IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i4p875-d1121972.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Paddy Fields in the Sediment of a Small Agricultural Catchment in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region by the Sediment Fingerprinting Method

Author

Listed:
  • Taili Chen

    (Faculty of Resources and Environment, Xichang College, Xichang 615000, China
    Key Laboratory of Mountain Surface Processes and Ecological Regulation, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Zhonglin Shi

    (Key Laboratory of Mountain Surface Processes and Ecological Regulation, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Anbang Wen

    (Key Laboratory of Mountain Surface Processes and Ecological Regulation, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Lina Li

    (Faculty of Resources and Environment, Xichang College, Xichang 615000, China)

  • Wenkai Wang

    (Faculty of Resources and Environment, Xichang College, Xichang 615000, China)

Abstract

Identifying sediment sources is a prerequisite for developing sediment management strategies. Erosion sediment derived from a small agriculture catchment is an important component of sediment inflow in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Paddy fields are one of the major land-use types in this region and can have both positive and negative effects on sediment. In this study, two different source group classification schemes were used to analyze the effect of paddy fields on the sediment in a typical small agriculture catchment in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region. A total of 32 soil source samples were collected from four kinds of land-use types (13 from dry land, 5 from orchards, 8 from paddy fields, and 6 from forest) in the Shipanqiu catchment. Moreover, the properties consisted of 41 elements and 12 element ratios were analyzed. Composite fingerprinting methodology was applied to discriminate and quantify the sediment source contributions. Additionally, element ratio was used as the fingerprint property in the fingerprinting application. The results showed that the element ratio was verified as an effective fingerprint property. Additionally, the relative sediment contributions of the potential land-use sources were 55.25% of dry land, 32.69% of orchards, and 12.06% of forest. Paddy fields played a role of sink rather than of source in this study. Accordingly, both forest and paddy fields are effective sediment management strategies. Particularly, paddy fields are a preferred choice for soil erosion control in mountainous and hilly areas. Furthermore, the proper management of paddy fields can help promote sediment retention and reduce soil erosion, which have positive effects on both the environment and agricultural productivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Taili Chen & Zhonglin Shi & Anbang Wen & Lina Li & Wenkai Wang, 2023. "The Role of Paddy Fields in the Sediment of a Small Agricultural Catchment in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region by the Sediment Fingerprinting Method," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:4:p:875-:d:1121972
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/4/875/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/4/875/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barrios, Edmundo, 2007. "Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 269-285, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Juan Carlos Alías & José Antonio Mejías & Natividad Chaves, 2022. "Effect of Cropland Abandonment on Soil Carbon Stock in an Agroforestry System in Southwestern Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Jiani Ma & Chao Zhang & Wenju Yun & Yahui Lv & Wanling Chen & Dehai Zhu, 2020. "The Temporal Analysis of Regional Cultivated Land Productivity with GPP Based on 2000–2018 MODIS Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Lafuite, A.-S. & Loreau, M., 2017. "Time-delayed biodiversity feedbacks and the sustainability of social-ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 351(C), pages 96-108.
    4. Karl S. Zimmerer & Steven J. Vanek, 2016. "Toward the Integrated Framework Analysis of Linkages among Agrobiodiversity, Livelihood Diversification, Ecological Systems, and Sustainability amid Global Change," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-28, April.
    5. Brady, Mark & Hedlund, Katarina & Cong, Rong-Gang & Hemerik, Lia & Hotes, Stefan & Machado, Stephen & Mattsson, Lennart & Schulz, Elke & Thomsen, Ingrid K., 2015. "Valuing Supporting Soil Ecosystem Services in Agriculture: a Natural Capital Approach," MPRA Paper 112303, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Snapp, Sieglinde, 2022. "Embracing variability in soils on smallholder farms: New tools and better science," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    7. John Taylor & Sarah Lovell, 2014. "Urban home food gardens in the Global North: research traditions and future directions," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 285-305, June.
    8. Dominati, Estelle & Patterson, Murray & Mackay, Alec, 2010. "A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1858-1868, July.
    9. Alberto Orgiazzi & Erica Lumini & R Henrik Nilsson & Mariangela Girlanda & Alfredo Vizzini & Paola Bonfante & Valeria Bianciotto, 2012. "Unravelling Soil Fungal Communities from Different Mediterranean Land-Use Backgrounds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-9, April.
    10. Mark V. Brady & Jordan Hristov & Fredrik Wilhelmsson & Katarina Hedlund, 2019. "Roadmap for Valuing Soil Ecosystem Services to Inform Multi-Level Decision-Making in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    11. Fátima Gonçalves & Cristina Carlos & Luís Crespo & Vera Zina & Amália Oliveira & Juliana Salvação & José Alberto Pereira & Laura Torres, 2021. "Soil Arthropods in the Douro Demarcated Region Vineyards: General Characteristics and Ecosystem Services Provided," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-35, July.
    12. Foudi, Sébastien, 2012. "The role of farmers' property rights in soil ecosystem services conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 90-96.
    13. Giuliano Rocco Romanazzi & Giovanni Ottomano Palmisano & Marilisa Cioffi & Vincenzo Leronni & Ervin Toromani & Romina Koto & Annalisa De Boni & Claudio Acciani & Rocco Roma, 2024. "A Cost–Benefit Analysis for the Economic Evaluation of Ecosystem Services Lost Due to Erosion in a Mediterranean River Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, September.
    14. Maëva Labouyrie & Cristiano Ballabio & Ferran Romero & Panos Panagos & Arwyn Jones & Marc W. Schmid & Vladimir Mikryukov & Olesya Dulya & Leho Tedersoo & Mohammad Bahram & Emanuele Lugato & Marcel G. , 2023. "Patterns in soil microbial diversity across Europe," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-21, December.
    15. Plaas, Elke & Meyer-Wolfarth, Friederike & Banse, Martin & Bengtsson, Jan & Bergmann, Holger & Faber, Jack & Potthoff, Martin & Runge, Tania & Schrader, Stefan & Taylor, Astrid, 2019. "Towards valuation of biodiversity in agricultural soils: A case for earthworms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 291-300.
    16. Wenyue Song & Hongqi Wu & Zequn Xiang & Yanmin Fan & Shuaishuai Wang & Jia Guo, 2024. "Effects of Plastic Mulch Residue on Soil Fungal Communities in Cotton," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, August.
    17. Senicovscaia, Irina, 2014. "Soil biota as a natural resource for the restoration of degraded chernozems," MPRA Paper 61749, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Sébastien Foudi, 2012. "Exploitation of soil biota ecosystem services in agriculture: a bioeconomic approach," Working Papers 2012-02, BC3.
    19. Cong, Rong-Gang & Hedlund, Katarina & Andersson, Hans & Brady, Mark, 2014. "Managing soil natural capital: An effective strategy for mitigating future agricultural risks," MPRA Paper 112155, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2016. "Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-38.

    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:12:y:2023:i:4:p:875-:d:1121972. 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.