Erosion processes and erodibility of cultivated soils in North Rhine‐Westphalia under artificial rain. II. Results of field experiments and comparison with laboratory trials

Abstract

AbstractIn the densely populated state of North Rhine‐Westphalia, soil erosion by water causes substantial on‐site degradation and off‐site damages. The implementation of soil‐conservation measures is improved, if soil erodibilities and erosion processes are known. In a state‐wide investigation, we aimed to representatively assess soil‐erosion processes and erodibilities of cultivated soils. For this purpose, we measured surface runoff and soil‐loss rates of 28 cultivated soils with field plots under artificial rain.In the field experiments, surface runoff and soil loss indicated high sealing susceptibilities and high erodibilities on soils of quite different textures including a clay silt, a loam silt, a loam sand, a sand loam, and two standard loams. Rill formation causing high soil‐loss rates was observed on a clay silt (soil BM) and on a loam silt (soil RB), the latter yielding an empirical K‐factor of 1.66 t ha–1 h N–1. K‐factors of other silty soils ranged from 0.04 to 0.48, whereas sandy soils and clayey soils had K‐factors ranging from 0.00 to 0.32, and 0.00 to 0.12, respectively. Comparatively high erodibilities of two silt clays were due to saturation overland flow. Erosion processes and erodibilities of soils with similar texture varied to a large extent, possibly caused in part by seasonal differences in the timing of erosion tests.Surface runoff was different in field experiments compared with laboratory experiments (companion paper) conducted with topsoil material taken from the field plots. In addition, higher concentrations of suspended sediment were recorded on average in the field than in the laboratory. These differences might reflect the influence of the subsoil and are due to higher transport capacities on longer plots in the field. Thus, laboratory experiments can complement but not replace costly field trials for K‐factor determination.Empirical K‐factors derived from field and laboratory experiments are in general lower than K‐factors of other soils in Germany or calculated K‐factors derived from pedotransfer functions, which might be attributed to a more maritime‐type climate in North Rhine‐Westphalia. Since the temporal variability of erodibility was not assessed, the reported K‐factors should be regarded as preliminary.