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

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Blanco-Canqui, H. Articles by Alberts, E. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Blanco-Canqui, H. Articles by Alberts, E. E. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Blanco-Canqui, H. Articles by Alberts, E. E. Related Collections Soil Conservation Water Quality Runoff Best Management Practices Soil Erosion

Division S-6—Soil & Water Management & Conservation

Grass Barriers for Reduced Concentrated Flow Induced Soil and Nutrient Loss

^a School of Natural Resources, The Ohio State Univ., 2021 Coffey Rd., Columbus, OH 43210-1085
^b Environmental Soil Sci., Univ. of Missouri-Columbia, 302 Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources Building, Columbia, MO 65211
^c USDA-ARS, 268 Agricultural Engineering Building, Columbia, MO 65211

^* Corresponding author (blanco.16{at}osu.edu)

Vegetative filter strips (FS) perform poorly for reducing losses of sediment and nutrients in concentrated flow. Stiff-stemmed grass barriers (B-FS) above the FS may be a companion treatment to improve the FS performance. This study evaluated the effectiveness of warm-season switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) barriers planted above fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) FS in reducing runoff water, sediment, N, and P losses in concentrated flow from an Aeric Vertic Epiaqualf on a 5% slope. Simulated rainfall was applied on plots consisting of a 1.5-m-wide by 8-m-long pollutant source area with an artificially constructed channel to concentrate surface runoff. The source area was bounded downslope by either an 8-m long fescue FS or 0.7 m of active or dormant barrier above a 7.3-m-long fescue FS. The B-FS treatment also reduced sediment loss by 91% while the FS reduced sediment by only 72% (P < 0.01). The B-FS also reduced sediment loss by 90%, whereas FS reduced sediment only 60% when inflow was added to the plots. The B-FS trapped 4.9 times more organic N, 2.3 times more NH₄–N, and 3.7 times more particulate P than FS at 0.7 m (P < 0.01). Sediment and nutrient trapping increased significantly with FS length. Switchgrass barriers above the FS dispersed and temporarily ponded concentrated runoff, enabling increased sediment deposition. Barriers may be a potential conservation strategy for rehabilitation of lands affected with concentrated flow where traditional practices are inadequate.

Abbreviations: ANCOVA, analysis of covariance • B-FS, barrier(s) above a fescue filter strip • FS, filter strip(s) • NPS, nonpoint-source

This article has been cited by other articles:

				X. Liu, X. Zhang, and M. Zhang Major Factors Influencing the Efficacy of Vegetated Buffers on Sediment Trapping: A Review and Analysis J. Environ. Qual., August 8, 2008; 37(5): 1667 - 1674. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Hussein, H. Ghadiri, B. Yu, and C. Rose Sediment Retention by a Stiff Grass Hedge under Subcritical Flow Conditions Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., August 9, 2007; 71(5): 1516 - 1523. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Blanco-Canqui, C. J. Gantzer, and S. H. Anderson Performance of Grass Barriers and Filter Strips under Interrill and Concentrated Flow J. Environ. Qual., October 27, 2006; 35(6): 1969 - 1974. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]