Hillslope runoff and erosion on duplex soils in grazing lands in semi-arid central Queensland. I. Influences of cover, slope, and soil

Soil Research ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 105 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. M. Silburn ◽  
C. Carroll ◽  
C. A. A. Ciesiolka ◽  
R. C. deVoil ◽  
P. Burger
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Suspended Sediment ◽  
Surface Soil ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Suspended Load ◽  
Total Soil ◽  
Tree Canopy Cover ◽  
Grazing Lands ◽  
Semi Arid ◽  
Soil Losses

Many soils in semi-arid grazing lands develop low pasture cover or bare areas (scalds) under heavy grazing and have a low tolerance to soil erosion, due to low total water-holding capacity and concentration of nutrients in the soil surface. Runoff and erosion was measured for 7 years on 12 hillslope plots with cover (pasture plus litter) ranging from 10 to 80%, slopes from 4 to 8%, with and without grazing, with and without tree canopy cover, on a variety of soils. Soils were grouped into those derived from sandstone (SS), mudstone (MS), and eroded mudstone (MSe). One plot with low cover had a grass filter at the outlet. Runoff was strongly influenced by surface cover and was high with low cover (200–300 mm/year or 30–50% of rainfall). Runoff averaged 35 mm/year or 5.9% of rainfall with >50% cover. All soils fitted the same runoff–cover relationship. The grass filter had no effect on runoff and suspended load, but did reduce bedload. Grass pasture cover and tree litter cover were equally effective in controlling runoff and erosion. Total, bedload, and suspended load sediment concentrations increased linearly with slope in the range 4–8% for plots with low cover, and decreased exponentially with greater cover. Total and bedload sediment–cover relationships were similar for SS, MS, and MSe. However, plots on MSe had higher suspended sediment losses and thus slightly higher total soil losses. For all soils, erosion resulted in low sediment concentrations due to the hard-set surface soil, but total soil losses were high due to the large volumes of runoff generated. Concentration–cover relationships were different for bedload and suspended sediment. Consequently, suspended sediment was 20–40% of total soil loss for bare soil, and increased with cover to about 80% with cover >80%. The proportion of suspended sediment for bare soil was similar to the proportion of dispersed silt plus clay in the surface soil. About 90% of suspended sediment was fine-sized (<0.053 mm). Bedload was mainly coarse and fine sands, which were enriched compared with the surface soil. Grazing in semi-arid pastures should be managed to maintain >50% ground cover to avoid excessive runoff and soil erosion, and degradation of soil productivity, and to maintain good off-site water quality.

Hillslope runoff and erosion on duplex soils in grazing lands in semi-arid central Queensland. II. Simple models for suspended and bedload sediment

Soil Research ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 118 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. M. Silburn
Keyword(s):  
Suspended Sediment ◽  
Sediment Concentration ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Measured Parameter ◽  
Cover Factor ◽  
Bedload Sediment ◽  
Grazing Lands ◽  
Parameter Values ◽  
Soil Losses ◽  
Simple Models

The use of simple models of soil erosion which represent the main effects of management in grazing lands in northern Australia is limited by a lack of measured parameter values. In particular, parameters are needed for erosion models (sediment concentration v. cover equations) used in daily soil-water balance models. For this research, we specifically avoided equations that use rainfall and runoff rates (e.g. peak flow), as current daily models are limited in their ability to estimate these rates. The resulting models will therefore give poor estimates of soil losses for individual events, but should give good estimates of long-term average erosion and management influences. Runoff and erosion data were available for 7 years on 12 hillslope plots with cover of 10–80%, with and without grazing, with and without tree canopy cover, on a variety of soils according to various soil classification systems. Soils were grouped into those derived from sandstone (SS), mudstone (MS), and eroded mudstone (MSe). These data were used to determine two parameters, i.e. (i) efficiency of entrainment for bare soil and (ii) a cover factor, for simple models of bedload and suspended sediment concentrations. Methods used to fit parameters affected the results; optimising to obtain the minimum sum of squares of errors in soil losses gave better results than fitting an exponential equation to sediment concentration–cover data. The use of a linear slope factor in the sediment concentration models was confirmed with data from plots with slopes 4–8%. Parameters for the bedload sediment concentration model were the same for SS, MS, and MSe soils. Parameters for the suspended sediment concentration model were the same for SS and MS soils, but the MSe soil had a greater efficiency of entrainment for bare soil (about double). The sediment concentration–cover relationships and fitted cover factors were different for suspended and bedload sediment. Thus, the resulting modelled proportion of sediment as suspended load changed with cover, from ~0.3 for bare soil to 0.9 at 80% cover, mimicking the measured data. The cover factor was lower than published values for cultivated soils, indicating less reduction in sediment concentration with greater cover. A compilation of parameter values for the sediment concentration model from published and unpublished sources in grazing and cropping lands is provided.

COMPUTER ASSISTED MAPPING OF SOIL EROSION POTENTIAL

1985 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. VOLD ◽  
M. W. SONDHEIM ◽  
N. K. NAGPAL
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Soil Loss ◽  
Surface Soil ◽  
Mineral Soil ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Potential Map ◽  
Fraser Valley

Soil erosion potential maps and summary statistics can be produced from existing information with relative ease with the aid of computers. Soil maps are digitized and survey information is stored as attributes for each soil. Algorithms are then prepared which evaluate the appropriate data base attributes (e.g. texture, slope) for each interpretation. Forty surface soil erosion potential maps were produced for the Lower Fraser Valley which identify the most erosion-prone areas and indicate average potential soil losses to be expected under assumed conditions. The algorithm developed follows the universal soil loss equation. Differences across the landscape in the R, K, and S factors are taken into account whereas the L factor is considered as a constant equal to 1.0. Worst conditions of bare soil (no crop cover, i.e. C = 1.0) and no erosion control practices (i.e. P = 1.0) are assumed. The five surface soil erosion potential classes are determined by a weighted average annual soil loss value based both on the upper 20 cm of mineral soil and on the proportion of the various soils in the polygon. A unique polygon number shown on the erosion potential map provides a link to computer tables which give additional information for each individual soil within that polygon. Key words: Erosion, computer mapping, USLE

scholarly journals Soil loss by water erosion in areas under maize and jack beans intercropped and monocultures

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Luiz Terra Lima ◽  
Marx Leandro Naves Silva ◽  
Nilton Curi ◽  
John Quinton
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Soil Loss ◽  
Soil Management ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Water Erosion ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Water Runoff ◽  
Jack Bean ◽  
Favorable Conditions ◽  
Soil Losses

Adequate soil management can create favorable conditions to reduce erosion and water runoff, consequently increase water soil recharge. Among management systems intercropping is highly used, especially for medium and small farmers. It is a system where two or more crops with different architectures and vegetative cycles are explored simultaneously at the same location. This research investigated the effects of maize intercropped with jack bean on soil losses due to water erosion, estimate C factor of Universal Soil Losses Equation (USLE) and how it can be affected by soil coverage. The results obtained also contribute to database generation, important to model and estimate soil erosion. Total soil loss by erosion caused by natural rain, at Lavras, Minas Gerais, Brazil, were: 4.20, 1.86, 1.38 and 1.14 Mg ha-1, respectively, for bare soil, maize, jack bean and the intercropping of both species, during evaluated period. Values of C factor of USLE were: 0.039, 0.054 and 0.077 Mg ha Mg-1 ha-1 for maize, jack bean and intercropping between both crops, respectively. Maize presented lower vegetation cover index, followed by jack beans and consortium of the studied species. Intercropping between species showed greater potential on soil erosion control, since its cultivation resulted in lower soil losses than single crops cultivation, and this aspect is really important for small and medium farmers in the studied region.

scholarly journals Performance of Conservation Techniques for Semiarid Environments: Field Observations with Caatinga, Mulch, and Cactus Forage Palma

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iug Lopes ◽  
Abelardo A. A. Montenegro ◽  
João L. M. P. de Lima
Keyword(s):  
Vegetation Cover ◽  
Soil Conservation ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Natural Vegetation ◽  
Soil Reclamation ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Semi Arid ◽  
Soil Losses

Understanding small-scale hydrologic processes and the impact of soil conservation techniques are crucial in reducing runoff and sediment losses in semi-arid regions. This study was conducted in the Alto Ipanema River Basin, in Pernambuco State (Brazil). Soil and water dynamics were intensely monitored in twelve experimental plots with different coverage conditions (plot with bare soil—Bare; plot with natural vegetation—Natur; plot with mulch—Mulch; plot with Cactus Palma—Palma). By far, bare soil conditions produced higher runoff and soil losses. Mulch cover was close to natural vegetation cover, but still presented higher runoff and sediment losses. Palma, which is a very popular spineless cactus for animal feed in the Brazilian semi-arid region, presented an intermediate hydrologic impact in controlling runoff, enhancing soil moisture, and also reducing soil losses. Experiments were conducted in one hydrologic year (2016/2017) at three different sites. They were intensely monitored and had the same number of plots. This enabled us to carry out a robust performance assessment of the two soil conservation practices adopted (Mulch and Palma), compared to natural vegetation cover and bare soil conditions. Such low-cost alternatives could be easily adopted by local farms in the region, and, hence, improve soil reclamation and regional resiliency in a water-scarce environment.

Hillslope runoff and erosion on duplex soils in grazing lands in semi-arid central Queensland. III. USLE erodibility (K factors) and cover - soil loss relationships

Soil Research ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 127 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. M. Silburn
Keyword(s):  
Soil Loss ◽  
Soil Classification ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Classification Systems ◽  
Tree Canopy ◽  
Undisturbed Soil ◽  
Tree Canopy Cover ◽  
Basin Scale ◽  
Factor C ◽  
Grazing Lands

Measured Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) soil erodibility (K) values are not available for soils in grazing lands in northern Australia. The K values extrapolated from croplands are used in national and river-basin scale assessments of hillslope erosion, using an assumption that the cover factor (C) equals 0.45 for undisturbed (uncultivated) bare soil. Thus, the K needed for input into the models is the measured K for undisturbed soil (KU) divided by 0.45. Runoff and erosion data were available for 7 years on 12 hillslope plots with cover of 10–80%, with and without grazing, with and without tree canopy cover, on a variety of soils according to various soil classification systems. Soils were grouped into those derived from sandstone (SS), mudstone (MS), and eroded mudstone (MSe). These data were used to determine USLE KU, K, and C factor–cover relationships. Methods used to fit the parameters affected the results; minimising the sum of squares of errors in soil losses gave better results than fitting an exponential equation. The USLE LS (length–slope) factor explained the increase in measured average annual soil loss with slope, for plots with low cover. Erodibility (K) was 0.042 for SS and MS soils, irrespective of Australian Soil Classification (Chromosol, Kandosol, Rudosol, Sodosol, Tenosol); K was 0.062 for exposed, decomposing mudstone (MSe Leptic Rudosol). The measured K factor for SS and MS soils was close to that used in catchment-wide soil loss estimation for the site (0.039). This indicates that the method used for estimating K from soil properties (derived from cultivated soils) gave a reasonable estimate of K for the main duplex soils at the study site, as long as the correction for undisturbed soil is used in deriving K from measured data and in applying the USLE model. A 20% increase in K (0.050) for SS and MS soils may be warranted for heavy grazing by cattle. The C factor–cover relationship was different from the standard revised USLE (RUSLE) relationship, requiring a greater exponent (‘bcov’) of 0.075, rather than the default for cropland of 0.035. Increasing cover is therefore more effective at the site than suggested by the USLE. Parameters of USLE were also derived for bedload, allowing suspended load to be calculated by subtracting bedload from total soil loss.

scholarly journals Soil Erosion Estimates in Arid Region: A Case Study of the Koutine Catchment, Southeastern Tunisia

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (15) ◽  
pp. 6763
Author(s):  
Mongi Ben Zaied ◽  
Seifeddine Jomaa ◽  
Mohamed Ouessar
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Soil Loss ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Spatiotemporal Variability ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Storm Events ◽  
Erosion Processes ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Soil Losses

Soil erosion remains one of the principal environmental problems in arid regions. This study aims to assess and quantify the variability of soil erosion in the Koutine catchment using the RUSLE (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation) model. The Koutine catchment is located in an arid area in southeastern Tunisia and is characterized by an annual mean precipitation of less than 200 mm. The model was used to examine the influence of topography, extreme rainstorm intensity and soil texture on soil loss. The data used for model validation were obtained from field measurements by monitoring deposited sediment in settlement basins of 25 cisterns (a traditional water harvesting and storage technique) over 4 years, from 2015 to 2018. Results showed that slope is the most controlling factor of soil loss. The average annual soil loss in monitoring sites varies between 0.01 and 12.5 t/ha/y. The storm events inducing the largest soil losses occurred in the upstream part of the Koutine catchment with a maximum value of 7.3 t/ha per event. Soil erosion is highly affected by initial and preceding soil conditions. The RUSLE model reasonably reproduced (R2 = 0.81) the spatiotemporal variability of measured soil losses in the study catchment during the observation period. This study revealed the importance of using the cisterns in the data-scarce dry areas as a substitute for the classic soil erosion monitoring fields. Besides, combining modeling of outputs and field measurements could improve our physical understanding of soil erosion processes and their controlling factors in an arid catchment. The study results are beneficial for decision-makers to evaluate the existing soil conservation and water management plans, which can be further adjusted using appropriate soil erosion mitigation options based on scientific evidence.

The effect of rainfall intensity on soil erosion and particulate phosphorus transfer from arable soils

1999 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 41-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. I. Fraser ◽  
T. R. Harrod ◽  
P. M. Haygarth
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Suspended Sediment ◽  
Rainfall Intensity ◽  
Overland Flow ◽  
Agricultural Soils ◽  
Arable Land ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Particulate Phosphorus ◽  
Arable Soils ◽  
Flow Monitoring

Soil erosion, in the form of transported suspended sediment in overland flow, is often associated with high rates of particulate phosphorus (PP) (total P&gt;0.45 μm) transfer from land to watercourses. Particulate P may provide a long-term source of P for aquatic biota. Twenty-two sites for winter overland flow monitoring were selected in south-west England within fields ranging from 0.2–3.8 ha on conventionally-managed arable land. Fields were situated on highly porous, light textured soils, lacking impermeable horizons and often overlying major aquifers. Long arable use and modern cultivation methods result in these soils capping under rain impact. Overland flow was observed when rainfall intensity approached the modest rate of 0.8 mm hr−1 on land at or near to field capacity. Low intensity rainfall (&lt;2 mm hr−1) produced mean suspended sediment losses of 14 kg ha−1 hr−1, with associated PP transfer rates of 16 g ha−1 hr−1. In high intensity rainfall (&gt;9 mm hr−1) mean PP losses of 319 g ha−1 hr−1 leaving the field were observed. As might be expected, there was a good relationship between PP and suspended sediment transfer in overland flow leaving the sites. The capacity of light soils to cap when in arable use, combined with heavy or prolonged rainfall, resulted in substantial discharges, soil erosion and associated PP transfer. Storms with heavy rain, typically of only a few hours duration, were characterised by considerable losses of PP. Such events, with return periods of once or twice a winter, may account for a significant proportion of total annual P transfer from agricultural soils under arable crops. However, contributions from less intense rain with much longer duration (around 100 hours per winter in many arable districts of the UK) are also demonstrated here.

Controls of surface soil moisture spatial patterns and their temporal stability in a semi-arid steppe

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (18) ◽  
pp. 2507-2519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Zhao ◽  
S. Peth ◽  
X. Y. Wang ◽  
H. Lin ◽  
R. Horn
Keyword(s):  
Soil Moisture ◽  
Spatial Patterns ◽  
Surface Soil ◽  
Temporal Stability ◽  
Surface Soil Moisture ◽  
Arid Steppe ◽  
Semi Arid

Straw mulch impact on soil properties and initial soil erosion processes in the maize field

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Dugan ◽  
Leon Josip Telak ◽  
Iva Hrelja ◽  
Ivica Kisić ◽  
Igor Bogunović
Keyword(s):  
Soil Erosion ◽  
Soil Water ◽  
Soil Loss ◽  
Bare Soil ◽  
Water Erosion ◽  
Straw Mulch ◽  
Erosion Processes ◽  
Maize Field ◽  
Sediment Loss ◽  
Initial Soil

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Straw mulch impact on soil properties and initial soil erosion processes in the maize field&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ivan Dugan*, Leon Josip Telak, Iva Hrelja, Ivica Kisic, Igor Bogunovic&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of General Agronomy, Zagreb, Croatia&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(*correspondence to Ivan Dugan: [email protected])&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Soil erosion by water is the most important cause of land degradation. Previous studies reveal high soil loss in conventionally managed croplands, with recorded soil losses high as 30 t ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt; under wide row cover crop like maize (Kisic et al., 2017; Bogunovic et al., 2018). Therefore, it is necessary to test environmentally-friendly soil conservation practices to mitigate soil erosion. This research aims to define the impacts of mulch and bare soil on soil water erosion in the maize (Zea mays&amp;#160;L.) field in Blagorodovac, Croatia (45&amp;#176;33&amp;#8217;N; 17&amp;#176;01&amp;#8217;E; 132 m a.s.l.). For this research, two treatments on conventionally tilled silty clay loam Stagnosols were established, one was straw mulch (2 t ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt;), while other was bare soil. For purpose of research, ten rainfall simulations and ten sampling points were conducted per each treatment. Simulations were carried out with a rainfall simulator, simulating a rainfall at an intensity of 58 mm h&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt;, for 30 min, over 0.785 m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; plots, to determine runoff and sediment loss. Soil core samples and undisturbed samples were taken in the close vicinity of each plot. The results showed that straw mulch mitigated water runoff (by 192%), sediment loss (by 288%), and sediment concentration (by 560%) in addition to bare treatment. The bare treatment showed a 55% lower infiltration rate. Ponding time was higher (p &lt; 0.05) on mulched plots (102 sec), compared to bare (35 sec), despite the fact that bulk density, water-stable aggregates, water holding capacity, and mean weight diameter did not show any difference (p &gt; 0.05) between treatments. The study results indicate that straw mulch mitigates soil water erosion, because it immediately reduces runoff, and enhances infiltration. On the other side, soil water erosion on bare soil under simulated rainstorms could be high as 5.07 t ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt;, when extrapolated, reached as high as 5.07 t ha&lt;sup&gt;-1 &lt;/sup&gt;in this study. The conventional tillage, without residue cover, was proven as unsustainable agro-technical practice in the study area.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Key words: straw mulch, &lt;/strong&gt;rainfall simulation, soil water erosion&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Acknowledgment&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This work was supported by Croatian Science Foundation through the project &quot;Soil erosion and degradation in Croatia&quot; (UIP-2017-05-7834) (SEDCRO).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Literature&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Bogunovic, I., Pereira, P., Kisic, I., Sajko, K., Sraka, M. (2018). Tillage management impacts on soil compaction, erosion and crop yield in Stagnosols (Croatia). Catena, 160, 376-384.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kisic, I., Bogunovic, I., Birk&amp;#225;s, M., Jurisic, A., Spalevic, V. (2017). The role of tillage and crops on a soil loss of an arable Stagnic Luvisol. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 63(3), 403-413.&lt;/p&gt;

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document