China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Erosion by Water: Assessment and Control
Published in Brian D. Fath, Sven E. Jørgensen, Megan Cole, Managing Soils and Terrestrial Systems, 2020
José Miguel Reichert, Nadia Bernardi Bonumá, Gustavo Enrique Merten, Jean Paolo Gomes Minella
The Areal Nonpoint Source Watershed Response Simulation (ANSWERS[31]) includes a conceptual hydrological process and a physically based erosion process. The Agricultural NonPoint Source model (AGNPS[32]) simulates runoff, sediment, and nutrient transport from agricultural watersheds. The Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP[33]) is a model to predict soil erosion and sediment delivery from fields, farms, forests, rangelands, construction sites, and urban areas. The Griffith University Erosion System Template (GUEST[34]) was developed to interpret temporal fluctuations in sediment concentration from bare soil in single erosion events. The Limburg Soil Erosion Model (LISEM[35]) is a physically based runoff and erosion model that simulates the spatial effects of rainfall events on small watersheds. The European Soil Erosion Model (EU-ROSEM[36]) is a model for predicting soil erosion by water from fields and small catchments. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT[37]) is a watershed scale model developed to predict the impact of land management practices on water, sediment, and agricultural chemical yields in complex watersheds with varying soils, land use, and management conditions over long periods of time.
Humanization of Decision Support using Information from Simulations
Published in Robert M. Peart, R. Bruce Curry, Agricultural Systems Modeling and Simulation, 2018
John R. Barrett, Mark A. Nearing
The WEPP model predicts crop yields. WEPP also gives spatial and temporal distribution information on erosion. This should be of benefit in meeting the needs of the precision farmer. On the other hand, WEPP is data-intensive, both for input and for output. Interpretation of the WEPP output information requires an erosion expert.
Effects of native vegetation recovery on soil loss
Published in Journal of Applied Water Engineering and Research, 2020
Dimaghi Schwamback, Luana Lavagnoli Moreira, Daniel Rigo
In contrast to the limitations and implications cited, empirical models such as USLE and RUSLE are of great importance and reliability (Devia et al. 2015; Pandey et al. 2016). Until the use of physical models is applicable, i.e. until there is wide availability with a variability of hydrological and environmental data, and their manipulation is not costly temporal and financially, the use of theoretical models such as USLE and its variations will be the best option for hydrosedimentological analysis (Merritt et al. 2003). As a result, although RUSLE development has taken place in the United States, it has been employed worldwide (Chen et al. 2017; Fernández and Vega 2018; Zerihun et al. 2018; Fayas et al. 2019; Pal and Chakrabortty 2019). Comparing to some other models that also allow the estimation of soil loss (WEPP, RUSLE3D and SWAT), the RUSLE (Renard et al. 1997) is an easy application tool that has low input data requirements and allows a wide applicability covering different types of soil, land use and declivity (Ozsoy et al. 2012; Guo et al. 2019).
Process-based soil erodibility estimation for empirical water erosion models
Published in Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2018
Selen Deviren Saygin, Chi Hua Huang, Dennis C. Flanagan, Gunay Erpul
For more than two decades, the trend in erosion prediction technology has been toward the development of process-based simulation models (Nearing, Lane, Alberts, & Laflen, 1990). One of the commonly used process-based models is the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP), which merges aspects of both qualitative and quantitative erosion models (Flanagan & Nearing, 1995; Flanagan, Gilley, & Franti, 2007). USDA’s WEPP model (Foster & Lane, 1987; Lane & Nearing, 1989) is an available technology which is physically based on fundamentals of hydrologic and erosion science (Nearing et al., 1990), and is a new generation of erosion prediction technology (Foster & Lane, 1987). This technology is essentially different from USLE/RUSLE, and the model uses individual storm event run-off rates and a steady-state sediment continuity equation given in Eq. (2) (Nearing, Foster, Lane, & Finkner, 1989): where G is the sediment load, x is the distance down the hillslope, Dr is rill detachment or deposition, and Di is the delivery rate of interrill sediment to the rills. WEPP soil erodibility parameters are expressed as three different equations in the model. And thereby, rill and sheet erosion processes can be evaluated independently of each other. These three parameters are interrill erodibility (Ki), rill erodibility (Kr), and critical hydraulic shear stress (τc) (Flanagan, Ascough, Nearing, & Laflen, 2001; Laflen, Lane, & Foster, 1991).