Performance of the Soil Vulnerability Index with respect to slope, digital elevation model resolution, and hydrologic soil group

Lohani, Sapana; Baffaut, Claire; Thompson, Allen L.; Aryal, Niroj; Bingner, Ronald L.; Bjorneberg, David L.; Bosch, David D.; Bryant, Ray B.; Buda, Anthony R.; Dabney, Seth M.; Davis, Austin R.; Duriancik, Lisa F.; James, David; King, Kevin W.; Kleinman, Peter J. A.; Locke, Martin A.; McCarty, Gregory W.; Pease, Lindsay; Reba, M. L.; Smith, Douglas R.; Tomer, Mark D.; Veith, T. L.; Williams, Mark R.; Yasarer, Lindsey

doi:10.2489/jswc.75.1.12

Cited by 28 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, after two years of applying the training program to the experimental group, they are better prepared in knowledge. The significant difference allows us to reject the Null Hypothesis H0, therefore the Alternative Hypothesis H1 is accepted, with a confidence level of 95%, considered in the proposed research (Lohani et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Untitled

2020

3C Tecnología

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Untitled

2020

3C Tecnología

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In areas with steeper topography, slope is the main determinant of the SVI soil runoff potential, whereas hydrologic soil group and K-factor are more determinant of the SVI soil runoff potential in areas of relatively low relief (Lohani et al 2020a). We see this relationship in Iowa, where the majority of agricultural fields categorized as having high or moderately high soil runoff potential are found in landscapes characterized by generally higher relief and more erodible soils, such as the Loess Hills, Paleozoic Plateau, and Southern Iowa Drift Plain regions of Iowa.…”

Section: Soil Vulnerability Index Classifications In Iowamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…DEMs were acquired from the Iowa P-Library series (ISU GIS 2016), which are light detection and ranging (LiDAR) point-cloud derived, 2 m (6.6 ft) resolution elevation rasters that have been hydro-conditioned and assembled for the state of Iowa at the HUC12 level (n = 1,615). High resolution DEMs that account for subtle slope differences are necessary for landscapes with low relief, like much of Iowa (Lohani et al 2020a;Thompson et al 2020). We used these data as inputs to estimate both SVI indices-soil runoff potential and soil leaching potential-using a custom ArcGIS tool at the HUC12 scale.…”

Section: Mapping the Soil Vulnerability Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other caveats of SVI data are discussed in Thompson et al (2020). Importantly, because SVI is an index that uses relatively few inputs, it does not account for some parameters considered to be important in determining soil and leaching potential in certain geographic locations such as rainfall intensity and topsoil depth, and may be sensitive to slope, complexity of soil profiles, and the presence of artificial drainage (Baffaut et al 2020a(Baffaut et al , 2020bLohani et al 2020a;Thompson et al 2020). We did not use hydrological models or monitoring data to assess its accuracy as others have done with the SVI (Lee et al 2018;Yasarer et al 2020;Lohani et al 2020b), due to the extensive spatial coverage of our output.…”

Section: Mapping the Soil Vulnerability Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fields with a higher leaching potential are found in areas where soils are coarser, and lower leaching potential in areas where soils are finer and denser (Huddleston 1996). Lohani et al (2020a) determined that the SVI soil leaching potential is more greatly affected by hydrologic soil group than slope. This is likely because hydrologic soil group reflects a soil's ability to infiltrate water (USDA NRCS 2007).…”

Section: Journal Of Soil and Water Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping the Soil Vulnerability Index across broad spatial extents to guide conservation efforts

Audia¹,

Schulte²,

James³

2021

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mapping the Soil Vulnerability Index across broad spatial extents to guide conservation efforts THE NEED FOR TARGETED AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION The 2008 Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Action Plan was developed in response to national water quality impairments that were largely caused by agricultural land uses within and around the US Corn Belt (Alexander et al. 2008; Mississippi River Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force 2008). The plan prompted states to create nutrient reduction strategies to achieve a 45% reduction in total nitrogen (N) and total phosphorus (P) loads into the Mississippi River, and thereby alleviate the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico (Mississippi River Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force 2008). Similar to other state strategies, the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (INRS) promotes the widespread and voluntary adoption of best management practices (BMPs) to achieve nutrient reduction goals. The INRS establishes goals of 41% and 29% reductions in total N and total P, respectively, from nonpoint sources from a 1980 to 1996 baseline (Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship et al. 2017). These goals are largely dependent on regional conservation funding and infrastructure to inform and incentivize BMP adoption at individual farm scales (Zimmerman et al. 2019a). Although billions of dollars have been spent to promote conservation, Iowa continues to be a primary contributor to Gulf of Mexico hypoxia, and there is little evidence of progress toward meeting environmental quality goals (Schilling et al. 2020; Jones et al. 2018; Robertson et al. 2014; Alexander et al. 2008; Tomer and Locke 2011; Osmond et al. 2012). Lack of success at broad-scale conservation efforts can be blamed on a complex mix of social, economic, and ecological barriers (Atwell et al. 2009; Osmond et al. 2012; Mattia et al. 2018; Zimmerman et al. 2019a); however, the historical lack of spatial precision and consideration of hydrologic processes in BMP application is likely a significant factor (Osmond et al. 2012; Tomer and Locke

show abstract

One size does not fit all: Toward regional conservation practice guidance to reduce phosphorus loss risk in the Lake Erie watershed

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural phosphorus (P) losses to surface water bodies remain a global eutrophication concern, despite the application of conservation practices on farm fields.Although it is generally agreed upon that the use of multiple conservation practices ("stacking") will lead to greater improvements to water quality, this may not be cost effective to farmers, reducing the likelihood of adoption. At present, wholesale recommendations of conservation practices are given; however, the application of specific conservation practices in certain environments (e.g., no-till with surface application, cover crops) may not be effective and can even lead to unintended consequences. In this paper, we present the Lake Erie watershed as a case study. The Lake Erie watershed contains regions with unique physical geographies that include differences in climate, soil, topography, and land use, which have implications for both P transport from agricultural fields and the efficacy of conservation practices in mitigating P losses. We define major regions within the Lake Erie watershed where common strategies for conservation practice implementation are appropriate, and we propose a five-step plan for bringing regionally tailored, adaptive, and cost-conscious conservation practice into watershed planning. Although this paper is specific to the Lake Erie watershed, our framework can be transferred across broader geographic regions to provide guidance for watershed planning.

show abstract

Performance of the Soil Vulnerability Index with respect to slope, digital elevation model resolution, and hydrologic soil group

Cited by 28 publications

References 58 publications

Untitled

Untitled

Mapping the Soil Vulnerability Index across broad spatial extents to guide conservation efforts

One size does not fit all: Toward regional conservation practice guidance to reduce phosphorus loss risk in the Lake Erie watershed

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About