by U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Technical Information Service [distributor] in [Washington, D.C.?], Springfield, Va .
Written in English
|Series||ARS -- 5., ARS (Series) (United States. Agricultural Research Service) -- 5.|
|Contributions||United States. Agricultural Research Service.|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||18 p. :|
|Number of Pages||18|
These land‐use changes were simulated using SWAT to reduce the basin runoff by % and the sediment load by %. Spatial analyses using ArcGIS indicated that the simulated reduction in water yield due to cropland conversion to forestland was more obvious than that due to the conversion to grassland, but the reductions in the sediment yields were by: Effect of LULC changes on runoff and soil erosion The analysis of annual runoff in the watershed (Figure 2) indicated that in there was mm out of total rainfall mm ( %). In , the total rainfall was 58 mm and there was no runoff. In , runoff was mm out of rainfall total mm (%).File Size: KB. It was found that land use can greatly affect runoff and soil erosion. The greatest rates of runoff and sediment loss were measured in hilly areas under vines (average sediment loss t km−2 yr−1). Areas cultivated with wheat are sensitive to erosion. These sites represent a variety of landscapes and are under a number of land-uses representative of the Mediterranean region, such as agricultural land with rainfed cereals, vines, olives, eucalyptus plantation or natural vegetation (shrubland). It was found that land use can greatly affect runoff and soil by:
Overall, the sediment yield were significantly negatively correlated with LAI, canopy cover, stand litter, and saturated water capacity, while positively correlated with BD and runoff. The effects of precipitation on the sediment yield of agroforestry systems in this region became less important due to their partly improved soil conditions and Cited by: 9. Soil erosion at the study site was very high within strong erosion base on TCVN ; (3) Both runoff and soil erosion had strong relationship with . Surface runoff and soil loss on the karst hill slopes were very small. Runoff and soil loss were affected by land use, land cover and rainfall regimes. Antecedent precipitation could promote runoff and soil loss on limestone slopes. Due to the low soil formation rates, soil erosion risk was quite by: EFFECT OF SOIL EROSION ON SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND MAPPING In soil mapping, the effect of erosion on the epipedon is described in terms of erosion classes. In the Iowa Cooperative Soil Survey program, erosion classes are defined quantitatively: Erosion Class 1-None or slight erosion. Little or no mixing of the subsoil with the plow layer.
Universal soil loss equation (USLE) was used in conjunction with a geographic information system to determine the influence of land use and land cover change (LUCC) on soil erosion potential of a reservoir catchment during the period to Results showed that the mean soil erosion potential of the watershed was increased slightly from t ha − 1 Cited by: Land use and the type of management explain the variability on annual plant cover. Vegetation dynamic emerges as a key factor in interpreting the hydrogeomorphic response. Cereal cultivation and tree planting accelerate runoff and soil erosion. Scrub and woodland are considered better for soil and water conservation. Pastureland should be encouraged for soils that are Cited by: Urban development has been linked to many environmental prob- lems, including air pollution, wa- ter pollution, and loss of wildlife habitat. Urban runoff often contains nutrients, sediment and toxic con- taminants, and can cause not only water pollution but also large varia- tion in stream flow and temperatures. The results showed a significant effect of land-use on runoff and erosion in different rainfall intensities, so that the highest runoff was generated in the abandoned rain-fed agriculture at the intensity of 88 -1, with the least being generated in the rain-fed agriculture at .