Seth Younger

Graduate Research Assistant

University of Georgia

Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources

I’m a Phd candidate studying how annual and seasonal transpiration varies among tree species and forest types in the southeastern US. My research encompasses very large scales, using long-term United States Geological Survey stream flow data to examine transpiration differences among large forested watersheds, and small scales, examining plot scale water balance to assess differences in water use among biomass tree species commonly grown in the southeastern US.

Interests

Hydrology
Geomorphology
Evapotranspiration
Data driven decision making
GIS Applications

Education

PhD student in Forestry and Natural Resources, [spring 2020]
University of Georgia
M.S. Geography, 2013
University of Georgia
BS Geography, 2010
Radford University

Research

My research focus is on quantifying water use and water source partitioning of forest stands from watershed to plot scales. I use a combination of methodos including isotopic tracers, water flux estimates from USGS stream gauges, and field data from sap flow, soil moisture and water level logger sensor networks.

Affiliated Labs:

Publications

Menberu B. Meles, Seth E. Younger, C. Rhett Jackson, Enhao Du, Damion Drover

November 2019 JEMA

Wetness Index based on Landscape position and Topography (WILT): Modifying the TWI using parameters related to landscape positions

We created Wetness Index based on Landscape position and Topography by modifying the classic Topographic Wetness Index (TWI) to better incorporate topography and improve performance on low relief groundwater dominated landscapes.

DOI

P.V. Caldwell, C.R. Jackson, C.F. Miniat, S.E. Younger, J.A. Vining, J.J. McDonnell, D.P. Aubrey

July 2018 In Biomass and Bioenergy

Woody bioenergy crop selection can have large effects on water yield: A southeastern United States case study

We compared water use of of 14-year old Sweetgum and Loblolly pine grown under intensive management. We found that Sweetgum were able to utilize almost 100% of precipitation while pine were efficient in their water use.

PDF DOI