ANOMALIAS DECADAIS DO REGIME HÍDRICO DO RS NO PERÍODO DE 1977 A 2006

Authors

  • Morgana Vaz da Silva Faculdade de Meteorologia/UFPEL
  • Cláudia Rejane Jacondino de Campos Faculdade de Meteorologia/UFPEL

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X9480

Abstract

In this work were determined and analyzed the anomalies of theDecadal Water Balance components of 1977-1986, 1987-1996 and 19972006in relation to Climatological Water Balance components 1977-2006.Air temperature and rainfall monthly data from 1977-2006, distributed in16 surface meteorological stations of the Rio Grande do Sul (RS) wereused to calculate the Water Balance (WB). The methods proposed byThornthwaite e Mather (1955) and Thornthwaite (1948) were used tocalculate the WB and the evapotranspiration, respectively. According tothe results obtained decades 1977-1986 and 1987-1996 were drier than the climatological normal for most of the RS, but there was not lack of waterbecause even the excess water being lower than the climatological normal,it was sufficient to restore the demand evaporative of these decades. The1987-2006 decade was wetter than the climatological normal studied, so inthis decade there was excess water in the RS.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Morgana Vaz da Silva, Faculdade de Meteorologia/UFPEL

M.Sc. em Meteorologia da Universidade Federal de Pelotas (2008-2010). Graduação em Meteorologia pela Universidade Federal de Pelotas, UFPel (2004-2007). Áreas de interesse: meteorologia, meteorologia de mesoescala, climatologia e agrometeorologia.

Cláudia Rejane Jacondino de Campos, Faculdade de Meteorologia/UFPEL

Professora Associada do Departamento de Meteorologia, da Faculdade de Meteorologia da Universidade Federal de Pelotas. Graduação em Meteorologia, pela Universidade Federal de Pelotas, UFPel (1984-1987), Mestrado em Agronomia (Meteorologia Agrícola) pela Universidade Federal de Viçosa, UFV (1988-1990) e Doutorado em Física da Atmosfera, pela Université de Toulouse III (Paul Sabatier), U.T. III, França (1993-1996). Áreas de interesse: meteorologia, meteorologia de mesoescala, meteorologia sinótica, climatologia e agrometeorologia.

Downloads

Published

2011-06-01

How to Cite

da Silva, M. V., & de Campos, C. R. J. (2011). ANOMALIAS DECADAIS DO REGIME HÍDRICO DO RS NO PERÍODO DE 1977 A 2006. Ciência E Natura, 33(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X9480

Issue

Vol. 33 No. 1 (2011)

Section

Meteorology

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.