Browse > Article

Effect of Red Pepper Canopy Coverages on Soil Loss and Runoff from Sloped Land with Different Transplanting Dates  

Cho, H.R. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Ha, S.K. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Hyun, S.H. (Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering, Korea University)
Hur, S.O. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Han, K.H. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Hong, S.Y. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Jeon, S.H. (National Academy of Agricultural Science)
Kim, E.J. (Chungnam National University)
Lee, D.S. (Chungnam National University)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer / v.43, no.3, 2010 , pp. 260-267 More about this Journal
Abstract
As sloped farmland is subject to runoff and soil erosion and consequently require appropriate vegetative coverage to conserve soil and water, a field study was carried out to evaluate the impact of crop canopy coverage on soil loss and runoff from the experimental plot with three different textural types (clay loam, loam, and sandy loam). The runoff and soil loss were examined at lysimeters with 15% slope, 5 m in length, and 2 m in width for five months from May to September 2009 in Suwon ($37^{\circ}$ 16' 42.67" N, $126^{\circ}$ 59' 0.11" E). Red pepper (Capsicum annum L. cv. Daechon) seedlings were transplanted on three different dates, May 4 (RP1), 15 (RP2), and 25 (RP3) to check vegetation coverage. During the experimental period, the vegetation coverage and plant height were measured at 7 day-intervals and then the 'canopy cover subfactor' (an inverse of vegetation cover) was subsequently calculated. After each rainfall ceased, the amounts of soil loss and runoff were measured from each plot. Under rainfall events >100 mm, both soil loss and runoff ratio increased with increasing canopy cover subfactor ($R^2$=0.35, p<0.01, $R^2$=0.09, p<0.1), indicating that as vegetation cover increases, the amount of soil loss and runoff reduces. However, the soil loss and runoff were depending on the soil texture and rainfall intensity (i. e., $EI_{30}$). The red pepper canopy cover subfactor was more highly correlated with soil loss in clay loam ($R^2$=0.83, p<0.001) than in sandy loam ($R^2$=0.48, p<0.05) and loam ($R^2$=0.43, p<0.1) plots. However, the runoff ratio was effectively mitigated by the canopy coverage under the rainfall only with $EI_{30}$<1000 MJ mm $ha^{-1}hr^{-1}$ ($R^2$=0.34, p<0.05). Therefore, this result suggested that soil loss from the red pepper field could be reduced by adjusting seedling transplanting dates, but it was also affected by the various soil textures and $EI_{30}$.
Keywords
Soil erosion; Crop coverage; Soil texture; Rainfall; Red pepper;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Lee, H.H., S.K. Ha, S.O. Hur, K.H. Jung, C.W. Park, and K.H. Kim. 2007. Characlerislics of Soil Water Runoff and Canopy Cover Subfactor in Sloped Land with Different Soil Texture. J. Korean Soil Sci. Fert. 40:131- 135.
2 Morgan, R.P.C. 1988. Soil erosion and conservation. Longman Group Ltd. p 198.
3 Jackson, R.D. and A.R. Huete. 1991. Interpreting vegetation indices, Prev. Vet. Med. J 11:185-200.   DOI
4 Jung K.H., W.T. Kim, S.O. Hur, S.K. Ha, P.K. Jung, and Y.S. Jung. 2004. USLE/RUSLE factors for national scale soil loss estimation based on the digital detailed soil map. J. Korean Soil Sci. Fert. 37: 199-206.
5 Penuelas. J. and I. Filella. 1998. Visible and near-infrared reflectance techniques for diagnosing plant physiological status. Trends. in Plant. Sci. 3:151- 156.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 America Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1975. Sedimentation engineering. New York. p 745.
7 Bouyoucos, G.J. 1935. The clay ratio as a crilerion of susceptibility of soils to erosion. Agro. Soc. Am. J. 27:738-751.   DOI
8 Hur, S.O., K.H. Jung, S.K. Ha, H.K. Kwak, and J.G. Kim. 2005. Mathematical Description of Soil Loss by Runoff at Inclined Upland of Maize Cultivation. J. Korean Soil Sci. Fert. 38:66-71.
9 Vun, B.K., P.K. Jung, S.J. Oh, S.K. Kim, and I.S. Ryu. 1996. Effects of Compost Application on Soil Loss and Physico-Chemical Properties in Lysimeters. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 29:336-341 .
10 Park, MJ. and G.I. Son. 1998. Study on the sediment yield estimation due to land development. National institute of disaster prevention. Seoul, Korea.
11 Renard, K.G., G.R. Foster, G.A. Weesies, O.K. McCOOL, and D.C. Yoder. 1997. Predicting soil erosion water: A guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation(RUSLE). Agric. Handbook No. 703. U.S. Dept. Agric., Washington DC, USA.
12 Rouse, J. W., R.H. Haas, J.A. Schell, and D. W. Deering. 1974. Monitoring the vernal advancement and retrogradation (green wave effect) of natural vegetation (Type III Final Report), NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Mary land.
13 Tucker, C.J., C. L. Vanpraet, M.J. Shannan, and G. Van Ittersum. 1985. Satellite remote sensing of total herbaceous biomass production in the Senegalese Sahel: 1980-1984. Remote Sensing Environ. 17:233-249.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Ward, A.D. and W.J. Elliot 1995. Environmental Hydrology. CRC Press. Florida. USA. p. 178-179.
15 Jung, P.K., M.H. Ko, and K.T. Urn. 1985. Discussion of Cropping Management Factor for Estimating Soil Loss. J. Korean Soil Sci. Fert. 18:7-13.
16 Wiegand, C.L., A.J. Richardson, D. E. Escobar, and A.H. Gerbennann. 1991. Vegetation indices in crop assessments. Remote Sensing Environ. 35: 105-119.   DOI
17 Wischmeier, W.H. and D.D. Smith. 1978. Predicting rainfall crosion losses: A guide to conservation planning. Agric. Handbook No. 537. US Dept. Agric., Washington D.C., USA.
18 NAAS. 2000. Analytical methods of soil and plant. p 35-54.
19 Osborn, B. 1954. Effectiveness of cover in reducing soil splash by raindrop impact. J. Soil and Water Conser. 9:70-76.