HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Truman, C. C. Articles by Bradford, J. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Truman, C. C. Articles by Bradford, J. M. Agricola Articles by Truman, C. C. Articles by Bradford, J. M.

Laboratory Determination of Interrill Soil Erodibility

USDA-ARS Southeast Watershed Research Lab., P.O. Box 946, Tifton, GA 31793

J. M. Bradford

USDA-ARS Subtropical Agricultural Research Lab., 2301 South International Blvd., Weslaco, TX 78596

* Corresponding author.

ABSTRACT

Laboratory soil pans and rainfall simulators have been used to study fundamental erosion processes affecting interrill soil loss. Problems exist when laboratory results are extended to those determined under field conditions. Experimental methodology influences a soil's interrill erodibility and interrill erodibility ranking among soils. We compared interrill soil loss and erodibility data from two erosion pans with field data from identical soils. Three plot size-rainfall simulator methodologies were used: (1) 0.14-m² lab pan under a constant drop size (4.6 mm) rainfall simulator, (2) 0.32-m² lab pan with soil border areas under an oscillating nozzle (2.3 mm median drop diameter) rainfall simulator, and (3) 1-m² field plots under the same rainfall simulator as used in Method 2. Soil loss was measured at 5-min intervals. Interrill erodibility (K_i) was calculated from two equations (E = K_iiI² and E = K_iqIq) using measured soil loss (E), rainfall intensity (I), and flow discharge (q) values. The interrill erosion equation, methodology, time, and initial water content influenced calculated K_i values. Soil loss and K_i values from Method 1 did not correlate with and were greater than corresponding values from Methods 2 and 3. Soil loss and K_i values from Method 2 were correlated (r = 0.56 to 0.79) with corresponding values from Method 3. The K_iq values decreased with time and were a function of soil properties related to soil detachment and sediment transport. The K_ii values (i) increased with time, (ii) were primarily a function of soil properties related to soil detachment only, and (iii) did not account for infiltration and runoff differences among soils.

Received for publication August 23, 1993.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F.-l. Zheng, S. D. Merrill, C.-h. Huang, D. L. Tanaka, F. Darboux, M. A. Liebig, and A. D. Halvorson Runoff, Soil Erosion, and Erodibility of Conservation Reserve Program Land under Crop and Hay Production Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., July 1, 2004; 68(4): 1332 - 1341. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]