Comparison between the USLE, the USLE-M and replicate plots to model rainfall erosion on bare fallow areas

Peter Kinnell

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    It has been proposed that the best physical model of erosion from a plot is provided by a replicate plot (Nearing, 1998). Event data from paired bare fallow plots in the USLE database were used to examine the abilities of replicate plots, the USLE and the USLE-M to model event erosion on bare fallow plots. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency factor as applied to logarithmic transforms of the data was used to evaluate the overall performance of models at a number of locations. The value of this efficiency factor is influenced by both systematic and stochastic differences between the pairs. Systematic differences are the result of systematic differences in event runoff or event sediment concentration or both, and the degree of the impact of them varies as the regression coefficient for the relationship between the soil losses from the pairs varies from the value of 1.0. In most cases the replicate model performed better than the USLE-M that modelled event soil loss as a product of observed event runoff and event sediment concentration directly related to the EI30 index. Generally, failure of replicates to match runoff was compensated by the ability of the replicated to determine sediment concentrations better than the USLE-M.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)39-46
    Number of pages8
    JournalCatena
    Volume145
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Fingerprint

    Universal Soil Loss Equation
    erosion
    rainfall
    runoff
    fallow
    sediment
    transform
    soil
    comparison
    fallow area

    Cite this

    @article{6b3611469e3140e4a70ec1742f7cc211,
    title = "Comparison between the USLE, the USLE-M and replicate plots to model rainfall erosion on bare fallow areas",
    abstract = "It has been proposed that the best physical model of erosion from a plot is provided by a replicate plot (Nearing, 1998). Event data from paired bare fallow plots in the USLE database were used to examine the abilities of replicate plots, the USLE and the USLE-M to model event erosion on bare fallow plots. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency factor as applied to logarithmic transforms of the data was used to evaluate the overall performance of models at a number of locations. The value of this efficiency factor is influenced by both systematic and stochastic differences between the pairs. Systematic differences are the result of systematic differences in event runoff or event sediment concentration or both, and the degree of the impact of them varies as the regression coefficient for the relationship between the soil losses from the pairs varies from the value of 1.0. In most cases the replicate model performed better than the USLE-M that modelled event soil loss as a product of observed event runoff and event sediment concentration directly related to the EI30 index. Generally, failure of replicates to match runoff was compensated by the ability of the replicated to determine sediment concentrations better than the USLE-M.",
    author = "Peter Kinnell",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.1016/j.catena.2016.05.017",
    language = "English",
    volume = "145",
    pages = "39--46",
    journal = "Catena",
    issn = "0341-8162",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    Comparison between the USLE, the USLE-M and replicate plots to model rainfall erosion on bare fallow areas. / Kinnell, Peter.

    In: Catena, Vol. 145, 2016, p. 39-46.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Comparison between the USLE, the USLE-M and replicate plots to model rainfall erosion on bare fallow areas

    AU - Kinnell, Peter

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - It has been proposed that the best physical model of erosion from a plot is provided by a replicate plot (Nearing, 1998). Event data from paired bare fallow plots in the USLE database were used to examine the abilities of replicate plots, the USLE and the USLE-M to model event erosion on bare fallow plots. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency factor as applied to logarithmic transforms of the data was used to evaluate the overall performance of models at a number of locations. The value of this efficiency factor is influenced by both systematic and stochastic differences between the pairs. Systematic differences are the result of systematic differences in event runoff or event sediment concentration or both, and the degree of the impact of them varies as the regression coefficient for the relationship between the soil losses from the pairs varies from the value of 1.0. In most cases the replicate model performed better than the USLE-M that modelled event soil loss as a product of observed event runoff and event sediment concentration directly related to the EI30 index. Generally, failure of replicates to match runoff was compensated by the ability of the replicated to determine sediment concentrations better than the USLE-M.

    AB - It has been proposed that the best physical model of erosion from a plot is provided by a replicate plot (Nearing, 1998). Event data from paired bare fallow plots in the USLE database were used to examine the abilities of replicate plots, the USLE and the USLE-M to model event erosion on bare fallow plots. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency factor as applied to logarithmic transforms of the data was used to evaluate the overall performance of models at a number of locations. The value of this efficiency factor is influenced by both systematic and stochastic differences between the pairs. Systematic differences are the result of systematic differences in event runoff or event sediment concentration or both, and the degree of the impact of them varies as the regression coefficient for the relationship between the soil losses from the pairs varies from the value of 1.0. In most cases the replicate model performed better than the USLE-M that modelled event soil loss as a product of observed event runoff and event sediment concentration directly related to the EI30 index. Generally, failure of replicates to match runoff was compensated by the ability of the replicated to determine sediment concentrations better than the USLE-M.

    U2 - 10.1016/j.catena.2016.05.017

    DO - 10.1016/j.catena.2016.05.017

    M3 - Article

    VL - 145

    SP - 39

    EP - 46

    JO - Catena

    JF - Catena

    SN - 0341-8162

    ER -