A regional analysis of the effects of largest events on soil erosion

A large amount of geomorphic work is caused by a small number of extreme events that are mainly responsible for the time compression of geomorphic processes. The classic approach defines extreme events by their magnitude and they are quantified by certain deviation from a central value. Alternatively, we define extreme events as the largest events sorted by rank, whatever their absolute magnitude. In this case, events with equal rank from two different sites can be responsible for different magnitudes of geomorphic work, e.g., the amount of erosion. The new approach applied to soil erosion is that, whatever the magnitude of soil eroded, erosion is a time compressed process and the percentage contribution to total soil erosion by the few largest events (regardless of their magnitude) is negatively related to the total number of daily soil erosion events recorded. To verify and generalize this approach, we used the most extensive daily soil erosion dataset available (USLE database). In this paper, we present a geographical analysis of the effects of largest daily event on soil erosion by comparing 594 erosion plots located in agricultural fields under various climatic temperate conditions across the central-east of the USA. Plots differ in cover, soil types and length of records. Results indicate that: i) soil erosion in agricultural fields is a highly time compressed process and soil erosion mean values calculated over short time periods are biased, regardless of the magnitude of daily events recorded; ii) the relative effects of the n-largest daily events (whatever their magnitude) on total soil erosion depends on the length of records and, particularly, on the total number of events recorded; iii) the derived relationship of the required time length for records is generalized on a semi-continental scale; and iv) thus seems to be independent of climate conditions. This new approach can help us to define the minimum number of recorded soil events needed to avoid bias in soil erosion evaluation, in other words: the minimum period of field research on erosion should be evaluated not in years, but by the total number of daily erosive events. Thus, the number of daily erosive events is the key parameter for characterizing soil erosion processes at each measuring location.

[1]  I. Douglas,et al.  The role of extreme events in the impacts of selective tropical forestry on erosion during harvesting and recovery phases at Danum Valley, Sabah. , 1999, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[2]  L. Lane,et al.  Hydrology and Soil Erosion , 2003 .

[3]  Mark A. Nearing,et al.  Error Assessment in the Universal Soil Loss Equation , 1993 .

[4]  C. E. Thorn,et al.  An introduction to theoretical geomorphology , 1988 .

[5]  R. Batalla,et al.  Contribution of the largest events to suspended sediment transport across the USA , 2010 .

[6]  A. Vacca,et al.  Influence of time on measurement results of erosion plot studies , 2002 .

[7]  W. H. Wischmeier,et al.  Predicting rainfall erosion losses : a guide to conservation planning , 1978 .

[8]  M. Luis,et al.  A review of daily soil erosion in Western Mediterranean areas , 2007 .

[9]  J. Garbrecht,et al.  PRECIPITATION RETENTION AND SOIL EROSION UNDER VARYING CLIMATE, LAND USE, AND TILLAGE AND CROPPING SYSTEMS 1 , 2002 .

[10]  L. B. Owens,et al.  Large storm effects on total soil erosion , 1991 .

[11]  Mario Aristide Lenzi,et al.  Interannual variation of suspended sediment load and sediment yield in an alpine catchment , 2003 .

[12]  Mike Kirkby,et al.  The hurst effect and its implications for extrapolating process rates , 1987 .

[13]  Carolina Boix-Fayos,et al.  Measuring soil erosion by field plots: understanding the sources of variation , 2006 .

[14]  Denys Brunsden,et al.  Geomorphology and time , 1977 .

[15]  M. McClaran,et al.  Long‐term runoff and sediment yields from small semiarid watersheds in southern Arizona , 2010 .

[16]  J. Boardman,et al.  Frequency-magnitude distributionsfor soil erosion, runoff and rainfall - a comparative analysis , 1999 .

[17]  Leo Stroosnijder,et al.  Measurement of erosion: Is it possible? , 2005 .

[18]  R. Batalla,et al.  Effects of the largest daily events on total soil erosion by rainwater. An analysis of the USLE database , 2009 .

[19]  J. R. Simanton,et al.  Sediment yields from unit‐source semiarid watersheds at Walnut Gulch , 2007 .

[20]  M. Wolman,et al.  Magnitude and Frequency of Forces in Geomorphic Processes , 1960, The Journal of Geology.

[21]  G. Ice,et al.  Runoff and Sediment Losses from Annual and Unusual Storm Events from the Alto Experimental Watersheds, Texas: 23 Years After Silvicultural Treatments , 2003 .

[22]  W. E. Larson,et al.  The role of severe storms in soil erosion : A problem needing consideration , 1997 .