Measurement and simulation of wind erosion, roughness degradation and residue decomposition on an agricultural field

Donk, S. J. van; Skidmore, E. L.

doi:10.1002/esp.1037

Cited by 35 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Soil crust and crop cover have a large influence on the erodibility of the soil and the transport capacity (Hagen, 1996;Molion and Moore, 1983;Rice et al, 1997;Visser et al, 2005). Van Donk and Skidmore (2003) concluded that the WEPS erosion submodel overestimates the protective role of small wheat plants in simulating erosion.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the SWEEP model during high winds on the Columbia Plateau

Feng

Sharratt

2009

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A standalone version of the Wind Erosion Prediction System (WEPS) erosion submodel, the Single-event Wind Erosion Evaluation Program (SWEEP), was released in 2007. A limited number of studies exist that have evaluated SWEEP in simulating soil loss subject to different tillage systems under high winds. The objective of this study was to test SWEEP under contrasting tillage systems employed during the summer fallow phase of a winter wheat-summer fallow rotation within eastern Washington. Soil and PM10 (particulate matter ≤10 μm in diameter) loss and soil and crop residue characteristics were measured in adjacent fields managed using conventional and undercutter tillage during summer fallow in 2005 and 2006. While differences in soil surface conditions resulted in measured differences in soil and PM10 loss between the tillage treatments, SWEEP failed to simulate any difference in soil or PM10 loss between conventional and undercutter tillage. In fact, the model simulated zero erosion for all high wind events observed over the two years. The reason for the lack of simulated erosion is complex owing to the number of parameters and interaction of these parameters on erosion processes. A possible reason might be overestimation of the threshold friction velocity in SWEEP since friction velocity must exceed the threshold to initiate erosion. Although many input parameters are involved in the estimation of threshold velocity, internal empirical coefficients and equations may affect the simulation. Calibration methods might be useful in adjusting the internal coefficients and empirical equations. Additionally, the lack of uncertainty analysis is an important gap in providing reliable output from this model. Published in

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the SWEEP model during high winds on the Columbia Plateau

Feng

Sharratt

2009

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing CUMR produced higher degradation rates of Kr and Crr created by all tillage tools, in both soils. Some authors proposed the use of only the rain amount or rain energy as a single parameter (Van Donk and Skidmore, 2003;Zobeck and Onstad, 1987) to evaluate both soil roughness decay using exponential negative relations (Onstad et al, 1984;Potter et al, 1990;Römkens and Wang, 1985;.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Degradation of the soil surface roughness by rainfall in two loess soils

Oro¹,

Buschiazzo²

2011

Geoderma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A wind tunnel study indicated that the threshold friction velocity of a dry and smooth silt loam was 0·34 m s −1 (Goossens, 2001). Van Donk et al (2003) examined the performance of WEPS on a silt loam sown to winter wheat in Colorado. The WEPS erosion submodel predicted no erosion despite a measured soil loss of 600 kg ha −1 during a singular event.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of WEPS for soil and PM10 loss from agricultural fields within the Columbia Plateau of the United States

Feng

Sharratt

2006

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wind erosion from agricultural fields contributes to poor air quality within the Columbia Plateau of the United States. Erosion from fields managed in a conventional winter wheatsummer fallow rotation was monitored during the fallow period near Washtucna, WA, in 2003 and 2004. Loss of soil and PM10 (particulates ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤10 µ µ µ µ µm in diameter) was measured during six high wind events (sustained wind speed at 3 m height > > > > >6·4 m s − − − − −1 ). Soil loss associated with suspension, saltation and creep as well as PM10 emission was used to validate the Wind Erosion Prediction System (WEPS) erosion submodel. Input parameters for WEPS simulations were measured before each high wind event. The erosion submodel produced no erosion for half of the observed events and over-predicted total soil loss by 200-700 kg ha − − − − −1 for the remaining events. The model appears to over-predict total soil loss as a result of overestimating creep, saltation and suspension. The model both over-predicted and underpredicted PM10 loss. High values for the index of agreement (d > > > > > 0·5) suggest that the performance of the model is acceptable for the conditions of this study. While the performance of the model is acceptable, improvements can be made in modeling efficiency by better specifying the static threshold friction velocity or coefficients that govern emissions, abrasion and breakage of silt loams on the Columbia Plateau.using a hanging water column for potentials from 10 −8 to 0·006 MPa, pressure plate apparatus for potentials from 0·01 to 1·0 MPa and a psychrometer for potentials of 1·5 MPa. Saturated hydraulic conductivity of soil columns was measured by the constant-head method (Klute and Dirksen, 1986). Above-ground prostrate and standing residue was collected from 0·25 m 2 areas and dried to constant weight.An automated meteorological station was established at the northeast corner of the field site to continuously measure wind speed and direction, precipitation, solar radiation, atmospheric temperature and relative humidity. Three-cup anemometers (model 14A, Met One, Grants Pass, OR) were placed at heights of 0·1, 0·5, 1, 2, 3 and 5 m and wind direction (model 024A, Met One, Grants Pass, OR) was monitored at 3 m. Micrometeorological sensors were monitored every 10 s and data recorded every 30 minutes by a data-logger (model 23X, Campbell Scientific, Logan, UT) except during high wind events, when data were recorded at 10 minute intervals.

show abstract

Measurement and simulation of wind erosion, roughness degradation and residue decomposition on an agricultural field

Cited by 35 publications

References 20 publications

Evaluation of the SWEEP model during high winds on the Columbia Plateau

Evaluation of the SWEEP model during high winds on the Columbia Plateau

Degradation of the soil surface roughness by rainfall in two loess soils

Validation of WEPS for soil and PM10 loss from agricultural fields within the Columbia Plateau of the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About