Details
Originalsprache | Englisch |
---|---|
Aufsatznummer | e26382 |
Fachzeitschrift | One Ecosystem |
Jahrgang | 3 |
Publikationsstatus | Veröffentlicht - 12 Juni 2018 |
Abstract
Control of erosion rates (CER) is a key ecosystem service for soil protection. It is mandatory for sustaining the capacity, especially of agroecosystems, to provide ecosystem services. By applying an established framework to assess soil regulating services, this study compares two approaches to assess CER provision for 466 ha of cropland in Lower Saxony (Central Northern Germany). In a “sealed modelling approach”, the structural and the mitigated structural impact were modelled by applying the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). The second approach uses spatially explicit long-term monitoring data on soil loss rates obtained in the investigation area as an alternative to the USLE-based modelled mitigated structural impact. Assuming that the monitoring data have a higher reliability than the modelled data, the comparison of both approaches demonstrated the uncertainties of the USLE-based assessment of CER. The calculated indicators based on a sound monitoring database on soil loss rates showed that, due to limitations of the USLE model, the structural impact in thalwegs has been underestimated. Incorporating models with the ability to estimate soil loss by rilling und gullying can help to overcome this uncertainty. The produced set of complementary large-scale CER maps enables an integrated analyses of CER. In the entire investigation area, the provision of CER regulating ecosystem services was generally high, indicating good management practices. Differences at the field scale and between the different regions can be explained by variations of the structural impact and the management practices.
ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete
- Umweltwissenschaften (insg.)
- Ökologie
- Umweltwissenschaften (insg.)
- Natur- und Landschaftsschutz
- Erdkunde und Planetologie (insg.)
- Erdkunde und Planetologie (sonstige)
Zitieren
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTex
- RIS
in: One Ecosystem, Jahrgang 3, e26382, 12.06.2018.
Publikation: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift › Artikel › Forschung › Peer-Review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Mapping Control of Erosion Rates: Comparing Model and Monitoring Data for Croplands in Northern Germany
AU - Steinhoff-Knopp, Bastian
AU - Burkhard, Benjamin
N1 - Funding Information: This study is based on field data collected in the Lower Saxonion soil erosion monitoring programme. The monitoring has been funded by the Lower Saxonian State Authority for Mining, Energy and Geology of Lower Saxony (LBEG). Furthermore, the study is partly based on work in the project ESMERALDA, that receive funds from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 642007. Besides, we wish to thank Angie Faust for double-checking the English language.
PY - 2018/6/12
Y1 - 2018/6/12
N2 - Control of erosion rates (CER) is a key ecosystem service for soil protection. It is mandatory for sustaining the capacity, especially of agroecosystems, to provide ecosystem services. By applying an established framework to assess soil regulating services, this study compares two approaches to assess CER provision for 466 ha of cropland in Lower Saxony (Central Northern Germany). In a “sealed modelling approach”, the structural and the mitigated structural impact were modelled by applying the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). The second approach uses spatially explicit long-term monitoring data on soil loss rates obtained in the investigation area as an alternative to the USLE-based modelled mitigated structural impact. Assuming that the monitoring data have a higher reliability than the modelled data, the comparison of both approaches demonstrated the uncertainties of the USLE-based assessment of CER. The calculated indicators based on a sound monitoring database on soil loss rates showed that, due to limitations of the USLE model, the structural impact in thalwegs has been underestimated. Incorporating models with the ability to estimate soil loss by rilling und gullying can help to overcome this uncertainty. The produced set of complementary large-scale CER maps enables an integrated analyses of CER. In the entire investigation area, the provision of CER regulating ecosystem services was generally high, indicating good management practices. Differences at the field scale and between the different regions can be explained by variations of the structural impact and the management practices.
AB - Control of erosion rates (CER) is a key ecosystem service for soil protection. It is mandatory for sustaining the capacity, especially of agroecosystems, to provide ecosystem services. By applying an established framework to assess soil regulating services, this study compares two approaches to assess CER provision for 466 ha of cropland in Lower Saxony (Central Northern Germany). In a “sealed modelling approach”, the structural and the mitigated structural impact were modelled by applying the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). The second approach uses spatially explicit long-term monitoring data on soil loss rates obtained in the investigation area as an alternative to the USLE-based modelled mitigated structural impact. Assuming that the monitoring data have a higher reliability than the modelled data, the comparison of both approaches demonstrated the uncertainties of the USLE-based assessment of CER. The calculated indicators based on a sound monitoring database on soil loss rates showed that, due to limitations of the USLE model, the structural impact in thalwegs has been underestimated. Incorporating models with the ability to estimate soil loss by rilling und gullying can help to overcome this uncertainty. The produced set of complementary large-scale CER maps enables an integrated analyses of CER. In the entire investigation area, the provision of CER regulating ecosystem services was generally high, indicating good management practices. Differences at the field scale and between the different regions can be explained by variations of the structural impact and the management practices.
KW - Biophysical method
KW - Control of erosion rates
KW - Monitoring
KW - Regulating ecosystem service
KW - Soil erosion
KW - USLE
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067244409&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3897/oneeco.3.e26382
DO - 10.3897/oneeco.3.e26382
M3 - Article
VL - 3
JO - One Ecosystem
JF - One Ecosystem
M1 - e26382
ER -