Frank G. A. Verheijen, Martinho A. S. Martins, Sergio A. Prats, Jan J. Keizer
{"title":"A new approach to pedestal differentiation for soil loss estimation—a case study from a burnt area in north-central Portugal","authors":"Frank G. A. Verheijen, Martinho A. S. Martins, Sergio A. Prats, Jan J. Keizer","doi":"10.1007/s11676-023-01694-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Soil pedestals have long been used as qualitative indicators of soil splash erosion. In rangelands, plant-capped pedestals, generally grass tussocks, have also been used to quantitatively estimate soil loss since the first half of the twentieth century. In agricultural lands, forests, and badlands, stone-capped pedestals have been used as qualitative and semi-quantitative indicators of active, ‘extreme’ erosion. Little work has been reported on using capstone pedestal data for quantifying soil loss. We postulate that three distinct capstone pedestal types may be present in any given location and that a detailed analysis of a pedestal height histogram may be used to recognize their populations. This analysis can subsequently inform if soil loss can be reliably estimated and if so, which of the existing methods using pedestal height data will provide more accurate results. The three proposed capstone pedestal types are: (1) neo-pedestals formed underneath surface stones exposed by (partial) removal of the soil surface cover; (2) endo-pedestals formed underneath stones that were buried in the soil but have been exposed by erosion; and (3) phoenix-pedestals formed underneath stones from collapsed pedestals. In the pedestal height histogram of any given location, a skew to smaller heights may indicate the existence of endo- and/or phoenix-pedestals, which may be revealed as a bi-(or tri) modal distribution when using a smaller bin size. This concept was applied to a case study where soil loss had been monitored for control plots and mulched plots during a 5-year period following wildfire in a eucalypt plantation. We measured pedestal heights and used methods to quantitatively assess soil loss from soil pedestal data in the available literature. Soil pedestal data at the end of the 5-year period under or overestimated soil loss in the control treatment, with results ranging from 60 to 115% of measured soil loss, depending on the method. It is postulated that phoenix- and endo-pedestals may be a driving factor behind the observed discrepancies. We discuss how future research may provide more insight into dominant processes, and how frequency distributions may be used to select the best methods for estimating soil loss from pedestals.</p>","PeriodicalId":15830,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry Research","volume":"256 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forestry Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-023-01694-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Soil pedestals have long been used as qualitative indicators of soil splash erosion. In rangelands, plant-capped pedestals, generally grass tussocks, have also been used to quantitatively estimate soil loss since the first half of the twentieth century. In agricultural lands, forests, and badlands, stone-capped pedestals have been used as qualitative and semi-quantitative indicators of active, ‘extreme’ erosion. Little work has been reported on using capstone pedestal data for quantifying soil loss. We postulate that three distinct capstone pedestal types may be present in any given location and that a detailed analysis of a pedestal height histogram may be used to recognize their populations. This analysis can subsequently inform if soil loss can be reliably estimated and if so, which of the existing methods using pedestal height data will provide more accurate results. The three proposed capstone pedestal types are: (1) neo-pedestals formed underneath surface stones exposed by (partial) removal of the soil surface cover; (2) endo-pedestals formed underneath stones that were buried in the soil but have been exposed by erosion; and (3) phoenix-pedestals formed underneath stones from collapsed pedestals. In the pedestal height histogram of any given location, a skew to smaller heights may indicate the existence of endo- and/or phoenix-pedestals, which may be revealed as a bi-(or tri) modal distribution when using a smaller bin size. This concept was applied to a case study where soil loss had been monitored for control plots and mulched plots during a 5-year period following wildfire in a eucalypt plantation. We measured pedestal heights and used methods to quantitatively assess soil loss from soil pedestal data in the available literature. Soil pedestal data at the end of the 5-year period under or overestimated soil loss in the control treatment, with results ranging from 60 to 115% of measured soil loss, depending on the method. It is postulated that phoenix- and endo-pedestals may be a driving factor behind the observed discrepancies. We discuss how future research may provide more insight into dominant processes, and how frequency distributions may be used to select the best methods for estimating soil loss from pedestals.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Forestry Research (JFR), founded in 1990, is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal in English. JFR has rapidly emerged as an international journal published by Northeast Forestry University and Ecological Society of China in collaboration with Springer Verlag. The journal publishes scientific articles related to forestry for a broad range of international scientists, forest managers and practitioners.The scope of the journal covers the following five thematic categories and 20 subjects:
Basic Science of Forestry,
Forest biometrics,
Forest soils,
Forest hydrology,
Tree physiology,
Forest biomass, carbon, and bioenergy,
Forest biotechnology and molecular biology,
Forest Ecology,
Forest ecology,
Forest ecological services,
Restoration ecology,
Forest adaptation to climate change,
Wildlife ecology and management,
Silviculture and Forest Management,
Forest genetics and tree breeding,
Silviculture,
Forest RS, GIS, and modeling,
Forest management,
Forest Protection,
Forest entomology and pathology,
Forest fire,
Forest resources conservation,
Forest health monitoring and assessment,
Wood Science and Technology,
Wood Science and Technology.