...
首页> 外文期刊>Ecological engineering: The Journal of Ecotechnology >Are erosion barriers and straw mulching effective for controlling soil erosion after a high severity wildfire in NW Spain?
【24h】

Are erosion barriers and straw mulching effective for controlling soil erosion after a high severity wildfire in NW Spain?

机译:西班牙西北部发生严重野火后,侵蚀屏障和秸秆覆盖对控制土壤侵蚀是否有效?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Erosion barriers have traditionally been used in Europe by land managers to reduce runoff and erosion after high severity wildfires. However, field research investigating the effectiveness of this treatment is scarce in Europe. Previous research in the US and Europe has demonstrated that application of straw mulch at a rate of 2 Mg ha(-1) effectively reduced post-fire sediment yields. For logistic and economic reasons, it would be useful to know whether a small reduction (25%) in the amount of straw mulch applied would significantly reduce the effectiveness of the treatment. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of a low rate of straw mulching (1.5 Mg ha(-1)) and of erosion barriers in reducing soil erosion during the first three years after a wildfire in Galicia (NW Spain). Twelve experimental plots (80 m(2)) were established along a hillslope burned at high severity. During the three years of study, the accumulated soil loss in the untreated burned soils was 77.9 Mg ha(-1). Mulching and erosion barriers both reduced soil loss (by respectively 38% and 26%). In all cases, soil erosion losses were high during the first two years after fire, which is an unusual response in the area. Maximum concentrated precipitation (rainfall >20 mm accumulated in two consecutive days) and the Wischmeier's rainfall erosivity factor were the variables most strongly associated with soil loss during the study period. Although erosion barriers and mulch cover both reduced soil loss, relative to the untreated control, the effectiveness of these measures was low after the high-severity wildfire in an area affected by high rainfall. The lack of effect of vegetation cover on soil loss highlights the need for emergency measures to be implemented immediately after fire to protect the soil from erosion. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:在欧洲,土地管理人员传统上使用侵蚀屏障来减少高强度野火后的径流和侵蚀。但是,在欧洲很少有野外研究这种疗法的有效性的研究。以前在美国和欧洲进行的研究表明,以2 Mg ha(-1)的比例施用秸秆覆盖物可有效降低火灾后泥沙的产生。出于后勤和经济方面的原因,了解秸秆覆盖物的少量减少(25%)是否会显着降低治疗效果将非常有用。在这项研究中,我们比较了加里西亚(NW西班牙)发生野火后的头三年,低秸秆覆盖率(1.5 Mg ha(-1))和侵蚀屏障对减少土壤侵蚀的有效性。沿着高度严重烧毁的山坡建立了十二个试验区(80 m(2))。在三年的研究过程中,未经处理的燃烧土壤中累积的土壤流失量为77.9 Mg ha(-1)。覆盖和侵蚀屏障都减少了土壤流失(分别减少了38%和26%)。在所有情况下,火灾后的头两年水土流失损失都很高,这是该地区的不寻常反应。在研究期间,最大集中降水量(连续两天累积降雨量> 20毫米)和维施迈尔的降雨侵蚀力因子是与土壤流失最密切相关的变量。尽管相对于未经处理的对照,侵蚀屏障和覆盖物都减少了土壤流失,但在受到高降雨影响的地区发生高强度野火后,这些措施的有效性较低。缺乏植被覆盖物对土壤流失的影响,突出表明有必要在火灾后立即采取紧急措施以保护土壤免受侵蚀。 (C)2015 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号