Influence of Grass and Agroforestry Buffer Strips on Soil Hydraulic Properties for an Albaqualf

Abstract

tem is more effective if tillage and planting are performed along the contour. Schwab et al. (1993) estimated soil Agroforestry production systems have been introduced in temperloss with the universal soil loss equation to be as low as ate regions to improve water quality and diversify farm income. Agro-5.1 Mg ha Ϫ1 yr Ϫ1 for strip cropping, which was comparaforestry and grass-legume buffer effects on soil hydraulic properties ble with soil loss with terraces. Grass buffer strips reduce for a Putnam soil (fine, smectitic, mesic Vertic Albaqualf) were evaluated in a corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] water-runoff and increase infiltration upslope from the strips; shed in northeastern Missouri. The no-till management watershed Schmitt et al. (1999) observed that doubling the width was established in 1991 with agroforestry buffers implemented in 1997. of a 7.5-m-wide grass strip doubled water infiltration into Agroforestry buffers, 4.5 m wide and 36.5 m apart, consist of redtop the soil. A multispecies riparian buffer increased the infil-(Agrostis gigantea Roth), brome (Bromus spp.), and birdsfoot trefoil tration rate five times compared with cultivated and (Lotus corniculatus L.) with pin oak (Quercus palustris Muenchh.), grazed fields (Bharati et al., 2002). The infiltration rates swamp white oak (Q. bicolor Willd.), and bur oak (Q. macrocarpa for components of the riparian buffer were as follows: Michx.) trees. Soil cores (7.6 cm in diam. by 7.6 cm long) were collected silver maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) Ͼ smooth brome from the treatments from four 10-cm depth increments to determine (Bromus inermis Leyss), timothy (Phleum pretense L.), saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat), soil water retention, pore-size and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) grass filter Ͼ distributions, and bulk density. Bulk density was 2.3% lower (P Ͻ 0.05) within the grass and agroforestry buffers compared with the row switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.). They showed that crop areas. Total porosity and coarse mesoporosity (60-to 1000-m planting buffers can improve infiltration within 8 to diam.) were 3 and 33% higher (P Ͻ 0.05), respectively, for the grass 10 yr. Other studies also have demonstrated that perenand agroforestry buffer treatments than the row crop treatment. The nial vegetation can increase infiltration (Broersma et al., K sat was three and 14 times higher (P Ͻ 0.05) in the grass and agrofores-1995; Wood, 1977). try buffer treatments compared with the row crop treatment. Results Recently, a study was conducted to evaluate the efshow that the grass and agroforestry buffer treatments increased pofects of grass and agroforestry contour buffer strips on tential water storage by 0.90 cm and 1.1 cm per 30-cm depth compared runoff, sediment, and nutrient losses on a claypan soil with the row crop treatment. Although the claypan horizon will domi-(Udawatta et al., 2002). They found that these buffers nate the surface hydrology, buffers may provide some benefit by rereduced surface water runoff, sediment, total P...

Improved APEX Model Simulation of Buffer Water Quality Benefits at Field Scale

“…Schueler (1987) suggested that for adequate buffer infiltration, K sat values of soils should at least range from 69 to 127 mm h -1 . Overall low simulated buffer effectiveness by any type of buffer configuration, compared to reported values (82%; Helmers et al, 2012), may be attributed to low infiltration rates as a result of low K sat values of soils for both types of buffers: 16 to 32 mm h -1 and 1 to 13 mm h -1 in agroforestry and grass buffers, respectively (Seobi et al, 2005). Indeed, a recent experiment on claypan soils led to 19% to 28% buffer effectiveness for trapping herbicide loads with varying adsorption coefficients and for varying buffer widths (Lerch et al, 2017).…”

“…According to Seobi et al (2005), although the K sat values in the grass and agroforestry buffers at this research site remained relatively small (i.e., 26 to 30 mm h -1 ), they were 1.5 times greater than in the cropland area, with even greater gains in the restrictive layer. Water quality impacts reported for management systems on claypan soils are often related to the very low infiltration rates (i.e., 0.001 to 0.01 mm h -1 ) in the restrictive layer, which cause excessive runoff and associated transport of pollutants.…”

“…Saturated conductivity and bulk density were measured at six cropland locations, six agroforestry buffer locations, and six grass buffer locations in the Center watershed on 0-10, 10-20, 20-30, and 30-40 cm deep cores collected in 2003 (Seobi et al, 2005). Soil samples (20 cores per sample, 0-5 cm and 5-15 cm depths) were collected in 2014 in each major combination of soil type and land use in each watershed.…”

“…Studies have documented increased infiltration rates in buffers (Schmitt et al, 1999) due to improved soil porosity and hydraulic conductivity (Udawatta and Anderson, 2008;Kumar et al, 2011;Larson and Safferman, 2012). Seobi et al (2005) and Kumar et al (2012) determined that soil hydraulic conductivity values were four to 16 times higher in an agroforestry buffer than in the associated cropland or pasture. Reported trapping effectiveness values of upland and edge-of-field buffers vary widely among studies: from 41% to 100% for sediment and from 27% to 96% for total phosphorus (TP) (Dillaha et al, 1989;Daniels and Gilliam, 1996;Schmitt et al, 1999;Mayer et al, 1999;Lee et al, 2000;Blanco-Canqui et al, 2004;Vianello et al, 2005;Bhattarai et al, 2009;Caron et al, 2010;Al-wadaey et al, 2012).…”

Effects of Farmyard Manure On Growth and Yield of Turmeric (Curcuma LongaL.) Cultivated in Dark-Red Soil, Red Soil andgray Soil in Okinawa, Japan

“…The soil without manure showed a water logging condition for some time and dried earlier as compared with the soil treated with manure, indicating that the soil without manure has lower porosity and farmyard manure improves water holding capacity of soil. Several studies (Whalen et al, 2000(Whalen et al, , 2003Seobi et al, 2005) revealed that organic manure increases pH and water-holding capacity, and decreases bulk density in soil. The loose soil was probably favorable for root growth and rhizome-stub expansion, which ultimately promoted vegetative growth, rhizome size and yield of turmeric.…”