اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات285
تعداد نشریات سازمان83
تعداد شماره‌ها3,139
تعداد مقالات34,918
تعداد مشاهده مقاله50,383,694
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله90,277,068
پرویزی, یحیی, گرامی, زهرا. (1404). فرسایش قابل تحمل: مفاهیم و روش‌های برآورد متناسب با شرایط ایران. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 17(4), 448-476. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2024.365322.2055
یحیی پرویزی; زهرا گرامی. "فرسایش قابل تحمل: مفاهیم و روش‌های برآورد متناسب با شرایط ایران". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 17, 4, 1404, 448-476. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2024.365322.2055
پرویزی, یحیی, گرامی, زهرا. (1404). 'فرسایش قابل تحمل: مفاهیم و روش‌های برآورد متناسب با شرایط ایران', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 17(4), pp. 448-476. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2024.365322.2055
پرویزی, یحیی, گرامی, زهرا. فرسایش قابل تحمل: مفاهیم و روش‌های برآورد متناسب با شرایط ایران. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1404; 17(4): 448-476. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2024.365322.2055

فرسایش قابل تحمل: مفاهیم و روش‌های برآورد متناسب با شرایط ایران

مهندسی و مدیریت آبخیز
مقاله 3، دوره 17، شماره 4، دی 1404، صفحه 448-476    اصل مقاله (1.32 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/ijwmse.2024.365322.2055
نویسندگان
یحیی پرویزی1؛ زهرا گرامی* 2
1استاد، گروه حفاظت آب و خاک، پژوهشکده حفاظت خاک و آبخیزداری، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
2پژوهشگر، گروه مهندسی حفاظت آب و خاک، پژوهشکده حفاظت خاک و آبخیزداری، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
مقدمه
برآوردهای انجام شده در کشور، نشان از هدررفت سالانه حدود یک میلیارد مترمکعب خاک از عرصه منابع اراضی کشور است. اگرچه ارزش‌گذاری اقتصادی این حجم از اتلاف منابع خاک از این رهگذر کار دشواری است، ولی با توجه ‌به تعادل شکننده زیست‌بوم‌های موجود در منابع اراضی کشور، می‌توان پیش‌بینی کرد که این حجم اتلاف منابع چه زیان جبران‌ناپذیر و برگشت‌ناپذیری را به ظرفیت تولید و کارکرد این منابع وارد می‌کند. بخشی از این اتلاف خاک به‌وسیله فرایندهای خاک‌سازی جبران و جایگزین می‌شود و تا زمانی که میزان فرسایش از نرخ خاک‌سازی پیشی ‌نگرفته است، به‌ نوعی فرایندی طبیعی و اجتناب‌ناپذیر تلقی می‌شود. داشتن اطلاع از نرخ جایگزینی طبیعی برای رصد تغییرات کیفیت و کمیت این منبع طبیعی و دانستن روند زوال یا بهبودی آن ضروری است. به‌علاوه، فرسایش خاک در خارج از محل وقوع خود، خساراتی را از منظر اقتصادی، تنوع زیستی و نیز بر چشم‌انداز طبیعی وارد می‌کند. حد قابل تحمل این نوع خسارات نیز استاندارد علمی خاص خود را طلب می‌‌کند. از سوی دیگر، سالانه ارقام کلانی از منابع مالی کشور صرف اقدامات آبخیزداری می‌شود. این در حالی است که یک استاندارد منطقه‌ای کمی برای طراحی این اقدامات و همچنین یک شیوه‌نامه کاربردی، برای ارزیابی میزان اثرگذاری این اقدامات در دست نیست. این استاندارد و نیز کمیت نرخ باززایی و تجدید‌پذیری خاک، در جهان تحت عنوان فرسایش قابل تحمل خاک (T) شناخته شده است.
 
مواد و روش‌ها
در این نوشتار تلاش شده تا ضمن رصد توسعه مفاهیم فرسایش قابل تحمل در جهان، فنون و شیوه‌‌های توسعه یافته، با نگاهی به قابلیت تعمیم و کاربرد در شرایط ایران مورد بررسی قرار گیرد. در این پژوهش، مروری بر 109 مقاله علمی پژوهشی داخلی و خارجی صورت گرفته است و خلاصه‌ای از نحوه شکل‌گیری مفهوم فرسایش قابل تحمل در علوم خاک، عامل‌های مؤثر بر مقدار T و همچنین روش‌های محاسبه آن معرفی و ارزیابی می‌شود. علاوه‌بر این، خلاصه‌ای از تحقیقات صورت‌گرفته و نتایج آن‌‌ها در ارتباط با فرسایش قابل تحمل و آشنایی با روش‌های مختلف در این زمینه ارائه و پیشنهادها و نیازهای تحقیقاتی و راهکارهای بهینه برآورد فرسایش قابل‌ تحمل برای شرایط کشور معرفی شده است.
 
نتایج و بحث
مفهوم فرسایش قابل تحمل خاک که در برنامه‌های حفاظت خاک به‌کار می‌رود، برای حفظ قابلیت تولید نامحدود زمین‌های زراعی در درازمدت مناسب نیست. زیرا این مقادیر بر اساس فرضیات نادرستی درباره نرخ‌های تشکیل لایه سطحی خاک و فرایندهای هوازدگی معدنی تعیین شده‌اند. این مفهوم بر دو فرض بنا شده است: اول، دانشمندان خاک می‌توانند به‌طور قابل اعتماد و دقیق، بیشینه نرخ‌های فرسایش قابل تحمل را ارزیابی کنند. دوم، سیاست‌گذاران می‌توانند این ارزیابی‌ها را به‌طور عینی در برابر منافع یا نیازهای مختلف سنجش و متعادل کنند. در حالی که هر دو فرض باید به چالش کشیده شوند تا صحت آن‌‌ها مشخص شود. ممکن است ملاحظات سیاسی کوتاه‌ مدت ایجاب کند که سیاست‌های عمومی به تدریج اجازه دهند منابع خاک بدون وقفه تخریب شوند. تا حدی که دیگر برای کشاورزی قابل استفاده نباشند. اما حمایت مستمر از چنین سیاستی باید به وضوح به میزان و کیفیت اطلاعات موجود درباره نرخ‌های تشکیل خاک در شرایط کشاورزی توجه داشته باشد. مقادیر فرسایش قابل تحمل خاک بسیار مهم هستند و نباید بر اساس فرضیات نادرست و غیرعلمی تعیین شوند. نکته دیگر آن‌‌که، بررسی خسارات فرسایش خاک در خارج از محل وقوع فرسایش بر روی تأسیسات، زیرساخت‌ها و منابع زیستی نیز مستلزم رصد کردن شاخص‌‌هایی در خارج از محل وقوع فرسایش برای ارزیابی است. در مجموع با بررسی روش‌‌های تعیین فرسایش قابل تحمل ارائه شده می‎‌توان بیان کرد که روش‌های پیشنهادی Macedo می‌تواند روش مناسبی برای شرایط ایران باشد، با توجه به کمبود داده در ایران و از این نظر که ویژگی‎های مورد بررسی در این روش سهل‌‌الوصول هستند.
 
نتیجه‌گیری
با توجه به این‌‌که پذیرش مفهوم فرسایش قابل تحمل بر اساس شرایط حاصلخیزی (توان تولید) و سرعت تشکیل خاک کافی نیست و اثرات برون عرصه‌ای فرسایش خاک نیز باید در آن لحاظ شود، در نتیجه تحقیقات بیشتر و علمی‌تری در این زمینه ضروری است. از آنجایی که مفهوم تحمل از دست دادن خاک برای برنامه‌ریزی راهبردهای حفاظت خاک مفید است، برآورد کمی آن نیز ضروری است و بهتر است با در نظر گرفتن رگبارهای حدی به جای شرایط متوسط انجام شود. به همین دلیل، باید تحقیقاتی در زمینه توزیع آماری بیشینه تلفات سالانه خاک در مناطق مختلف جهان انجام شود.
 
کلیدواژه‌ها
تشکیل مجدد خاک؛ تلفات خاک؛ حاصلخیزی خاک؛ کیفیت خاک؛ مدل‌های فرسایش
عنوان مقاله [English]
Tolerable soil erosion: concepts and estimation methods suitable for Iran's conditions
نویسندگان [English]
Yahya Parvizi1؛ Zahra Gerami2
1Professor, Water and Soil Conservation Engineering Department, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute (SCWMRI), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran
2Researcher, Water and Soil Conservation Engineering Department, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute (SCWMRI), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Introduction
Estimates in Iran indicate an annual loss of about one billion cubic meters of soil from the country's land resources. Although quantifying the economic value of this volume of soil resource loss is difficult, the fragile ecological balance of ecosystems in the country's land resources suggests that this volume of resource loss will cause irreparable and irreversible damage to the production capacity and functioning of these resources. A part of this soil loss is compensated for and replaced by soil formation processes, and as long as the rate of erosion does not exceed the rate of soil formation, it is considered a natural and inevitable process. Knowing the rate of natural replacement is necessary for monitoring changes in the quality and quantity of this natural resource and for understanding the process of its deterioration or recovery. In addition, soil erosion beyond its place of occurrence causes economic, biodiversity, and natural landscape damages. The tolerable limit for this type of damage also requires its own scientific standard. On the other hand, substantial amounts of the country's financial resources are spent annually on watershed management measures. However, there is no quantitative regional standard for the design of these measures, nor a practical guideline for evaluating their effectiveness of these measures. This standard, along with the rate of soil regeneration and renewability, is known worldwide as tolerable soil erosion.
 
Materials and methods
In this article, the development of the concepts of tolerable erosion worldwide has been monitored, and the developed techniques and methods have been investigated for their potential generalization and application to the conditions of Iran. In this study, 109 domestic and international research articles were reviewed, and a summary is provided of the evolution of the concept of tolerable soil erosion, the factors influencing the T-value, and the methods for its calculation. Additionally, a summary of the research conducted, their results related to tolerable erosion, and various methodologies in this field are presented. Recommendations, research needs, and optimal strategies for estimating tolerable erosion in the country's conditions are also presented.
 
Results and discussion
The concept of tolerable soil erosion used in soil conservation programs is not suitable for maintaining the long-term indefinite productivity of agricultural lands over the long term. This is because these values are based on incorrect assumptions about the rates of topsoil formation and mineral weathering processes. The concept is built on two assumptions: first, that soil scientists can reliably and accurately assess the maximum tolerable erosion rates; and second, that policymakers can objectively weigh and balance these assessments against various interests or needs. Both assumptions should be challenged. Short-term political considerations might require that public policies allow soil resources to be degraded gradually and continuously to the point where they are no longer usable for agriculture. However, sustained support for such policies must clearly take into account the quantity and quality of available information on soil formation rates under agricultural conditions. Another point is that assessing soil erosion damages beyond the site of erosion to facilities, infrastructures, and biological resources also requires monitoring indicators off-site for evaluation. Tolerable soil erosion values are crucial and should not be determined based on incorrect and unscientific assumptions. Overall, after reviewing the proposed methods for determining tolerable erosion, it can be concluded that the method suggested by Macedo could be appropriate for Iran's conditions, given that the parameters examined in this method are easily accessible and, considering the data scarcity in Iran, this method is well-suited to these conditions.
 
Conclusion
Given that the concept of tolerable erosion based on soil fertility and soil formation rates is insufficient, and that the off-site effects of soil erosion should also be considered, more extensive and scientific research in this field is necessary. Since the concept of tolerable soil loss is useful for planning soil conservation strategies, its quantitative estimation is essential and should be performed taking into account extreme rainfall events rather than average conditions. Therefore, research on the statistical distribution of maximum annual soil losses in different regions of the world is necessary.
 
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Erosion models, Soil fertility, Soil loss, Soil quality, Soil formation
مراجع

Alexander, E.B., 1986. Rates of soil formation from bedrock or consolidated sediments. Phys. Geograph. 6(1), 26-42.

Alexander, E.B., 1988a. Rates of soil formation: implications for soil loss tolerance. Soil Sci. 145(1), 37-45.

Alexander, E.B., 1988b. Strategies for determining soil loss tolerance. Environ. Manage. 12(6), 791-796.

Anderson, S.P., 2005. Glaciers show direct linkage between erosion rate and chemical weathering fluxes. Geomorphol. 67, 147-157.

Arabkhedri, M., Shadfar, S., Sokouti Oskouei, R., 2016. Improving the estimates of water erosion and determining soil loss tolerance for Iran tolerance for Iran. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute. Code: 2-29-29-90025 (in Persian).

Arriaga, F.J., Lowery, B., 2003. Corn production on an eroded soil: effects of total rainfall and soil water storage. Soil Till. Res. 71, 87-93.

Bakker, M.M., Govers, G., Jones, R., Rounsevell, M., 2005. The effect of soil erosion on agricultural productivity. Geophysi. Res. Abstract. 7, 695.

Bazzoffi, B., 2009. Soil erosion tolerance and water runoff control: minimum environmental standards. Reg. Environ. Change. 9, 169-179.

Bennett, H.H., 1939. Soil conservation. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc, New York, 93-124.

Bennett, S.J., Rhoton, F.E., 2016. Field and laboratory methods for measuring soil erosion. USDA Agricultural Research Service.

Bertol, I., Almeida, J.A., 2000. Tolerância de perda de solo por erosão para os principais solos do Estado de Santa Catarina. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, 24(3), 657-668.

Bhattacharyya, P., V.K. Bhatt, D. Mandal, 2008. Soil loss tolerance limits for planning of soil conservation measures in Shivalik–Himalayan region of India. Catena 73, 117-124.

Bierman, P.R., Steig, E.J., 1996. Estimating rates of denudation using cosmogenic isotope abundances in sediment. Earth Surf. Proces. Landform 21, 125-139.

Biggelaar, C.D., Lal, R., Wiebe, K., Eswaran, H., Breneman, V., Reich, P., 2003. The global impact of soil erosion on productivity I: absolute and relative erosion-induced yield losses. Advanc. Agronom. 81, 148.

Blanco-Canqui, H., Lal, R., 2008. Principles of soil conservation and management. Springer Dordrecht.

Boardman, J., Poesen, J., 2006. Soil erosion in Europe: major processes, causes and consequences. Soil Erosion in Europe, 477-487.

Bouchard, M., Jolicoeur, S., 2000. Chemical weathering studies in relation to geomorphological research in southeastern Canada. Geomorphol. 32, 213-238.

Browning, G.M., Parish, G.L., Glass, J., 1947. A method for determining the use and limitation of rotation and conservation practices in the control of soil erosion in Iowa. J. Ameri. Soci. Agron. 39, 65-73. Cook, K., 1982. Soil loss: a question of values. J.Soil Water Conserv. 37 (2), 89-92.

Carollo, F.G., Di Stefano, C., Nicosia, A., Palmeri, V., Pampalone, V., Ferro, V., 2023. A new strategy to assure compliance with soil loss tolerance at a regional scale. Catena 223, 106945.

Cockburn, H.A.P., Summerfield, M.A., 2004. Geomorphological applications of cosmogenic isotope analysis. Prog. Physi. Geograph. 28, 1-42.

Darvill, C.M., 2013. Cosmogenic nuclide analysis. Geomorphological Techniques.

Dash, S., Sahoo, B., Raghuwanshi, N., 2021. How reliable are the evapotranspiration estimates by soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) and variable infiltration capacity (VIC) models for catchment-scale drought assessment and irrigation planning? J. Hydrol. 592, 125838.

Di Stefano, C.,  Nicosia, A., Pampalone, V., Ferro, V., 2023. Soil loss tolerance in the context of the European Green Deal. Heliyon 9, e12869.

Dietrich, W.E., Reiss, R., Hsu, M.-L., Montgomery, D.R., 1995. A process-based model for colluvial soil depth and shallow landsliding using digital elevation data. Hydrol. Process. 9, 383-400.

Duan X., Shi X., Li, Y., Rong, L., Fen, D., 2017. A new method to calculate soil loss tolerance for sustainable soil productivity in farmland. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 37, 2.

Duan, X., Xie, Y., Feng, Y.J., Yin, S.Q., 2009. Study on the method of soil productivity assessment in black soil region of northeast China. Agric. Sci. China 8, 472-481.

Duan, X., Xie, Y., Liu, B., Liu, G., Feng, Y., GAO, X., 2012. Soil loss tolerance in the black soil region of Northeast China. J. Geogr. Sci. 22(4), 737-751.

Earth, T.F.W., 1961. Abundance of the elements, areal averages, and geochemical cycles. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 23, 1-8.

Fenton, T.E., Kazemi, M., Lauterbach-Barrett, M.A., 2005. Erosional impact on organic matter content and productivity of selected Iowa soils. Soil Till. Res. 81, 163-171.

Fulajtár, E., Mabit, L., Renschler, C., Amelialeezhi, Y.I., 2019. Use of 137Cs for soil erosion assessment. Environ. Sci.

Gabet, E.J., Mudd, S.M., 2010. Bedrock erosion by root fracture and tree throw: A coupled biogeomorphic model to explore the humped soil production function and the persistence of hillslope soils. J. Geophysic. Res. (Earth Surface), 115, F04005

Galindo, I.C.L., Margolis, E., 1989. Tolerância de perdas por erosão para solos do estado de Pernambuco. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 13, 95-100.

Gantzer, C.J., Anderson, S.H., Thompson, A.L., Brown, J.R., 1990. Estimating soil erosion after 100 years of cropping on Sanborn field. J. Soil Water Conserv. 45(6), 641-644.

Ghafari, H., Gorji, M., Arabkhedri, M., Roshani, G.A., Heidaria, A., Akhavand, S., 2017b. Identification and prioritization of critical erosion areas based on onsite and offsite effect. Catena 156, 1-9.

Gosse, J.C., Phillips, F.M., 2001. Terrestrial in situ cosmogenic nuclides: theory and application. Quat. Sci. Review. 20, 1475-1560.

Granger, D.E., Kirchner, J.W., Finkel, R., 1996. Spatially averaged long-term erosion rates measured from in situ-produced cosmogenic nuclides in alluvial sediment. J. Geol. 104, 249-257.

Green, E.G., Dietrich, W.E., Banfield, J.F., 2006. Quantification of chemical weathering rates across an actively eroding hillslope. Earth Planet. Sci. Letter. 242, 155-169.

Guo, Y., Zheng, H., Wu, T., Wu, J., Robinson, B.E., 2020. A review of spatial targeting methods of payment for ecosystem services. Geogr. Sustainab. 1(2), 132-140.

Hancock, G.R., Wells, T., Martinez, C., Dever C., 2015. Soil erosion and tolerable soil loss: insights into erosion rates for a well-managed grassland catchment. Geoderma 237-238, 256-265.

Hartemink, A.E., Bockheim, J.G., 2013. Soil genesis and classification. Catena 104, 251-256.

Heimsath, A.M., Chappell, J., Dietrich, W.E., Nishiizumi, K., Finkel, R.C., 2002. Late quaternary erosion in southeastern Australia: a field example using cosmogenic nuclides. Quat. Int. 83-85, 169.

Heimsath, A.M., Chappell, J., Dietrich, W.E., Nishiizumi, K., Finkel, R.C., 2002. Late quaternary erosion in southeastern Australia: a field example using cosmogenic nuclides. Quat. Int. 83-85, 169-185.

Heimsath, A.M., Dietrich, W.E., Nishiizumi, K., Finkel, R.C., 1997. The soil production function and landscape equilibrium. Nature 388, 358-361.

Heimsath, A.M., Dietrich, W.E., Nishiizumi, K., Finkel, R.C., 1999. Cosmogenic nuclides, topography, and the spatial variation of soil depth. Geomorphol. 27, 151-172.

Heimsath, A.M., Dietrich,W.E., Nishiizumik, K., Finkel, R.C., 2001. Stochastic processes of soil production and transport: erosion rates, topographic variation and cosmogenic nuclide in the Oregon coast range. Earth Surface Process. Landf. 26, 531-552.

Heimsath, A.M., Fink, D., Hancock, G.R., 2009. The ‘humped’ soil produc- tion function: eroding Arnhem Land, Australia. Earth Surf Process Landf. 34, 1674-1684.

Huang, L.-M., Zhang, G.L., Yang, J.-L., 2013. Weathering and soil formation rates based on geo chemical mass balance in a small forested watersheds under acid precipitation in subtropical China. Catena 105, 11-20.

Hudson, N., 1986. Soil conservation. BT Batsford Ltd, London.

Humphreys, G.S., Wilkinson, M.T., 2007. The soil production function: a brief history and its rediscovery. Geoderma 139, 73-78.

Islam, K., Yokoi, R., Pastor, A.V., Motoshita, M., 2023. Balancing water use and nutrition for crop production in a highly dense population – Bangladesh. Sustain. Produc. Consump. 43, 389-399.

Johnson, L.C., 1987. Soil loss tolerance: fact or myth. J. Soil Water Conserv. 42(3), 155-160.

Johnson, L.C., 2005. Soil loss tolerance: fact or myth [2]. J. Soil Water Conserv. 60(3), 52.

Kapur, K.C., Lamberson, L.R., 2001. Reliability in engineering design.Wiley, New York, 10. 1997.

Kliment'ev, A.I., Tikhonov, V.E., 2001. Ecohydrological analysis of soil loss tolerance in agrolandscapes. Soil Erosion 34 (6), 673-682.

Kuznetsov, M.S., Abdulkhanova, D.R., 2013. Soil loss tolerance in the central chernozemic region of the european part of Russia. Eurasian Soil Sci. 46(7), 802-809.

Lakaria, B.L., Biswas, H., Mandal, D., 2008. Soil loss tolerance values for different physiographic region of Central India. Soil Use Manage. 24, 192-198.

Lal, D., 1991. Cosmic ray labeling of erosion surfaces: in situ nuclide production rates and erosion models. Earth Planet. Sci. Letters 104(2-4), 424-439.

Lal, R., 1985. Soil erosion and crop productivity relationship for a tropical soil. In: EI-Swaify, S.A., Moldenhauer, W.C., Lo, A. (Eds.), Soil Erosion and Conservation. Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, Iowa, 137-257.

Langbein, W.B., Dawdy, D.R., 1964. Occurrence of dissolved solids in surface waters in the United States. USDI Geol. Surv., Prof. Paper 501-D, 115-117.

Larson, W.E., 1981. Protecting the soil resource base. J. Soil Water Conserv. 36(1), 13-16.

Le Dortz, K., Meyer, B., Sébrier, M., Braucher, R., Bourles, D., Benedetti, L., Nazari, H., Foroutan, M., 2012. Interpreting scattered in-situ produced cosmogenic nuclide depth-profile data. Quat. Geochronol. 11, 98-115.

Le Dortz, K., Meyer, B., Sébrier, M., Nazari, H., Braucher, R., Fattahi, M., Benedetti, L., Foroutan, M., Siame, L., Bourlès, D., Talebian, M., 2009. Holocene right-slip rate determined by cosmogenic and OSL dating on the Anar fault, Central Iran. Geophysi. J. Int. 179(2), 700-710.

Lee, K., Song, Y., Koo, H., Kim, H., Kweon, H., Koo, N., 2023. Evaluation of soil loss tolerance and tree growth features based on planting ground methods in the Alpine center, degraded forestland in the republic of Korea. Forests 14, 200.

Li, L., Du, S., Wu, L., Liu, G., 2009. An overview of soil loss tolerance. Catena 78, 93-99.

Li, L., Zhou, Z.H., Liu, G.C., 2005. The present situation and conceive of soil loss tolerance study. Advanc. Earth Sci. 20(9), 65-72.

Liu, G.C., Li, L., Wu, L., Wang, G., Zhou, Z., Du, S., 2009. Determination of soil loss tolerance of an Entisol in Southwest China. Soil Sci. Soci. Ameri. J. 73(2), 412-417.

Lombardi Neto, F., Bertoni, J., 1975. Tolerância de perdas de terras para solos do Estado de São Paulo. Instituto Agronômico, Campinas.

Macedo, L.T.S., Santos, L.A., Farias Filho, M.S., Oliveira, F.P., Almeida, R.G., Santos, R.V., Campos, M.C.C., 2023. Tolerance of soil loss by erosion in the western mesoregion of Maranhão. Revista de Agricultura Neotropical, Cassilândia-MS, 11(1), e8292.

Mallarino, A.P., Stewart, B.M., Baker, J.L., Downing, J.D., Sawyer, J.E., 2002. Phosphorus indexing for cropland: Overview and basic concepts of the Iowa phosphorus index. J. Soil Water Conserv. 57, 440-447.

Mandal, D., Dadhwal, K.S., Khola, O.P.S., Dhyani, B.L., 2006. Adjusted T values for conservation planning in Northeast Himalayas of India. J. Soil Water Conserv. 61(6), 391-397.

Mandal, D., Sharda, V.N., Tripathi, K.P., 2010. Relative efficacy of two biophysical approaches to assess soil loss tolerance for Doon valley soils of India. J. Soil Water Conserv. 65(1), 42-49.

Martha, M.B., Gerard, G., Rounsevell, M.D., 2004. The crop productivity–erosion relationship: an analysis based on experimental work. Catena 57, 55-76.

McCormack, D.E., Young, K.K., Kimberlin, L.W., 1982. Current criteria for determining soil loss tolerance. In: Schmidt, B.l., allmaras, R.r., Mannering, J.V., Papendick, R.I. (Eds.), Agronomy Society of America Special Publication, 45. Agronomy Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.

Merchel, S., Benedetti, L., Bourlès, D.L., Braucher, R., Dewald, A., Faestermann, T., Finkel, R.C., Korschinek, G., Masarik, J., Poutivtsev, M., Rochette, P., 2010. A multi-radionuclide approach for in situ producedterrestrial cosmogenic nuclides: 10Be, 26Al, 36Cl and 41Ca from carbonate rocks, Nuclear Instruments Meth.Phys. Res. B, 268(7), 1179.

Merchel, S., Herpers, U., 1999. An update on radiochemical separation techniques for the determination of long-lived radionuclides via accelerator mass spectrometry. Radiochimica Acta. 84(4), 215.

Midmorea, D.J., Jansena, H.G., Dumsday, R.G., 1996. Soil erosion and environmental impact of vegetable production in the Cameron Highlands, Malaysia. Agricul. Ecosys. Environ. 60(1), 29-46.

Minasny, B., McBratney, A.B., 2001. A rudimentary mechanistic model for soil formation and landscape development II. A two-dimensional model incorporating chemical weathering. Geoderma 103, 161-179.

Mirtskhulava, T.E., 2001. On the maximum soil loss tolerance. Eurasian Soil Sci. 34(3), 321-325.

Morgan, R.P.C., 2005. Soil erosion and conservation.

Nearing, M., 2002. Toward a new definition of soil loss tolerance for the United States. International Soil Conservation Organization Conference, Conference abstracts.

Nishiizumi, K., Winterer, E.L., Kohl, C.P., Klein, J., Middleton, R., Lal, D., Arnold, J.R., 1989. Cosmic ray production rates of 10Be and 26Al in quartz from glacially polished rocks. J. Geophysi. Res.: Solid Earth, 94(B12), 17907-17915.

Ott, R., Gallen, S.F., Helman, D.: Erosion and weathering in carbonate regions reveal climatic and tectonic drivers of carbonate landscape evolution. Earth Surf. Dynam. 11, 247-257.

Peter, B.S., Donald, M.F., Thomas, W.G., Thomas, W.G., Katherine, M., Susan, L.B., 2004. Rate of weathering rind formation on Costa Rican basalt. Geochimica ET Cosmochimica Acta 68(7), 1453-1472.

Pierce, F.J., Larson, W.E., Dowdy, R.H., 1984. Soil loss tolerance: maintenance of longterm soil productivity. J. Soil Water Conserv. 39(2), 136-138.

Pimentel, D., Burgess, M., 2013. Soil erosion threatens food production. Agricul. 3, 443-463.

Pimentel, D., Harvey, C., Resosudarmo, P., Sinclair, K., Kurz, D., McNair, M., Crist, S., Shpritz, Fitton, L., Saffouri, L., Blair, R., 1995. Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation benefits. Science 267, 1117-1123.

Pimentel, D., Kounang, N., 1998. Ecology of soil erosion in ecosystems. Ecosys. 1, 416-426.

Qiao, X., Li, Z., Wamg, H., Zheng, S., Yang, S., 2024. Assessing current and future soil erosion under changing land use based on InVEST and FLUS models in the Yihe River Basin, North China. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 12(2), 298-312.

Rango, A., Shalaby, A.I., 1999. Applications of remote sensing to hydrology and water resources. Hydrol. Sci. J. 24(4), 485-498.

Ratke RF, Zuffo AM, Steiner F, Aguilera JG, de Godoy ML, Gava R, de Oliveira JT, Filho TAdS, Viana PRN, Ratke LPT, 2023. Can soil moisture and crop production be influenced by different cropping systems? AgriEngineering. 5(1), 112-126.

Roose, E., 1996. Land husbandry: components and strategy. FAO soils Bulletin N° 1503 70. FAO, Rome, 380 pages.

Ruan, F.S., 1997. The discussion on the reference index of soil erosion intensity class in granite slope. Res. Soil Water Conserv. 4(1), 113-119.

Salviano, A.A.C., Vieira, S.R., Sparovek, G., 1998. Erosion intensity and Crotalaria juncea yield on a southeast Brazilian Ultisol. Advanc. Geoecol. 31, 369-374.

Schertz, D.L., 1983. The base for soil loss tolerance. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38(1), 10-14.

Shabanian, E., Bellier, O., Siame, L., Abbassi, M.R., Bourlès, D., Braucher, R. and Farbod, Y., 2012. The binalud mountains: A key piece for the geodynamic puzzle of NE Iran. Tectonics 31, 6.

Shtompel, Y.A., Lisetskii, F.N., Sukhanovskii, Y.P., 1998. Soil loss tolerance of brown forest soils of Northwestern Caucasus under intensive agriculture. Eurasian Soil Sci. 31(2), 185-190.

Singh, P.D., Klamerus-Iwan, A., Hawryło, P., Sierka, E., Pietrzykowski, M., 2023. Possibility of spatial estimation of soil erosion using revised universal soil loss equation model and generalized additive model in post-hard coal mining spoil heap. Land Degrad. Dev. 1-13.

Skidmore, E.L., 1982. Soil loss tolerance. In: David, M.K. (Ed.), Determinants of Soil Loss Tolerance. ASA Spec. Publ., 45. ASA, Madison, pp. 87-93.

Small, E.E., Anderson, R.S., Hancock, G.S., 1999. Estimates of the rate of regolith production using 10Be and 26Al from an alpine hillslope. Geomorphol. 27(1-2), 131-150.

Smith, D.D., 1941. Interpretation of soil conservation data for field use. Agricul. Engin. 22, 173-175.

Smith, D.D., Whitt, D.M., 1948. Evaluating soil losses from field area. Agricul. Engin. 29, 394-396.

Sokouti Oskouei, R., 2011. An introduction to tolerable erosion and its measurement methods. Pelk Publication (in Persian).

Stamey, W.L., Smith, R.M., 1964. A conservation definition of erosion tolerance. Soil Sci. 97, 183-186.

Stocking, M.A., 2003. Tropical soil and food security: the next 50 years. Sci. 302(21), 1356-1359.

Sudhishri, S., Kumar, A., Singh, J.K., Dass, A., Nain, A.S., 2014. Erosion tolerance index under different land use units for sustainable resource conservation in a Himalayan watershed using remote sensing and geographic information system (GIS). Afr. J. Agri. Res. 9(41), 3098-3110.

Sverdrup, H., Warfvinge, P., 1993. Calculating field weathering rates using a mechanistic geochemical model PROFILE. Appl. Geochem. 8, 273-283.

Toy, T.J., Foster, G.R., Renard, K.G., 2001. Soil erosion: process, prediction, measurement and control. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, pp. 233-265.

Toy, T.J., Foster, G.R., Renard, K.G., 2002. Soil erosion: process, prediction, measurement, and control. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 352 pages.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012. Water quality assessment and total maximum daily loads information.

USDA-NRCS. 2014. General guidelines for assigning soil loss tolerance “T”. https://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=44089.wba

Velbel, M.A., Price, J.R., 2007. Solute geochemical mass-balances and mineral weathering rates in small watersheds: methodology, recent advances, and future directions. Appli. Geochemist. 22 (8), 1682-1700.

Verheijen, F.G.A., Jones, R.J.A., Rickson, R.J., Smith, C.J., 2009. Tolerable versus actual soil erosion rates in Europe. Earth Sci. Rev. 94, 23-38.

Von Blanckenburg, F., 2005. The control mechanisms of erosion and weathering at basin scale from cosmogenic nuclides in river sediment. Earth Planet. Sci. Letters 237, 462-479.

Wakatsuki, T., Rasyldin, A., 1992. Rates of weathering and soil formation. Geoderma 52(34), 251-263.

Wakatsuki, T., Rasyldin, A., Naganawa, T., 1993. Multiple regression method for esti- mating rates of weathering and soil formation in watersheds. Soil Sci. Plant Nutri. 39(1), 153-159.

Wang, L., Li, X., Qin, B., Zheng, H., Zheng, Z., 2024. Catena 239, 107919.

Wesley, L., 2009. Soil formation, composition, and basic concepts. Environmental Science, Geology.

Willenbring, J.K., von Blanckenburg, F., 2010. Meteoric cosmogenic Beryllium-10 adsorbed to river sediment and soil: Applications for Earth-surface dynamics. Earth-Sci. Review. 98(1), 105-122.

Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses-a Guide to Conservation Planning, USDA, Agriculture Handbook 537.

Wolf, M.K., Wiesmeier, M., Macholdt, J., 2023. Importance of soil fertility for climate-resilient cropping systems: The farmer's perspective. Soil Securit. 13, 100119.

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 600
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 64


counter
سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. طراحی و پیاده سازی از سیناوب