Statistical and physical analysis of soil detachment by raindrop impact: Rain erosivity indices and threshold energy

Salles, Christian; Poesen, Jean; Govers, Gérard

doi:10.1029/2000wr900024

Cited by 96 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table I shows that the kinetic energy of the median volume drop diameter of the leaf drips is only 47 per cent of that of the simulated rainfall. However, Styczen and Høgh-Schmidt (1988) and Salles et al (2000) show that kinetic energy may underestimate the potential of rainfall to detach soil particles because it underplays the importance of drop size. Using m 2 v 2 as an indicator of detachment potential (Styczen and Høgh-Schmidt, 1988), it can be seen that leaf drips from a fall height of 0·5 m have 1·4 times the potential of the simulated rainfall to detach soil particles (Table I).…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 96%

The role of leaf inclination, leaf orientation and plant canopy architecture in soil particle detachment by raindrops

Foot

Morgan

2005

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A laboratory investigation of the effect of plant architecture on soil particle detachment by rainfall is described. The effects of leaf inclination, leaf orientation, effective canopy area, leaf area index, leaf subcatchment area, lowest canopy area, largest canopy area, canopy overlap area and an alternative leaf area index are examined using artificial plants. Detachment from a 30 cm diameter splash cup filled with sand (150 µ µ µ µ µm-1 mm particle size) was measured under three types of plant (small leaved, broad leaved and long narrow leaved) for a 10 minute simulated rainstorm of 75 mm/h intensity. There were no significant differences in soil particle detachment between the three plant types or between detachment under the plants and detachment of bare soil. No significant relationships were obtained between detachment and any of the plant parameters. Soil particle detachment by leaf drips can offset any protective effects of the canopy so that detachment does not differ significantly from that on bare soil. Plant architecture significantly affected the distance from the plant stem at which detachment was concentrated even though the canopy diameters of the plants were similar. There would appear to be no advantages in a detailed description of plant architecture and its effects in process-based models of soil erosion. Parameters such as plant height and plant canopy area are sufficient descriptors for modelling plant effects.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 96%

The role of leaf inclination, leaf orientation and plant canopy architecture in soil particle detachment by raindrops

Foot

Morgan

2005

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interactions of antecedent wetness, rainfall intensity and depth with surface and subsurface structures are deemed as first order controls in each of these cases. Likewise, particle detachment and soil erosion is clearly a threshold process (Hicks et al, 2000;Salles et al, 2000;Hairsine et al, 2002;Shao et al, 2005;Maerker et al, 2008;Scherer, 2008;Ternat et al, 2008), which is controlled by rainfall intensity, shear stress due to overland flow and soil stability. Infiltration, vertical flow and transport of contaminants in field soils may be observed in two qualitatively different modes, namely in preferential pathways or in a slow form in the soil matrix continuum (Bouma, 1981;Beven and Germann, 1982;Edwards et al, 1989;Flury et al, 1994Flury et al, , 1996Stamm et al, 1998;Zehe and Flühler, 2001a, b;Vogel et al, 2005;McGrath et al, 2007).…”

Section: Examples Of Threshold Behaviour In Hydrology and Earth Systementioning

confidence: 99%

Threshold behaviour in hydrological systems as (human) geo-ecosystems: manifestations, controls, implications

Zehe¹,

Sivapalan

2009

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

196

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper we review threshold behaviour in environmental systems, which are often associated with the onset of floods, contamination and erosion events, and other degenerative processes. Key objectives of this review are to a) suggest indicators for detecting threshold behavior, b) discuss their implications for predictability, c) distinguish different forms of threshold behavior and their underlying controls, and d) hypothesise on possible reasons for why threshold behaviour might occur. Threshold behaviour involves a fast qualitative change of either a single process or the response of a system. For elementary phenomena this switch occurs when boundary conditions (e.g., energy inputs) or system states as expressed by dimensionless quantities (e.g. the Reynolds number) exceed threshold values. Mixing, water movement or depletion of thermodynamic gradients becomes much more efficient as a result. Intermittency is a very good indicator for detecting event scale threshold behavior in hydrological systems. Predictability of intermittent processes/system responses is inherently low for combinations of systems states and/or boundary conditions that push the system close to a threshold. Post hoc identification of "cause-effect relations" to explain when the system became critical is inherently difficult because of our limited ability to perform observations under controlled identical experimental conditions. In this review, we distinguish three forms of threshold behavior. The first one is threshold behavior at the Correspondence to: E. Zehe (e.zehe@bv.tum.de) process level that is controlled by the interplay of local soil characteristics and states, vegetation and the rainfall forcing. Overland flow formation, particle detachment and preferential flow are examples of this. The second form of threshold behaviour is the response of systems of intermediate complexity -e.g., catchment runoff response and sediment yield -governed by the redistribution of water and sediments in space and time. These are controlled by the topological architecture of the catchments that interacts with system states and the boundary conditions. Crossing the response thresholds means to establish connectedness of surface or subsurface flow paths to the catchment outlet. Subsurface stormflow in humid areas, overland flow and erosion in semi-arid and arid areas are examples, and explain that crossing local process thresholds is necessary but not sufficient to trigger a system response threshold. The third form of threshold behaviour involves changes in the "architecture" of human geoecosystems, which experience various disturbances. As a result substantial change in hydrological functioning of a system is induced, when the disturbances exceed the resilience of the geo-ecosystem. We present examples from savannah ecosystems, humid agricultural systems, mining activities affecting rainfall runoff in forested areas, badlands formation in Spain, and the restoration of the Upper Rhine river basin as examples of this phenomenon. This fun...

show abstract

“…Aggregate breakdown and transfer of soil fragments by raindrop impact are the first key steps of the soil erosion process (Legout et al, 2005b;Shainberg et al, 1992). These initial steps may affect soil porosity, resulting in decreased infiltration and hydraulic conductivity and increased surface sealing and susceptibility to erosion (Falsone et al, 2012;Huang et al, 2010;Jasinska et al, 2006;Li et al, 2008;Raine and So, 1993;Ramos et al, 2003;Salles et al, 2000). In addition, soil aggregates physically protect organic matter (Feller and Beare, 1997;Gregorich et al, 1994;Li and Pang, 2014), which is important for carbon sequestration (Chaplot and Cooper, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Raindrop Characteristics on the Selective Detachment and Transport of Aggregate Fragments in the Loess Plateau of China

Fu¹,

Zheng³

et al. 2016

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The size of the raindrop in a rainfall event was the direct driving force for the aggregate breakdown and dispersion: the greater the diameter of raindrops, the higher was the degree of aggregate breakdown and dispersion. The splash erosion for the aggregate fragment <0.053 mm was at a maximum with increases in raindrop diameter, which accounted for 33.46 to 72.02% of the total splash amount. The contents of microaggregate fragments of <0.25 mm were highest at each splash distance and accounted for 50.49 to 94.04% of the total splash amount. This showed that microaggregate dispersion and breakdown is important in soil surface sealing and pore clogging.

show abstract

Statistical and physical analysis of soil detachment by raindrop impact: Rain erosivity indices and threshold energy

Cited by 96 publications

References 41 publications

The role of leaf inclination, leaf orientation and plant canopy architecture in soil particle detachment by raindrops

The role of leaf inclination, leaf orientation and plant canopy architecture in soil particle detachment by raindrops

Threshold behaviour in hydrological systems as (human) geo-ecosystems: manifestations, controls, implications

Impact of Raindrop Characteristics on the Selective Detachment and Transport of Aggregate Fragments in the Loess Plateau of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About