• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Journals and Magazines
    • Society for Range Management Journal Archives
    • Rangeland Ecology & Management / Journal of Range Management
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 56 (2003)
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 56, Number 3 (May 2003)
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Journals and Magazines
    • Society for Range Management Journal Archives
    • Rangeland Ecology & Management / Journal of Range Management
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 56 (2003)
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 56, Number 3 (May 2003)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UA Campus RepositoryCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournal

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutUA Faculty PublicationsUA DissertationsUA Master's ThesesUA Honors ThesesUA PressUA YearbooksUA CatalogsUA Libraries

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Evaluation of USLE and RUSLE estimated soil loss on rangeland

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    9797-9678-1-PB.pdf
    Size:
    1.123Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Spaeth, K. E.
    Pierson, F. B.
    Weltz, M. A.
    Blackburn, W. H.
    Issue Date
    2003-05-01
    Keywords
    western United States
    soil erosion
    soil types
    accuracy
    Universal Soil Loss Equation
    Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation
    rainfall simulation
    hydrologic models
    prediction
    precipitation
    plant communities
    range management
    botanical composition
    rangelands
    erosion models
    sheet and rill erosion
    rainfall simulation experiments
    rangeland health
    Show allShow less
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Spaeth, K. E., Pierson, F. B., Weltz, M. A., & Blackburn, W. H. (2003). Evaluation of USLE and RUSLE estimated soil loss on rangeland. Journal of Range Management, 56(3), 234-246.
    Publisher
    Society for Range Management
    Journal
    Journal of Range Management
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10150/643432
    DOI
    10.2307/4003812
    10.2458/azu_jrm_v56i3_spaeth
    Additional Links
    https://rangelands.org/
    Abstract
    The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE 1.06) were evaluated with rainfall simulation data from a diverse set of rangeland vegetation types (8 states, 22 sites, 132 plots). Dry, wet, and very-wet rainfall simulation treatments were applied to the study plots within a 2-day period. The rainfall simulation rate was 65mm/hr for the dry and wet simulation treatments and alternated between 65-130 mm/hr for the very-wet treatment. Average soil loss for all plots for the representative simulation runs were: 0.011 kg/m2, 0.007 kg/m2, and 0.035 kg/m2 for the dry, wet, and very-wet simulation treatments, respectively. The Nash-Sutcliffe Model efficiencies (R2eff) of the USLE for the dry, wet, very-wet simulation treatments and sum of all soil loss measured in the three composite simulation treatments (pooled data) were negative. This indicates that the observed mean measured soil loss from the field rainfall simulations is better than predicted USLE soil loss. The USLE tended to consistently overpredict soil loss for all 3 rainfall simulation treatments. As the USLE predicted values increased in magnitude, the error variance between predicted and observed soil loss increased. Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency for the RUSLE was also negative, except for the dry run simulation treatment [R2eff = 0.16 using RUSLE cover management (C) subfactor parameters from the RUSLE manual (C(table)), NRCS soil erodibility factor (K); and R2eff = 0.17 with C(table) and K estimated from the soil-erodibility nomograph]. In comparison to the USLE, there was less error between observed and RUSLE predicted soil loss. The RUSLE error variances showed a consistent trend of underpredicted soil loss among the 3 rainfall simulation treatments. When actual field measured root biomass, plant production and soil random roughness values were used in calculating the RUSLE C subfactors: the R2eff values for the dry, wet, very-wet rainfall simulation treatments and the pooled data were all negative.
    Type
    text
    Article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    0022-409X
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.2307/4003812
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Journal of Range Management, Volume 56, Number 3 (May 2003)

    entitlement

     
    The University of Arizona Libraries | 1510 E. University Blvd. | Tucson, AZ 85721-0055
    Tel 520-621-6442 | repository@u.library.arizona.edu
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.