IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i6p554-d561608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Hydric Erosion Soil Loss Models in Rainy Mountainous and Dry Flat Regions in Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Lia Duarte

    (Department of Geosciences, Environment and Land Planning, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal
    ICT–Institute of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Mário Cunha

    (Department of Geosciences, Environment and Land Planning, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal
    Institute for Systems and Computer Engineering, Technology and Science (INESC TEC), Campus da Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal)

  • Ana Cláudia Teodoro

    (Department of Geosciences, Environment and Land Planning, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal
    ICT–Institute of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

Soil erosion is a severe and complex issue in the agriculture area. The main objective of this study was to assess the soil loss in two regions, testing different methodologies and combining different factors of the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) based on Geographical Information Systems (GIS). To provide the methodologies to other users, a GIS open-source application was developed. The RUSLE equation was applied with the variation of some factors that compose it, namely the slope length and slope steepness (LS) factor and practices factor (P), but also with the use of different sources of information. Eight different erosion models (M1 to M8) were applied to the two regions with different ecological conditions: Montalegre (rainy-mountainous) and Alentejo (dry-flat), both in Portugal, to compare them and to evaluate the soil loss for 3 potential erosion levels: 0–25, 25–50 and >50 ton/ha·year. Regarding the methodologies, in both regions the behavior is similar, indicating that the M5 and M6 methodologies can be more conservative than the others (M1, M2, M3, M4 and M8), which present very consistent values in all classes of soil loss and for both regions. All methodologies were implemented in a GIS application, which is free and available under QGIS software.

Suggested Citation

  • Lia Duarte & Mário Cunha & Ana Cláudia Teodoro, 2021. "Comparing Hydric Erosion Soil Loss Models in Rainy Mountainous and Dry Flat Regions in Portugal," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:554-:d:561608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/554/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/554/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nirmal Kumar & Sudhir Kumar Singh, 2021. "Soil erosion assessment using earth observation data in a trans-boundary river basin," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 107(1), pages 1-34, May.
    2. I. Rellini & C. Scopesi & S. Olivari & M. Firpo & M. Maerker, 2019. "Assessment of soil erosion risk in a typical Mediterranean environment using a high resolution RUSLE approach (Portofino promontory, NW-Italy)," Journal of Maps, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 356-362, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Valentina Santarsiero & Antonio Lanorte & Gabriele Nolè & Giuseppe Cillis & Biagio Tucci & Beniamino Murgante, 2023. "Analysis of the Effect of Soil Erosion in Abandoned Agricultural Areas: The Case of NE Area of Basilicata Region (Southern Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Caterina Samela & Vito Imbrenda & Rosa Coluzzi & Letizia Pace & Tiziana Simoniello & Maria Lanfredi, 2022. "Multi-Decadal Assessment of Soil Loss in a Mediterranean Region Characterized by Contrasting Local Climates," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-25, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vergamini, Daniele & Olivieri, Matteo & Andreoli, Maria & Bartolini, Fabio, 2024. "Simulating policy mixes to reduce soil erosion and land abandonment in marginal areas: A case study from the Liguria Region (Italy)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Paolo Vassallo & Claudia Turcato & Ilaria Rigo & Claudia Scopesi & Andrea Costa & Matteo Barcella & Giulia Dapueto & Mauro Mariotti & Chiara Paoli, 2021. "Biophysical Accounting of Forests’ Value under Different Management Regimes: Conservation vs. Exploitation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Michalia Sakellariou & Basil E. Psiloglou & Christos Giannakopoulos & Photini V. Mylona, 2021. "Integration of Abandoned Lands in Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Terraced Landscape Re-Cultivation in Mediterranean Island Conditions," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Maria Michalopoulou & Nikolaos Depountis & Konstantinos Nikolakopoulos & Vasileios Boumpoulis, 2022. "The Significance of Digital Elevation Models in the Calculation of LS Factor and Soil Erosion," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-36, September.
    5. Dandan Shen & Yuangang Guo & Bo Qu & Sisi Cao & Yaer Wu & Yu Bai & Yiting Shao & Jinglin Qian, 2024. "Investigation and Simulation Study on the Impact of Vegetation Cover Evolution on Watershed Soil Erosion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Indie G. Dapin & Victor B. Ella, 2023. "GIS-Based Soil Erosion Risk Assessment in the Watersheds of Bukidnon, Philippines Using the RUSLE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:554-:d:561608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.