Using cesium-137 to quantify sediment source contribution and uncertainty in a small watershed

Zhang, X.C.; Zhang, G.H.; Liu, B.L.; Liu, B.

doi:10.1016/j.catena.2016.01.021

Cited by 23 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the 1950s and 1960s, atmospheric nuclear tests distributed radioactive fallout of cesium-137 around the world, where it was deposited onto and adsorbed by soil (Nagle and Ritchie, 2003). Because of its widespread distribution, multiple studies have used cesium-137 for tracing sediment sources in agricultural lands (e.g., Nagle and Ritchie, 2003; Stout et al, 2014; Zhang et al, 2016). We provide a brief overview of how cesium-137 was used in the study by Malone (2017) so that the reader may understand how the sources of sediment were determined and the potential limitations of this method.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A physical and social analysis of how variations in no-till conservation practices lead to inaccurate sediment runoff estimations in agricultural watersheds

Malone

Polyakov

2019

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although agricultural influence on sediment runoff is well known, determining what sources of sediment contribute most to stream impairment has remained challenging in agricultural watersheds across the world. Therefore, methods to distinguish the sources of sediment in streams are warranted, particularly methods that incorporate information on anthropogenic practices that affect sediment runoff. In this study we examined how variations in conservation practices contributed to unidentified sources of sediment in an agricultural watershed, where 49% of sediment was sourced from agricultural fields that were assumed to have little erosional runoff. We found that variations in the way no-till agriculture is practiced significantly affected estimates of erosion in the watershed and also led agency managers to overlook sources of sediment in the watershed. In doing this research, we provide a methodological framework that may be useful to researchers who are attempting to identify sources of sediment erosion in watersheds impacted by variations in agricultural conservation practices.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A physical and social analysis of how variations in no-till conservation practices lead to inaccurate sediment runoff estimations in agricultural watersheds

Malone

Polyakov

2019

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sediment trap was modeled after Phillips et al (2000). The trap used in this study was made of an aluminum pipe (14‐cm dimeter and 60‐cm length) with plastic funnels on each end with a 3‐cm opening upstream and a 2‐cm opening downstream (Zhang et al, 2016). The traps were set on the stream bed to capture fresh sediment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the WEPP Rangeland Hillslope Model Using Cesium‐137 Estimated Spatial Erosion Data

Liu

Zhang

Storm

et al. 2017

Vadose Zone Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas WEPP rangeland model was evaluated using spatial erosion data for the first time. WEPP and 137Cs methods predicted similar low soil erosion rates. Spatial erosion patterns predicted by WEPP and 137Cs methods agreed well. WEPP predicted soil erosion patterns well along rangeland hillslopes. Lack of spatially distributed soil erosion data has greatly hampered the development and improvement of process‐based soil erosion models. The 137Cs method has been widely used to estimate soil erosion and redistribution but has seldom been used to evaluate process‐based erosion models. This study evaluated spatial erosion patterns predicted by the Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model using 137Cs‐estimated spatially distributed erosion data and quantified the effects of slope length on erosion along rangeland hillslopes. Eight rangeland hillslopes in midwestern Oklahoma were selected. The WEPP rangeland model was parameterized with observed soil and vegetation data. One downslope transect was sampled for each hillslope. At each sampling position, seven samples along a contour line were composited to represent the 137Cs inventory for that slope position to reduce random spatial variation. Both methods predicted low soil erosion rates, with the maximum erosion rates being near 2 Mg ha−1 yr−1. The erosion rates predicted by the two methods were significantly correlated at P = 0.01, and the medians were not significantly different; however, a paired t‐test showed that WEPP predicted significantly lower erosion rates than the 137Cs method. More importantly, the WEPP‐predicted soil erosion patterns in response to slope length agreed very well with those predicted by the 137Cs method. The loci of the maximum and minimum erosion rates were similar between the two methods for seven transects. The WEPP rangeland model predictions for the spatial patterns of relative soil erosion intensity along a hillslope compared favorably with 137Cs method estimates.

show abstract

“…1). The trap, which was made of an aluminum pipe (14 cm i.d., 60 cm long) with plastic funnels mounted on each end with a 3‐cm opening upstream and a 2‐cm opening downstream, was anchored to the creek bed (Zhang et al, 2016). Sediment samples were collected from storm runoff from 2011 to 2014.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying Sediment Provenance Using Multiple Composite Fingerprints in a Small Watershed in Oklahoma

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2016

J of Env Quality

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantitative information on sediment provenance is needed for improved calibration and validation of process-based soil erosion models. However, sediment source data are often limited due to difficulties in directly measuring source contributions at a watershed scale. Our objectives in this study were to estimate sediment source contributions in a 15-km watershed using analytical solutions to a three end-member mixing model using multiple composite fingerprints and to compare the results with those estimated with a single radionuclide, Cs. Surface soil samples were collected from 23 croplands, 19 rangelands, and 26 gully banks in the watershed, and 31 geochemical elements were analyzed for each sample. The elements served as tracers and were screened using statistical tests and range checks. The mean concentrations of all the nonconflict tracer pairs were used in the mixing model to calculate source contributions for the three sources. Results showed that although source contributions were strongly influenced by topography and land use, gully or subsoil erosion was found to be the main source of fine sediment in most subwatersheds. This study demonstrates that estimated source contributions may vary substantially among different composite fingerprints and that the use of multiple composite fingerprints greatly improves accuracy while reducing uncertainty. The source contributions estimated using multiple composite fingerprints agreed well with those estimated with Cs, with a correlation coefficient of 0.69 for gully contributions. This good agreement increases our confidence in using the multiple composite fingerprint method to identify sediment provenance in relatively small watersheds.

show abstract

Using cesium-137 to quantify sediment source contribution and uncertainty in a small watershed

Cited by 23 publications

References 48 publications

A physical and social analysis of how variations in no-till conservation practices lead to inaccurate sediment runoff estimations in agricultural watersheds

A physical and social analysis of how variations in no-till conservation practices lead to inaccurate sediment runoff estimations in agricultural watersheds

Evaluating the WEPP Rangeland Hillslope Model Using Cesium‐137 Estimated Spatial Erosion Data

Quantifying Sediment Provenance Using Multiple Composite Fingerprints in a Small Watershed in Oklahoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About