2012
DOI: 10.1007/s10333-012-0340-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of surface cover on the reduction of runoff and agricultural NPS pollution from upland fields

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
8
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…These results demonstrate that the rice straw mat and the soil amendments were effective in reducing both runoff and NPS pollution loads. However, the reductions of nutrient losses in this study were relatively low despite adding the soil amendments (PAM and gypsum) when compared to the reductions of TN 68.3% and TP 53.3% observed by Shin et al (2012), who covered the soil with a similar amount of straw mat (3.1 ton/ha) as used in the present study, but on plots with 3% slope. The differences in results from the present study and that of Shin et al (2012) appear to be due to the slope difference.…”
Section: Runoffmentioning
confidence: 55%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…These results demonstrate that the rice straw mat and the soil amendments were effective in reducing both runoff and NPS pollution loads. However, the reductions of nutrient losses in this study were relatively low despite adding the soil amendments (PAM and gypsum) when compared to the reductions of TN 68.3% and TP 53.3% observed by Shin et al (2012), who covered the soil with a similar amount of straw mat (3.1 ton/ha) as used in the present study, but on plots with 3% slope. The differences in results from the present study and that of Shin et al (2012) appear to be due to the slope difference.…”
Section: Runoffmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…However, the reductions of nutrient losses in this study were relatively low despite adding the soil amendments (PAM and gypsum) when compared to the reductions of TN 68.3% and TP 53.3% observed by Shin et al (2012), who covered the soil with a similar amount of straw mat (3.1 ton/ha) as used in the present study, but on plots with 3% slope. The differences in results from the present study and that of Shin et al (2012) appear to be due to the slope difference. The nutrient reduction rates achieved in the present study also were low (approximately half as large) compared to the results (about 95% for TN and 97% for TP) from the study by Won et al (2013), which was performed on 28% slope.…”
Section: Runoffmentioning
confidence: 55%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is different from the summer-rice-winter-wheat rotation in the same most likely generated surface runoff. [36] Based on this study, 53-56% of the rainfall contributed to surface runoff ( Figure 4). Considerable amount of N was lost in runoff with the surface soil nitrate-N as high as 656 mg kg −1 after tomato harvest (Table 2) combined with high precipitation in the summer season when the polyethylene cover was not in use.…”
Section: Characteristics Of N Runoff Lossmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In the past few decades, many researchers have focused on the precipitation, topography conditions on the influence of the NPS pollutants migration [24][25][26]. A prediction of potential bioavailable P in the water columns and sediments and their relations with enzymatic hydrolysis was conducted and the spatial variations of phosphorus showed that higher phosphorus content and more intense enzymatic hydrolysis in silty clay finer sediments [27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%