2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.05.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative rates of wind and water erosion on typical farmland at the northern end of the Loess Plateau, China

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is also lower than the 1:5 calculated by LinDegen (2022) using different models 15 , and much lower than the ratio of 1.8:1 in the middle valley of Baerdonggou as estimated by field survey, runoff plot observation, topographic survey, and "3S" technology.The large difference between the wind erosion and water erosion ratios in this study and those in previous studies is mainly due to the difference in wind erosion rates in the results of each study. The average wind erosion rate of 190 t km -2 a -1 for cropland derived from this study is similar to the average wind erosion rate of 120 t km -2 a -1 measured by the BSNE sand collector method in Jungar Banner in GUO (2019) 20 . However, some other studies derived wind erosion rates distributed between 100-2400 t km -2 a -1 , which are 8-10 times higher than the results of this study.…”
Section: Contribution Rates Of Wind and Water Erosion In The Agricult...supporting
confidence: 82%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…It is also lower than the 1:5 calculated by LinDegen (2022) using different models 15 , and much lower than the ratio of 1.8:1 in the middle valley of Baerdonggou as estimated by field survey, runoff plot observation, topographic survey, and "3S" technology.The large difference between the wind erosion and water erosion ratios in this study and those in previous studies is mainly due to the difference in wind erosion rates in the results of each study. The average wind erosion rate of 190 t km -2 a -1 for cropland derived from this study is similar to the average wind erosion rate of 120 t km -2 a -1 measured by the BSNE sand collector method in Jungar Banner in GUO (2019) 20 . However, some other studies derived wind erosion rates distributed between 100-2400 t km -2 a -1 , which are 8-10 times higher than the results of this study.…”
Section: Contribution Rates Of Wind and Water Erosion In The Agricult...supporting
confidence: 82%
“…The different methods have their own advantages and disadvantages; the contribution of wind and water erosion can be easily calculated from the perspective of kinetic energy of erosion, but there is the problem of ignoring the differences due to microtopographic conditions and the nature of the subsurface. The advantage of field measurements is that they can accurately control the boundaries of the source area of water-eroded sediments, but it is difficult to determine the source area of wind-eroded materials in wind transport, which affects the accuracy of the amount of wind erosion per unit area 20,87 . The tracer method is a relatively mature method with relatively reliable accuracy, but it requires reasonable determination of the background value.…”
Section: Contribution Rates Of Wind and Water Erosion In The Agricult...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Ren et al [14] evaluated the effects of sand cover on runoff soil loss by conducting a series of rainfall simulation experiments. Guo et al [15] measured the compound erosion from 2012 to 2014 in an agricultural field at the northern end of the Loess Plateau (LP). These previous studies have promoted our re-understanding of the distribution and mechanism of erosion in erosion crisscross regions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%