The usefulness of 137Cs as a tracer for soil erosion assessment: A critical reply to Parsons and Foster (2011)

Mabit, Lionel; Meusburger, Katrin; Fulajtár, Emil; Alewell, Christine

doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2013.05.008

Cited by 127 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Forests, shrublands and wetlands usually have considerably lower erosion rates than the more intensively managed grasslands. As it has been shown by Frankenberg et al (1995), Descroix et al (2003), Konz et al (2012) and Alewell et al (2013), intensively used areas in the Alps might have considerably higher erosion rates than the average values of the whole catchment of the Urseren Valley. At strongly affected sites, erosion rates are estimated to be between 1.4 to 3 mm year −1 which would result in a total erosion depth of 1.4 to 3 m at such slopes during the last 1,000 years when human impact was considerable (settlement and deforestation).…”

Section: Soil Sediment Budgets Indicate Unsustainable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The plots of Frankenberg et al (1995) were located on parent material of Flysch and Molasse in the Allgäuer Alps. In the Bavarian Alps (Kalkalpine), Felix and Johannes (1995) The large differences between the FRN measurements and the results of USLE modelling can be explained by the following: (i) FRN measurements focused on heavily-degraded grassland slopes-the aim was to determine erosion of strongly affected sites (Konz et al 2009;Alewell et al 2013); (ii) the USLE reproduced a modelled average for the catchment (please note that streams, settlements, bare rock and glaciers were excluded from the calculations; Meusburger et al 2010) and (iii) the USLE does not include winter processes (e.g. soil erosion due to avalanches, snow gliding or snow ablation) or livestock trails.…”

Section: Measurement and Modelling Of Physical Soil Erosion (E) In Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sampling details and analytical procedure are described in detail in Konz et al (2009) and Alewell et al (2013). It is important to note that FRN-based erosion rates cover all involved erosion processes over the given time span.…”

Section: +240mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the meantime, we have to use erosion estimates resulting from different methods of single case studies when evaluating the balance between soil formation and soil erosion. Methods vary from sediment trap measurements (Felix and Johannes 1995;Frankenberg et al 1995;Langenscheidt 1995;Konz et al 2012), the measurement of fallout radionuclides 137 Cs or 239+240 Pu Alewell et al 2013), modelling (Konz et al 2010) or a combination of remote sensing and modelling ).…”

Section: Soil Erosionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An attempt to estimate tolerable soil erosion rates by matching soil formation with denudation in Alpine grasslands

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Natural rates of soil production or a target soil thickness that allows unrestricted land use can serve as a basis for defining tolerable soil erosion rates. Guidelines for tolerable soil erosion rates in alpine grasslands do not yet exist, partly due to the lack of information of soil formation and production rates. We (i) defined soil formation/production rates for alpine grasslands on siliceous lithology and compared them to measured and modelled soil erosion rates and resulting soil thickness with a special focus on the Urseren Valley (Central Swiss Alps) and (ii) discussed possible trends for alpine soils under global change. Materials and methods Ranges of soil formation, production and erosion rates were determined using published and our own data for Alpine grasslands soils. Two definitions of tolerable erosion rate were used: when (i) current soil depth remains constant over time; and (ii) at least a minimum soil depth is maintained (minimum thicknesses for individual land uses still need to be defined). Results and discussion Soil production and related tolerable erosion rates (i.e. 50-90 % of the soil production rate) are a strong function of time. Average soil production rate in alpine areas for relatively old soils (>10-18 kyr) is between 54 (±14) and 113 (±30)t km . Measured recent soil erosion rates in alpine areas at intensively used slopes range from 600 to 3000 t km −2 year −1 . Average catchment values for the Urseren Valley using the model USLE plus soil loss due to landslides resulted in an overall loss of 180 t km −2 year −1

show abstract

Section: Soil Sediment Budgets Indicate Unsustainable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurement and Modelling Of Physical Soil Erosion (E) In Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: +240mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Soil Erosionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An attempt to estimate tolerable soil erosion rates by matching soil formation with denudation in Alpine grasslands

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 137 Cs method has the major advantage of reflecting all erosion processes by water, snow and wind, and is thus an integrated estimate of the total net soil redistribution rate since the 1950s (the start of the global fallout deposit) and since 1986 (in areas where the major fallout originated from the Chernobyl accident). Fallout radionuclides are therefore largely used to assess the budget of soil erosion and sedimentation processes (Mabit et al, 2008;Mabit and Bernard, 2007;Matisoff and Whiting, 2011;Mabit et al, 2013). Ceaglio et al (2012) used this method to compare field-measured and 137 Cs-derived soil redistribution rates, highlighting the predominance of the snow-related phenomena in the total soil erosion for a mountain basin in the northwestern Italian Alps.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil erosion in an avalanche release site (Valle d'Aosta: Italy): towards a winter factor for RUSLE in the Alps

Stanchi

Freppaz

Ceaglio³

et al. 2014

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Soil erosion in Alpine areas is mainly related to extreme topographic and weather conditions. Although different methods of assessing soil erosion exist, the knowledge of erosive forces of the snow cover needs more investigation in order to allow soil erosion modeling in areas where the snow lays on the ground for several months. This study aims to assess whether the RUSLE (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation) empirical prediction model, which gives an estimation of water erosion in t ha yr −1 obtained from a combination of five factors (rainfall erosivity, soil erodibility, topography, soil cover, protection practices) can be applied to mountain areas by introducing a winter factor (W ), which should account for the soil erosion occurring in winter time by the snow cover. The W factor is calculated from the ratio of Ceasium-137 ( 137 Cs) to RUSLE erosion rates. Ceasium-137 is another possible way of assessing soil erosion rates in the field. In contrast to RUSLE, it not only provides waterinduced erosion but integrates all erosion agents involved. Thus, we hypothesize that in mountain areas the difference between the two approaches is related to the soil erosion by snow. In this study we compared 137 Cs-based measurement of soil redistribution and soil loss estimated with RUSLE in a mountain slope affected by avalanches, in order to assess the relative importance of winter erosion processes such as snow gliding and full-depth avalanches. Three subareas were considered: DS, avalanche defense structures, RA, release area, and TA, track area, characterized by different prevalent winter processes. The RUSLE estimates and the 137 Cs redistribution gave significantly different results. The resulting ranges of W evidenced relevant differences in the role of winter erosion in the considered subareas, and the application of an avalanche simulation model corroborated these findings. Thus, the higher rates obtained with the 137 Cs method confirmed the relevant role of winter soil erosion. Despite the limited sample size (11 points), the inclusion of a W factor in RUSLE seems promising for the improvement of soil erosion estimates in Alpine environments affected by snow movements.

show abstract

Quantifying sheet wash erosion rates in a mountainous semi‐arid basin using environmental radionuclides and a stream power model

Geng

Pan

Milledge

et al. 2015

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Erosion rates and processes define how mountainous landscapes evolve. This study determines the range of erosion rates in a semi‐arid landscape over decadal time spans and defines the dominant processes controlling variability in erosion rates. The varying topography and climatic regimes of the Xiying Basin (Qilian Shan Mountains, China) enables us to examine the relative roles of sheet wash versus rainsplash and the influence of vegetation on soil erosion and deposition. Soil erosion rates since 1954 were determined using 137Cs along 21 transects at four sites with varying gradient, rainfall, and vegetation cover. The mean 137Cs derived soil erosion rate ~0.42 mm/a was consistent with the catchment level erosion rate derived from total sediment yield for a 44 year record. However, there is considerable variability in 137Cs erosion rates both between transects and along transects, perhaps reflecting variation not only in the effectiveness of individual processes but also in their relative roles. We compare the 137Cs‐derived erosion rates with 1‐D models for sediment flux that incorporate sheet wash and rainsplash processes, testing them over a previously untested 60 year timescale. The variability in 137Cs erosion rates along transects is best replicated by sheet wash dominated simulations, suggesting that this is the dominant erosion process in this semi‐arid landscape. The functional form of the sheetwash model can also explain our observations that 137Cs erosion rates decrease with upslope length (i.e. distance down slope) while its variability increases. However, sparsely vegetated sites, located in slightly drier locations, have higher erosion rates, and are not as accurately modeled as densely vegetated sites, suggesting that patchiness of vegetation introduces fine scale variability in erosion rates on these slopes. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

The usefulness of 137Cs as a tracer for soil erosion assessment: A critical reply to Parsons and Foster (2011)

Cited by 127 publications

References 96 publications

An attempt to estimate tolerable soil erosion rates by matching soil formation with denudation in Alpine grasslands

An attempt to estimate tolerable soil erosion rates by matching soil formation with denudation in Alpine grasslands

Soil erosion in an avalanche release site (Valle d'Aosta: Italy): towards a winter factor for RUSLE in the Alps

Quantifying sheet wash erosion rates in a mountainous semi‐arid basin using environmental radionuclides and a stream power model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About