基于降雨特征的土壤脆弱性指数分级评价

IF 2.2 4区 农林科学 Q2 ECOLOGY Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Pub Date : 2023-03-28 DOI:10.2489/jswc.2023.00065
Q. Phung, A. Thompson, C. Baffaut, L. Witthaus, N. Aloysius, T. L. Veith, D. Bosch, G. McCarty, S. Lee
{"title":"基于降雨特征的土壤脆弱性指数分级评价","authors":"Q. Phung, A. Thompson, C. Baffaut, L. Witthaus, N. Aloysius, T. L. Veith, D. Bosch, G. McCarty, S. Lee","doi":"10.2489/jswc.2023.00065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) uses widely available inputs from the SSURGO database to classify cropland into four levels of vulnerability to sediment and nutrient losses: Low, Moderate, Moderately High, and High. Previous work has identified inconsistencies in SVI assessments across the United States, possibly because neither precipitation amount nor intensity were included in the development of SVI. This study aimed to determine if rainfall characteristics influence the SVI classification and which ones are most critical. The objectives were to (1) evaluate the impact of precipitation characteristics on land vulnerability to sediment loss, and (2) evaluate if rainfall characteristics alter the degree of agreement between the simulated sediment yield and SVI classification. The study focused on four Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) watersheds in Ohio, Missouri, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania for which sediment yields were simulated using previously calibrated models. The models were run with input precipitation data from these four watersheds. In addition, in order to examine a wider range of precipitation characteristics, model runs were made for the same four watersheds utilizing precipitation data from two CEAP areas in Georgia and Maryland. Sediment yields for all the cropland units in four of the watersheds were simulated using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool or the Annualized Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Model using 1985 to 2014 precipitation data from all six areas as inputs. Similarities and differences between precipitation characteristics such as precipitation amount, intensity, and rainfall erosivity R-factors were compared with the similarities and differences in simulated sediment loss. Results confirmed that SVI is a useful tool for relative ranking of cropland at risk of erosion within a region, as SVI and the model-based vulnerability classifications agreed for 55% to 100% of the watersheds’ subunits. However, model-based classification of field vulnerability could shift due to changes in precipitation characteristics. Thus, the range of soil loss for each vulnerability class can shift from one region to another. The results suggest that precipitation intensity or annual R-factor may help improve the correspondence between vulnerability and the range of expected soil loss.","PeriodicalId":50049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Soil Vulnerability Index classification with respect to rainfall characteristics\",\"authors\":\"Q. Phung, A. Thompson, C. Baffaut, L. Witthaus, N. Aloysius, T. L. Veith, D. Bosch, G. McCarty, S. Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.2489/jswc.2023.00065\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) uses widely available inputs from the SSURGO database to classify cropland into four levels of vulnerability to sediment and nutrient losses: Low, Moderate, Moderately High, and High. Previous work has identified inconsistencies in SVI assessments across the United States, possibly because neither precipitation amount nor intensity were included in the development of SVI. This study aimed to determine if rainfall characteristics influence the SVI classification and which ones are most critical. The objectives were to (1) evaluate the impact of precipitation characteristics on land vulnerability to sediment loss, and (2) evaluate if rainfall characteristics alter the degree of agreement between the simulated sediment yield and SVI classification. The study focused on four Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) watersheds in Ohio, Missouri, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania for which sediment yields were simulated using previously calibrated models. The models were run with input precipitation data from these four watersheds. In addition, in order to examine a wider range of precipitation characteristics, model runs were made for the same four watersheds utilizing precipitation data from two CEAP areas in Georgia and Maryland. Sediment yields for all the cropland units in four of the watersheds were simulated using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool or the Annualized Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Model using 1985 to 2014 precipitation data from all six areas as inputs. Similarities and differences between precipitation characteristics such as precipitation amount, intensity, and rainfall erosivity R-factors were compared with the similarities and differences in simulated sediment loss. Results confirmed that SVI is a useful tool for relative ranking of cropland at risk of erosion within a region, as SVI and the model-based vulnerability classifications agreed for 55% to 100% of the watersheds’ subunits. However, model-based classification of field vulnerability could shift due to changes in precipitation characteristics. Thus, the range of soil loss for each vulnerability class can shift from one region to another. The results suggest that precipitation intensity or annual R-factor may help improve the correspondence between vulnerability and the range of expected soil loss.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2023.00065\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Soil and Water Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2023.00065","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

土壤脆弱性指数(SVI)利用SSURGO数据库中广泛可用的输入数据,将农田对沉积物和养分流失的脆弱性分为四个级别:低、中、中高和高。以前的工作已经确定了美国各地SVI评估的不一致性,可能是因为降水量和强度都没有包括在SVI的发展中。本研究旨在确定降雨特征是否影响SVI的分类,以及哪些特征是最关键的。目的是(1)评估降水特征对土地输沙脆弱性的影响;(2)评估降雨特征是否改变了模拟输沙量与SVI分类之间的一致性程度。该研究集中在俄亥俄州、密苏里州、密西西比州和宾夕法尼亚州的四个保护效果评估项目(CEAP)流域,使用先前校准的模型模拟了沉积物产量。模型使用这四个流域的降水输入数据运行。此外,为了研究更广泛的降水特征,利用格鲁吉亚和马里兰州两个CEAP地区的降水数据,对相同的四个流域进行了模式运行。利用土壤和水评价工具或农业非点源污染模型,以1985 - 2014年6个地区的降水数据为输入,模拟了4个流域所有农田单元的产沙量。比较了降水量、强度、降雨侵蚀力r因子等降水特征与模拟输沙量的异同。结果证实,SVI是对区域内面临侵蚀风险的农田进行相对排名的有用工具,因为SVI和基于模型的脆弱性分类在流域亚单元的55%至100%上是一致的。然而,基于模式的野外脆弱性分类可能会因降水特征的变化而发生变化。因此,每一类脆弱性的土壤流失范围可以从一个地区转移到另一个地区。结果表明,降水强度或年r因子可能有助于改善脆弱性与预期土壤流失量之间的对应关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Assessing Soil Vulnerability Index classification with respect to rainfall characteristics
The Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) uses widely available inputs from the SSURGO database to classify cropland into four levels of vulnerability to sediment and nutrient losses: Low, Moderate, Moderately High, and High. Previous work has identified inconsistencies in SVI assessments across the United States, possibly because neither precipitation amount nor intensity were included in the development of SVI. This study aimed to determine if rainfall characteristics influence the SVI classification and which ones are most critical. The objectives were to (1) evaluate the impact of precipitation characteristics on land vulnerability to sediment loss, and (2) evaluate if rainfall characteristics alter the degree of agreement between the simulated sediment yield and SVI classification. The study focused on four Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) watersheds in Ohio, Missouri, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania for which sediment yields were simulated using previously calibrated models. The models were run with input precipitation data from these four watersheds. In addition, in order to examine a wider range of precipitation characteristics, model runs were made for the same four watersheds utilizing precipitation data from two CEAP areas in Georgia and Maryland. Sediment yields for all the cropland units in four of the watersheds were simulated using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool or the Annualized Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Model using 1985 to 2014 precipitation data from all six areas as inputs. Similarities and differences between precipitation characteristics such as precipitation amount, intensity, and rainfall erosivity R-factors were compared with the similarities and differences in simulated sediment loss. Results confirmed that SVI is a useful tool for relative ranking of cropland at risk of erosion within a region, as SVI and the model-based vulnerability classifications agreed for 55% to 100% of the watersheds’ subunits. However, model-based classification of field vulnerability could shift due to changes in precipitation characteristics. Thus, the range of soil loss for each vulnerability class can shift from one region to another. The results suggest that precipitation intensity or annual R-factor may help improve the correspondence between vulnerability and the range of expected soil loss.
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Soil and Water Conservation (JSWC) is a multidisciplinary journal of natural resource conservation research, practice, policy, and perspectives. The journal has two sections: the A Section containing various departments and features, and the Research Section containing peer-reviewed research papers.
期刊最新文献
Defining boundaries and conceptual frameworks for ecologically focused agricultural systems Artificial intelligence for assessing organic matter content and related soil properties Decompaction and organic amendments provide short-term improvements in soil health during urban, residential development Effect of biochar treatment on soil pH and cucumber fruit: A demonstration of the importance of biochar amendment on the tropical soils of Nigeria Erratum for Martinez et al., Leveraging ecological monitoring programs to collect soil and geomorphology data across the western United States
×
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