Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2020, Vol. 12 Issue (4): 676-689    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-020-0094-6     CSTR: 32276.14.s40333-020-0094-6
Research article     
Applying seepage modeling to improve sediment yield predictions in contour ridge systems
Qianjin LIU1, Liang MA2, Hanyu ZHANG1,*()
1 Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Water and Soil Conservation & Environmental Protection, College of Resources and Environment, Linyi University, Linyi 276000, China
2 Water Resources Research Institute of Shandong Province, Ji'nan 250013, China
Download: HTML     PDF(994KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Contour ridge systems may lead to seepage that could result in serious soil erosion. Modeling soil erosion under seepage conditions in a contour ridge system has been overlooked in most current soil erosion models. To address the importance of seepage in soil erosion modeling, a total of 23 treatments with 3 factors, row grade, field slope and ridge height, in 5 gradients were arranged in an orthogonal rotatable central composite design. The second-order polynomial regression model for predicting the sediment yield was improved by using the measured or predicted seepage discharge as an input factor, which increased the coefficient of determination (R2) from 0.743 to 0.915 or 0.893. The improved regression models combined with the measured seepage discharge had a lower P (0.007) compared to those combined with the predicted seepage discharge (P=0.016). With the measured seepage discharge incorporated, some significant (P<0.050) effects and interactions of influential factors on sediment yield were detected, including the row grade and its interactions with the field slope, ridge height and seepage discharge, the quadratic terms of the field slope and its interactions with the row grade and seepage discharge. In the regression model with the predicted seepage discharge as an influencing factor, only the interaction between row grade and seepage discharge significantly affected the sediment yield. The regression model incorporated with predicted seepage discharge may be expressed simply and can be used effectively when measured seepage discharge data are not available.

Key words： soil erosion model      contour ridge      seepage      geometry factors      rainfall simulation     
Received: 08 March 2019      Published: 10 July 2020
Corresponding Authors:
About author: *Corresponding author: ZHANG Hanyu (E-mail: zhanghanyu@lyu.edu.cn)
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Qianjin LIU
Liang MA
Hanyu ZHANG
Cite this article:

LIU Qianjin, MA Liang, ZHANG Hanyu. Applying seepage modeling to improve sediment yield predictions in contour ridge systems. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(4): 676-689.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-020-0094-6     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2020/V12/I4/676

Fig. 1 Contour failure on sloped land in North China
Code gradient Factor
Row grade (°) Field slope (°) Ridge height (cm)
1.68 10.0 15.0 16.0
1.00 8.4 13.0 14.4
0.00 6.0 10.0 12.0
-1.00 3.6 7.0 9.6
-1.68 2.0 5.0 8.0
Table 1 Code gradient and values of influential factors
Treatment number Factor values Experiment results
Row grade (°) Field slope (°) Ridge height (cm) Seepage discharge (L/min) Sediment yield (kg)
1 8.4 13.0 14.4 0.98 1.19
2 8.4 13.0 9.6 0.69 0.61
3 8.4 7.0 14.4 0.87 0.33
4 8.4 7.0 9.6 0.50 0.40
5 3.6 13.0 14.4 0.99 2.09
6 3.6 13.0 9.6 0.70 0.14
7 3.6 7.0 14.4 0.97 0.14
8 3.6 7.0 9.6 0.52 0.09
9 10.0 10.0 12.0 0.80 3.83
10 2.0 10.0 12.0 1.21 0.17
11 6.0 15.0 12.0 0.54 2.09
12 6.0 5.0 12.0 0.74 0.17
13 6.0 10.0 16.0 1.26 0.77
14 6.0 10.0 8.0 0.43 2.03
15 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.51 2.20
16 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.63 3.48
17 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.63 2.77
18 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.35 3.89
19 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.83 3.19
20 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.59 3.17
21 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.62 2.08
22 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.80 2.84
23 6.0 10.0 12.0 0.43 3.08
Table 2 Orthogonal rotatable central composite design and measured values of seepage discharge and sediment yield
Fig. 2 Rainfall simulation plot. a, screws for adjusting row grade; b, screws for adjusting field slope; c, pipes fixed through the plot bottom for keeping the water level approximately 1 cm lower than the lowest point of the two conjunction ridges; d, the lowest point of the two conjunction ridges; e, pipes banded with gauze for providing a constant discharge; f, flexible pipes connected to pipes c for collecting excess water from furrow; and g, outlet for collecting seepage and runoff from upper side-slope of the ridge.
Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Bulk density of plow layer (g/cm3) Bulk density of plow sole (g/cm3)
22.2 71.2 28.1 0.7 0.2 1.6
Table 3 Textural characteristics of the soil used to pack the experimental plot*
Fig. 3 Curve (a) and plot (b) of the measured and predicted seepage discharge
Factor Seepage discharge Sediment yield
RC SRC t-Test P RC SRC t-Test P
RG -0.299 -2.31 1.92 0.075 1.80 2.52 2.03 0.062
FS 0.043 0.41 0.33 0.748 1.55 2.71 2.08 0.057
RH -0.169 -1.31 0.92 0.375 2.80 3.91 2.65 0.019
RG×RG 0.023 2.18 3.46 0.004 -0.09 -1.52 2.35 0.034
FS×FS 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.998 -0.09 -3.24 3.78 0.002
RH×RH 0.013 2.39 1.93 0.074 -0.13 -4.26 3.34 0.005
RG×FS 0.002 0.19 0.26 0.799 -0.02 -0.29 0.38 0.707
RG×RH -0.002 -0.18 0.19 0.853 -0.03 -0.61 0.61 0.549
FS×RH -0.004 -0.59 0.57 0.581 0.04 1.13 1.05 0.311
RMSE 0.12 0.67
Table 4 Results of regression coefficient significance tests for seepage discharge and sediment yield
Factor Regression combined with measured seepage Regression combined with predicted seepage
RC SRC t-Test P RC SRC t-Test P
RG 2.69 3.76 2.66 0.026 -286.24 -400.22 0.00 1.000
FS 1.25 2.19 1.72 0.119 42.20 73.76 0.00 1.000
RH -7.45 -10.41 1.56 0.153 -164.76 -230.37 0.00 1.000
SR 78.82 14.26 2.19 0.056 -943.41 -148.65 0.00 1.000
RG×RG -0.03 -0.58 0.75 0.474 22.14 379.86 0.00 1.000
FS×FS -0.15 -5.29 5.80 0.000 -0.08 -2.88 0.00 1.000
RH×RH 0.44 14.89 1.67 0.129 12.71 429.03 0.00 1.000
SR×SR 15.62 4.55 2.20 0.056 38.31 9.87 1.97 0.080
RG×FS -0.12 -2.22 2.77 0.022 1.78 31.59 0.00 1.000
RG×RH -0.35 -6.72 3.12 0.012 -2.13 -40.34 0.00 1.000
RG×SR 4.26 6.05 3.05 0.014 4.62 6.22 3.37 0.008
FS×RH 0.42 10.75 3.19 0.011 -3.86 -98.06 0.00 1.000
FS×SR -3.61 -8.19 3.37 0.008 -1.12 -2.29 1.00 0.346
RH×SR -7.26 -22.60 2.23 0.053 -8.03 -23.44 0.97 0.359
RMSE 0.38 0.43
Table 5 Sediment yield regression coefficient significance tests incorporated with seepage
Fig. 4 Curve and plot of the measured and predicted sediment yield (a1 and a2 for the regression model; b1 and b2 for the regression model combined with measured seepage discharge; c1 and c2 for the regression model combined with predicted seepage discharge)
Fig. 5 Significant interactions on sediment yield
[1]   Brunner A C, Park S J, Ruecker G R, et al. 2008. Erosion modelling approach to simulate the effect of land management options on soil loss by considering catenary soil development and farmers perception. Land Degradation & Development, 19(6): 623-635.
[2]   Changere A, Lal R. 1995. Soil degradation by erosion of a typic hapludalf in central Ohio and its rehabilitation. Land Degradation & Development, 6(4): 223-238.
[3]   Chu-Agor M L, Fox G A, Cancienne R M, et al. 2008. Seepage caused tension failures and erosion undercutting of hillslopes. Journal of Hydrology, 359(3-4): 247-259.
[4]   Cui M, Cai Q G, Zhang Y G, et al. 2007. Development of ephemeral gully during rainy season in the slope land in rolling-hill black-soil region of Northeast China. Transactions of the CSAE, 23(8): 59-65. (in Chinese)
[5]   Ding X Q. 1986. The Applied Regression Design of the Field Experiment. Changchun: Ji Lin Agriculture Science Press, 89-95. (in Chinese).
[6]   Domínguez J R, González T, Palo P, et al. 2010. Anodic oxidation of ketoprofen on boron-doped diamond (BDD) electrodes. Role of operative parameters. Chemical Engineering Journal, 162(3): 1012-1018.
[7]   Fang N F, Shi Z H, Li L, et al. 2012. The effects of rainfall regimes and land use changes on runoff and soil loss in a small mountainous watershed. Catena, 99: 1-8.
[8]   Flanagan D C, Livingston S J. 1995. Water erosion prediction project (WEPP) user summary. In: USDA-ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory. NSERL report No. 11. West Lafayette, IN, USA.
[9]   Fohrer N, Berkenhagen J, Hecker J M, et al. 1999. Changing soil and surface conditions during rainfall: single rainstorm/subsequent rainstorms. Catena, 37(3-4): 355-375.
[10]   Fox G A, Wilson G V, Simon A, et al. 2007. Measuring streambank erosion due to ground water seepage: correlation to bank pore water pressure, precipitation and stream stage. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 32(10): 1558-1573.
[11]   Fox G A, Wilson, G V. 2010. The role of subsurface flow in hillslope and stream bank erosion. A review. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 74(3): 717-733.
[12]   Gebreegziabher T, Nyssen J, Govaerts B, et al. 2009. Contour furrows for in situ soil and water conservation, Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Soil & Tillage Research, 103(2): 257-264.
[13]   Griffith D R, Parsons S D, Mannering J V. 1990. Mechanics and adaptability of ridge-planting for corn and soya bean. Soil & Tillage Research, 18(2-3): 113-126.
[14]   Grum B, Assefa D, Hessel R, et al. 2017. Effect of in situ water harvesting techniques on soil and nutrient losses in semi-arid northern Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, 28(3): 1016-1027.
[15]   Hadjmohammadi M, Sharifi V. 2012. Simultaneous optimization of the resolution and analysis time of flavonoids in reverse phase liquid chromatography using Derringer's desirability function. Journal of Chromatography B, 880: 34-41.
[16]   Hessel R, Messing I, Liding C, et al. 2003. Soil erosion simulations of land use scenarios for a small Loess Plateau catchment. Catena, 54(1-2): 289-302.
[17]   Huang C H, Laften J M. 1996. Seepage and soil erosion for a clay loam soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 60(2): 408-416.
[18]   Huang C H. 1998. Sediment regimes under different slope and surface hydrologic conditions. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 62(2): 423-430.
[19]   Knapen A, Poesen J, Govers G, et al. 2007. Resistance of soils to concentrated flow erosion. A review. Earth-Science Reviews, 80(1-2): 75-109.
[20]   Lal R. 1990. Ridge-tillage. Soil &Tillage Research, 18(2-3): 107-111.
[21]   Legates D R, McCabe G J. 1999. Evaluating the use of "goodness-of-fit" measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resources Research, 35(1): 233-241.
[22]   Liu H, Lei T W, Zhao J, et al. 2011. Effects of rainfall intensity and antecedent soil water content on soil infiltrability under rainfall conditions using the run off-on-out method. Journal of Hydrology, 396(1-2): 24-32.
[23]   Liu L, Liu Q J, Yu X X. 2016. The influences of row grade, ridge height and field slope on the seepage hydraulics of row sideslopes in contour ridge systems. Catena, 147: 686-694.
[24]   Liu Q J, Shi Z H, Yu X X, et al. 2014a. Influence of microtopography, ridge geometry and rainfall intensity on soil erosion induced by contouring failure. Soil & Tillage Research, 136: 1-8.
[25]   Liu Q J, Zhang H Y, An J, et al. 2014b. Soil erosion processes on row sideslopes within contour ridging systems. Catena, 115: 11-18.
[26]   Liu Q J, An J, Wang L Z, et al. 2015. Influence of ridge height, row grade, and field slope on soil erosion in contour ridging systems under seepage conditions. Soil and Tillage Research, 147: 50-59.
[27]   Liu Q J, An J, Zhang G H, et al. 2016. The effect of row grade and length on soil erosion from concentrated flow in furrows of contouring ridge systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 160: 92-100.
[28]   Nachshon U. 2016. Seepage weathering impacts on erosivity of arid stream banks: A new conceptual model. Geomorphology, 261: 212-221.
[29]   Ni L S, Fang N F, Shi Z H, et al. 2017. Validating a basic assumption of using cesium-137 method to assess soil loss in a small agricultural catchment. Land Degradation & Development, 28(5): 1772-1778.
[30]   Nishigaki T, Sugihara S, Kilasara M, et al. 2017. Surface runoff generation and soil loss under different soil and rainfall properties in the Uluguru Mountains, Tanzania. Land Degradation & Development, 28(1): 283-293.
[31]   Nouwakpo S K, Huang C H, Bowling L, et al. 2010. Impact of vertical hydraulic gradient on rill erodibility and critical shear stress. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 74(6): 1914-1921.
[32]   Nouwakpo S K, Huang C H. 2012. The role of subsurface hydrology in soil erosion and channel network development on a laboratory hillslope. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 76(4): 1197-1211.
[33]   Quinton J N, Catt J A. 2004. The effects of minimal tillage and contour cultivation on surface runoff, soil loss and crop yield in the long-term Woburn Erosion Reference Experiment on sandy soil at Woburn, England. Soil Use and Management, 20(3): 343-349.
[34]   Razafison U, Cordier S, Delestre O, et al. 2012. A shallow water model for the numerical simulation of overland flow on surfaces with ridges and furrows. European Journal of Mechanics B/Fluids, 31: 44-52.
[35]   Regmi R K, Jung K, Nakagawa H, et al. 2017. Numerical analysis of multiple slope failure due to rainfall: Based on laboratory experiments. Catena, 150: 173-191.
[36]   Sato M, Kuwano R. 2015. Suffusion and clogging by one-dimensional seepage tests on cohesive soil. Soils and Foundations, 55(6): 1427-1440.
[37]   Shi Z H, Cai C F, Ding S W, et al. 2004. Soil conservation planning at the small watershed level using RUSLE with GIS: a case study in the Three Gorge Area of China. Catena, 55(1): 33-48.
[38]   Shi Z H, Chen L D, Fang N F, et al. 2009. Research on the SCS-CN initial abstraction ratio using rainfall-runoff event analysis in the Three Gorges Area, China. Catena, 77(1): 1-7.
[39]   Shi Z H, Ai L, Li X Y, et al. 2013. Partial least-squares regression for linking land-cover patterns to soil erosion and sediment yield in watersheds. Journal of Hydrology, 498: 165-176.
[40]   St-Pierre N R, Weiss W P. 2009. Technical note: Designing and analyzing quantitative factorial experiments. Journal of Dairy Science, 92(9): 4581-4588.
doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2267 pmid: 19700721
[41]   Tang Q Y. 2010. DPS Data Processing System—Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Data Mining (2nd ed.). Beijing: Science Press, 258-269. (in Chinese)
[42]   USDA-ARS ( U S Department of Agriculture-Agriculture Research Service ). 2008a. User's reference guide, Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2. [2013-03-01]. http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2UserFiles/Place/64080510/RUSLE/RUSLE2_User _Ref_Guide.pdf.
[43]   USDA-ARS. 2008b. Draft science documentation, Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2. [2013-03-01]. http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2UserFiles/Place/64080510/RUSLE/RUSLE2_Science_Doc.pdf.
[44]   Valentin C, Poesen J, Li Y. 2005. Gully erosion: Impacts, factors and control. Catena, 63(2-3): 132-153.
[45]   Wilson G V, Periketi R K, Fox G A, et al. 2007. Soil properties controlling seepage erosion contributions to streambank failure. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 32(3): 447-459.
[46]   Wiyo K A, Kasomekera Z M, Feyen J. 1999. Variability in ridge and furrow size and shape and maize population density on small subsistence farms in Malawi. Soil & Tillage Research, 51(1-2): 113-119.
[47]   Yan B, Fang N, Zhang P, et al. 2013. Impacts of land use change on watershed streamflow and sediment yield: An assessment using hydrologic modelling and partial least squares regression. Journal of Hydrology, 484: 26-37.
[48]   Yan F L, Shi Z H, Li Z X, et al. 2008. Estimating interrill soil erosion from aggregate stability of Ultisols in subtropical China. Soil & Tillage Research, 100(1): 34-41.
[49]   Zheng F L, Huang C H, Norton L D. 2000. Vertical hydraulic gradient and run-on water and sediment effects on erosion processes and sediment regimes. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64(1): 4-11.
[50]   Ziegler A D, Giambelluca T W, Plondke D, et al. 2007. Hydrological consequences of landscape fragmentation in mountainous northern Vietnam: Buffering of Hortonian overland flow. Journal of Hydrology, 337(1-2): 52-67.
[1] Alamusa , SU Yuhang, YIN Jiawang, ZHOU Quanlai, WANG Yongcui. Effect of sand-fixing vegetation on the hydrological regulation function of sand dunes and its practical significance[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(1): 52-62.
[2] Tian WANG, Peng LI, Zongping REN, Guoce XU, Zhanbin LI, Yuanyuan YANG, Shanshan TANG, Jingwei YAO. Effects of freeze-thaw on soil erosion processes and sediment selectivity under simulated rainfall[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2017, 9(2): 234-243.