alters water availability, which touches our lives and ecosystem health in the Southwest. This essay focuses on drought impacts on ecosystems across the Four-Corners region and Grand Canyon, with particular attention to the forests and woodlands that contribute, in part, to Colorado River flows.

Arizona, California, Nevada↗