利用有机碳指纹图谱评估苏格兰集水区的侵蚀风险模型

IF 2.8 3区 农林科学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Journal of Soils and Sediments Pub Date : 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1007/s11368-024-03850-6
C. Wiltshire, J. Meersmans, T. W. Waine, R. C. Grabowski, B. Thornton, S. Addy, M. Glendell
{"title":"利用有机碳指纹图谱评估苏格兰集水区的侵蚀风险模型","authors":"C. Wiltshire, J. Meersmans, T. W. Waine, R. C. Grabowski, B. Thornton, S. Addy, M. Glendell","doi":"10.1007/s11368-024-03850-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>Identification of hotspots of accelerated erosion of soil and organic carbon (OC) is critical to the targeting of soil conservation and sediment management measures. The erosion risk map (ERM) developed by Lilly and Baggaley (Soil erosion risk map of Scotland, 2018) for Scotland estimates erosion risk for the specific soil conditions in the region. However, the ERM provides no soil erosion rates. Erosion rates can be estimated by empirical models such as the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Yet, RUSLE was not developed specifically for the soil conditions in Scotland. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of these two erosion models to determine whether RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from high-risk areas identified in the ERM.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>The study was conducted in the catchment of Loch Davan, Aberdeenshire, Scotland. Organic carbon loss models were constructed to compare land use specific OC yields based on RUSLE and ERM using OC fingerprinting as a benchmark. The estimated soil erosion rates in this study were also compared with recently published estimates in Scotland (Rickson et al. in Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The region-specific ERM most closely approximated the relative land use OC yields in streambed sediment however, the results of RUSLE were very similar, suggesting that, in this catchment, RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from the high-risk areas identified by ERM. The RUSLE estimates of soil erosion for this catchment were comparable to the soil erosion rates per land use estimated by Rickson et al. (Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019) in Scottish soils except in the case of pasture/grassland likely due to the pastures in this catchment being grass ley where periods of surface vegetation cover/root network absence are likely to have generated higher rates of erosion.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Selection of suitable erosion risk models can be improved by the combined use of two sediment origin techniques—erosion risk modelling and OC sediment fingerprinting. These methods could, ultimately, support the development of targeted sediment management strategies to maintain healthy soils within the EU and beyond.</p>","PeriodicalId":17139,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Soils and Sediments","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating erosion risk models in a Scottish catchment using organic carbon fingerprinting\",\"authors\":\"C. Wiltshire, J. Meersmans, T. W. Waine, R. C. Grabowski, B. Thornton, S. Addy, M. Glendell\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11368-024-03850-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Purpose</h3><p>Identification of hotspots of accelerated erosion of soil and organic carbon (OC) is critical to the targeting of soil conservation and sediment management measures. The erosion risk map (ERM) developed by Lilly and Baggaley (Soil erosion risk map of Scotland, 2018) for Scotland estimates erosion risk for the specific soil conditions in the region. However, the ERM provides no soil erosion rates. Erosion rates can be estimated by empirical models such as the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Yet, RUSLE was not developed specifically for the soil conditions in Scotland. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of these two erosion models to determine whether RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from high-risk areas identified in the ERM.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>The study was conducted in the catchment of Loch Davan, Aberdeenshire, Scotland. Organic carbon loss models were constructed to compare land use specific OC yields based on RUSLE and ERM using OC fingerprinting as a benchmark. The estimated soil erosion rates in this study were also compared with recently published estimates in Scotland (Rickson et al. in Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>The region-specific ERM most closely approximated the relative land use OC yields in streambed sediment however, the results of RUSLE were very similar, suggesting that, in this catchment, RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from the high-risk areas identified by ERM. The RUSLE estimates of soil erosion for this catchment were comparable to the soil erosion rates per land use estimated by Rickson et al. (Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019) in Scottish soils except in the case of pasture/grassland likely due to the pastures in this catchment being grass ley where periods of surface vegetation cover/root network absence are likely to have generated higher rates of erosion.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Selection of suitable erosion risk models can be improved by the combined use of two sediment origin techniques—erosion risk modelling and OC sediment fingerprinting. These methods could, ultimately, support the development of targeted sediment management strategies to maintain healthy soils within the EU and beyond.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Soils and Sediments\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Soils and Sediments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-024-03850-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Soils and Sediments","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-024-03850-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的确定土壤和有机碳(OC)加速侵蚀的热点地区对于有针对性地采取土壤保持和沉积物管理措施至关重要。Lilly 和 Baggaley 为苏格兰开发的侵蚀风险地图(ERM)(苏格兰土壤侵蚀风险地图,2018 年)估计了该地区特定土壤条件下的侵蚀风险。但是,ERM 没有提供土壤侵蚀率。侵蚀率可通过经验模型估算,如修订的通用土壤流失方程 (RUSLE)。然而,RUSLE 并非专门针对苏格兰的土壤条件而开发。因此,我们对这两种侵蚀模型的性能进行了评估,以确定 RUSLE 侵蚀率估算值是否可用于量化 ERM 中确定的高风险地区的土壤侵蚀量。以有机碳指纹图谱为基准,构建了有机碳损失模型,以比较基于 RUSLE 和 ERM 的特定土地利用的有机碳产量。本研究中估算的土壤侵蚀率还与苏格兰最近公布的估算值进行了比较(Rickson 等人,《开发苏格兰高风险集水区土壤侵蚀成本估算方法》,2019 年)。结果特定区域 ERM 最接近河床沉积物中相对土地利用的有机碳产量,但 RUSLE 的结果非常相似,这表明在该集水区,RUSLE 侵蚀率估算值可用于量化 ERM 确定的高风险区域的土壤侵蚀量。该流域的 RUSLE 土壤侵蚀估算值与 Rickson 等人(《开发苏格兰高风险流域土壤侵蚀成本估算方法》,2019 年)在苏格兰土壤中估算的每种土地用途的土壤侵蚀率相当,但牧场/草地除外,这可能是由于该流域的牧场为草莱,在草莱地表植被覆盖/根网缺失期间可能会产生较高的土壤侵蚀率。结论综合使用两种沉积物来源技术--侵蚀风险建模和 OC 沉积物指纹识别,可以改进合适的侵蚀风险模型的选择。这些方法最终可支持制定有针对性的沉积物管理策略,以保持欧盟内外健康的土壤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating erosion risk models in a Scottish catchment using organic carbon fingerprinting

Purpose

Identification of hotspots of accelerated erosion of soil and organic carbon (OC) is critical to the targeting of soil conservation and sediment management measures. The erosion risk map (ERM) developed by Lilly and Baggaley (Soil erosion risk map of Scotland, 2018) for Scotland estimates erosion risk for the specific soil conditions in the region. However, the ERM provides no soil erosion rates. Erosion rates can be estimated by empirical models such as the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Yet, RUSLE was not developed specifically for the soil conditions in Scotland. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of these two erosion models to determine whether RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from high-risk areas identified in the ERM.

Methods

The study was conducted in the catchment of Loch Davan, Aberdeenshire, Scotland. Organic carbon loss models were constructed to compare land use specific OC yields based on RUSLE and ERM using OC fingerprinting as a benchmark. The estimated soil erosion rates in this study were also compared with recently published estimates in Scotland (Rickson et al. in Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019).

Results

The region-specific ERM most closely approximated the relative land use OC yields in streambed sediment however, the results of RUSLE were very similar, suggesting that, in this catchment, RUSLE erosion rate estimates could be used to quantify the amount of soil eroded from the high-risk areas identified by ERM. The RUSLE estimates of soil erosion for this catchment were comparable to the soil erosion rates per land use estimated by Rickson et al. (Developing a method to estimate the costs of soil erosion in high-risk Scottish catchments, 2019) in Scottish soils except in the case of pasture/grassland likely due to the pastures in this catchment being grass ley where periods of surface vegetation cover/root network absence are likely to have generated higher rates of erosion.

Conclusion

Selection of suitable erosion risk models can be improved by the combined use of two sediment origin techniques—erosion risk modelling and OC sediment fingerprinting. These methods could, ultimately, support the development of targeted sediment management strategies to maintain healthy soils within the EU and beyond.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Soils and Sediments
Journal of Soils and Sediments 环境科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
256
审稿时长
3.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Soils and Sediments (JSS) is devoted to soils and sediments; it deals with contaminated, intact and disturbed soils and sediments. JSS explores both the common aspects and the differences between these two environmental compartments. Inter-linkages at the catchment scale and with the Earth’s system (inter-compartment) are an important topic in JSS. The range of research coverage includes the effects of disturbances and contamination; research, strategies and technologies for prediction, prevention, and protection; identification and characterization; treatment, remediation and reuse; risk assessment and management; creation and implementation of quality standards; international regulation and legislation.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing pyromorphite formation through hydroxyapatite application in lead-contaminated, water-unsaturated soils: influence of low percolation velocity and high soil porosity Effect of peanut straw mulching on the soil nitrogen change and functional genes in the Camellia oleifera intercropping system Microbial metabolism strengths carbon sequestration and crop yield in upland red soil after long-term ex situ incorporation of straw “Once upon a time… a beach sand grain”: a bed-time story and scientific outreach activity for young children to increase sediment literacy Desalination of dredged sediments for beneficial use: a case of study for raising agricultural peatlands
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1