Depressional Storage on Tilled Soil Surfaces

Onstad, C. A.

doi:10.13031/2013.32861

Cited by 166 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13). Moreover, as opposed to the unrealistic zero-DS max threshold slope implied in the random roughness index-based equations (Onstad, 1984;Kamphorst et al, 2000), Eq. (5b) is able to reflect the asymptotical decrease of DS max with slope also observed by Chu et al (2012).…”

Section: Maximum Depression Storagementioning

confidence: 98%

“…The range of values of r and R were selected so as to reflect extreme but still realistic values observed in real fields (Table 1; Onstad, 1984;Zobeck and Onstad, 1987;Darboux et al, 2002a;Vidal Vázquez et al, 2005). The fields were 6 m Â 6 m size and the maximum R was 400 mm in order to minimize scale and boundary effects (Appels et al, 2011;Peñuela et al, 2013).…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Micro-topographiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overland flow is a spatially distributed process whereby depressions progressively overflow and connect to either nearby depressions or to the outflow boundary (Onstad, 1984;Darboux et al, 2002b;Antoine et al, 2011;Chu et al, 2013). During a rainfall event this process starts when the infiltration capacity becomes lower than the rainfall intensity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Surface slope gradient is another important terrain attribute that may interact with surface roughness to affect functional hydrological connectivity. On rough surfaces particularly, slope gradient can dramatically affect the depression storage (Onstad, 1984;Kamphorst et al, 2000), runoff and the development of preferential flow paths (Bracken and Croke, 2007). Changing the slope gradient modifies the balance between water fill and water spill processes and therefore also changes the dynamics and spatial distribution of overland flow.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How do slope and surface roughness affect plot-scale overland flow connectivity?

Peñuela

Javaux

Bielders

2015

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Maximum Depression Storagementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Characteristics Of the Micro-topographiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How do slope and surface roughness affect plot-scale overland flow connectivity?

Peñuela

Javaux

Bielders

2015

Journal of Hydrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Depressional storage is created by surface micro-relief, which can be enhanced by various tillage practices (Onstad, 1984). Micro-relief can be quantified using variations in surface point elevations (Currence and Lovely, 1970;Saleh, 1993;Gilley and Kottwitz, 1995;Linden and Van Doren, 1986;Hansen et al, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface Detention on Cropland, Rangeland, and Conservation Reserve Program Areas

Gilley¹

2018

Transactions of the ASABE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. One of the factors contributing to overland flow on upland areas is water stored temporarily in a thin sheet on the soil surface as surface detention. This study was conducted to quantify surface detention on selected cropland, rangeland, and Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) sites. Surface detention was determined from the recession portion of runoff hydrographs corresponding with the period when rainfall had ceased but runoff continued. The hydrographs were generated from six previously reported rainfall simulation studies conducted on paired 3.7 m wide × 10.7 m long plots on which approximately 128 mm of rainfall was applied. Surface detention values were found to increase as crop residue or vegetative cover increased. Eleven fallow cropland sites in the eastern U.S. had surface detention values that varied from 1.7 to 4.6 mm. Surface detention on plots in southwestern Oklahoma containing Old World bluestem, no-till wheat, and conservation-till wheat was 9.4, 7.3, and 5.2 mm, respectively. No-till sorghum, tilled sorghum, no-till wheat, and tilled wheat plots in southeast Nebraska had surface detention values of 6.7, 4.5, 6.7, and 4.6 mm, respectively. Mean surface detention on no-till and tilled cropland sites in southwest Iowa containing corn residue was 7.2 and 5.9 mm, respectively. CRP study sites in southwestern Iowa had mean surface detention of 10.8 mm. When data from the six field studies were combined, mean surface detention values for fallow cropland, tilled cropland, no-till cropland, rangeland, and CRP areas were 3.1, 5.0, 6.9, 9.6, and 10.8 mm, respectively. Keywords: Depressional storage, Hydrographs, Hydrologic modeling, Overland flow, Runoff volume, Surface detention.

show abstract

Surface Roughness Evolution of Soils Containing Rock Fragments

Wesemael

Poesen

Figueiredo³

et al. 1996

Earth Surf. Process. Landforms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil surface roughness is a dynamic property which determines, to a large extent, erosion and infiltration rates. Although soils containing rock fragments are widespread in the Mediterranean region, the effect of the latter on surface roughness evolution is yet poorly understood. Therefore, laboratory experiments were conducted in order to investigate the effect of rock fragment content, rock fragment size and initial moisture content of the fine earth on the evolution of interrill surface roughness during simulated rainfall. Surface elevations of simulated plough layers along transects of 50 cm length were measured before and after simulated rainfall (totalling 192.5mm, Z = 70mm h-') with a laser microreliefmeter. The results were used to investigate whether systematic variations in interrill surface roughness along stony hillslopes in southeastern Spain could be attributed to rock fragment cover and rock fragment size. Soil surface elevations were measured along the contour lines (50 cm long transects) with a contact microreliefmeter. Roughness was expressed by two parameters related to the height and frequency of roughness elements, respectively: standard deviation of de-trended surface elevations (random roughness: RR), and correlation length (L) derived from exponential fits of the autocorrelation functions.The frequently used assumption that surface roughness (RR) of cultivated topsoils decreases exponentially with cumulative rain is not valid for soil surfaces covered by rock fragments. The RR of soils containing small rock fragments (1.7-2.7 cm) increased with cumulative rainfall after an initial decrease during the first 17.5 mm of rainfall. For soils containing large rock fragments (7.7 cm), RR increased with rainfall above a threshold rock fragment content by mass of 52 per cent. For a given rainfall application, RR increased non-linearly with rock fragment content. The correlation length for soils containing small rock fragments decreases with rock fragment content and is significantly lower than for soils with large rock fragments. Soils covered with small rock fragments (large RR and small L) are thus well protected against raindrop impact by a water film in the depressions between the rock fragments.On abandoned agricultural fields along hillslopes in southeastern Spain, rock fragments cover increases non-linearly with slope owing to selective erosion of finer particles on steep slopes. The increase of surface cover by large rock fragments (>25 mm) is even more pronounced. The simultaneous increase of rock fragment cover and rock fragment size with slope explains the non-linear increase of RR with slope. These relationships differ for soils covered by platy misaschists and those covered with cubic andesites. The variations in correlation length along the hillslopes are not clear, probably owing to a simultaneous increase in rock fragment cover and rock fragment size. These findings may provide a better prediction of soil surface roughness of interrill areas covered by rock fragments using s...

show abstract

Depressional Storage on Tilled Soil Surfaces

Cited by 166 publications

References 0 publications

How do slope and surface roughness affect plot-scale overland flow connectivity?

How do slope and surface roughness affect plot-scale overland flow connectivity?

Surface Detention on Cropland, Rangeland, and Conservation Reserve Program Areas

Surface Roughness Evolution of Soils Containing Rock Fragments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About