Effects of Surface Cover and Soil Amendments on the NPS load Reduction from Alpine Fields

Abstract

We investigated the effect of straw mat cover and soil amendments on the reduction of runoff, non-point source pollution load and yield of a Chinese cabbage from alpine fields. Two plots on sandy loam soil were prepared. Experimental treatments were control and rice straw mat cover (3,300 kg/ha)＋Polyacrylamide (PAM) (5 kg/ha)＋Gypsum (1 ton/ha) (SPG). A variety of Chinese cabbage was cultivated and runoff was monitored during a growing season in 2012. Monitoring was conducted to seven times. Runoff rate of SPG plot was lower than those of control plot. The reduction rate of runoff from SPG plot was 29.4 % compared to control plot. The reduction rate of suspended solids (SS), total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) load of SPG plot was 86.5 %, 34.7 % and 39.1 %, respectively. Yield of a Chinese cabbage from SPG plot (39,646 kg/ha) was greater than that of control plots (28,482 kg/ha). It was concluded that the use of SPG on soil surface could not only reduce the NPS pollution loads in receiving waters but also help increase the crop yield.

Application of Surface Cover Materials for Reduction of NPS Pollution on Field‐Scale Experimental Plots

“…Shin et al . (, ) and Won et al () reported that runoff reduction on sand and loamy sand fields by the SPG and similar surface cover treatments was between 29.4 and 81.2% and between 70.9 and 95.1%, respectively. The runoff reduction on sandy loam fields by the SPG and the SM treatments in the present study ranged from 22.0 to 90.9%, and from 37.5 to 68.1%, respectively.…”

“…Thus the differences in runoff quantity mainly contributed to the large reduction in pollutant loads, and proved that runoff control at source must be a key objective in the control of agricultural NPS pollution. Shin et al (2014) and Won et al (2014) reported that the NPS pollution reduction on sand and loamy sand fields by SPG and similar surface cover treatments was between 13.8 and 95.1% and between 28.5 and 79.8%, respectively. The load reduction on sandy loam fields by the SPG and SM treatments in the present study ranged from 27.6 to 95.0%, and from 38.7 to 96.7%, respectively.…”

“…Although the number of monitoring data was not enough to statistically compare the effect of the SM and the SPG treatments and deduce the effect of the PAM and the gypsum, the demonstrated effect of the SM treatment was also more than enough to be considered good practice (like the SPG treatment) for the control of field runoff. Shin et al (2012Shin et al ( , 2014 and Won et al (2014) reported that runoff reduction on sand and loamy sand fields by the SPG and similar surface cover treatments was between 29.4 and 81.2% and between 70.9 and 95.1%, respectively. The runoff reduction on sandy loam fields by the SPG and the SM treatments in the present study ranged from 22.0 to 90.9%, and from 37.5 to 68.1%, respectively.…”

“…Unfortunately, the labour and material cost associated with the SPG and SM practices in this study was determined to be much greater than the increased earnings, resulting in a large decrease in a farmer's income. However, in a similar study focused on cabbage production, Won et al (2014) reported that the increase in income resulting from use of SPG was higher than the cost, making the use of SPG both profitable and environmentally advantageous. Thus, if the government could guide farmers to producing profitable crops and implementing the SPG or the SM treatment by providing financial incentives together with technical support, these BMPs would be adopted by farmers.…”

Pollutant Runoff Reduction Efficiency of Surface Cover, Vegetative Filter Strip and Vegetated Ridge for Korean Upland Fields: A Review

“…As the pattern of pollutant load from upland fields via runoff is likely to be affected by soil, crop, topography, and seasonal distribution of rainfall (Prosdocimi et al, 2016), we considered studies that were conducted in South Korea to provide information that is more relevant to Korean agricultural environment and thus can support the MAFRA's program. Among various BMPs adoptable to steep-sloping uplands fields, we focused on SCV (Shin et al, 2011a(Shin et al, , 2011b(Shin et al, , 2012(Shin et al, , 2013(Shin et al, , 2016Won et al, 2011Won et al, , 2013Won et al, , 2014 (Table 1), VFS (Choi and Jang, 2014;Lee et al, 2015) (Table 2), and VRD (Kim et al, 2012;Kim and Kim, 2015) (Table 3) as these three BMPs have been relatively well studied. Though a few modeling studies were also available, we did not include these studies.…”