Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 75, Issue 1, pp 5–16

Soil water content and infiltration in agroforestry buffer strips

  • Stephen H. Anderson
  • Ranjith P. Udawatta
  • Tshepiso Seobi
  • Harold E. Garrett
Article

Abstract

Agroforestry practices are receiving increased attention in temperate zones due to their environmental and economic benefits. To test the hypothesis that agroforestry buffers reduce runoff by increased infiltration, water use, and water storage; profile water content and soil water infiltration were measured for a Putnam soil (fine, smectitic, mesic Vertic Albaqualf). The watershed was under no-till management with a corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean (Glycine max L.) rotation since 1991. Agroforestry buffer strips, 4.5 m wide and 36.5 m apart, were planted with redtop (Agrostis gigantea Roth), brome (Bromus spp.), and birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.). Pin oak (Quercus palustris Muenchh.), swamp white oak (Q. bicolor Willd.) and bur oak (Q. macrocarpa Michx.) trees were planted at 3-m intervals in the center of the agroforestry buffers in 1997. Ponded water infiltration was measured in agroforestry and grass buffers and row crop areas. Water content in agroforestry and row crop areas at 5, 10, 20, and 40 cm depths were measured throughout the year. Quasi-steady infiltration rates were not different (P > 0.05) among the treatments. Agroforestry had lower soil water content than row crop areas (P < 0.05) during the growing season. Higher water content after the principal recharge event in the agroforestry treatment was attributed to better infiltration through the root system. Results show that agroforestry buffer strips reduce soil water content during critical times such as fallow periods, and increase water infiltration and water storage. Therefore, adoption of agroforestry buffer practices may reduce runoff and soil loss from watersheds in row crop management.

Keywords

Automated water content sensors Corn-soybean rotation Green-Ampt equation Oak-grass-birdsfoot trefoil buffers Parlange equation Saturated hydraulic conductivity 

References

  1. Bharati L, Lee KH, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2002) Soil-water infiltration under crops, pasture, and established riparian buffer in Midwest USA. Agrofor Syst 56:249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blanco-Canqui H, Gantzer CJ, Anderson SH, Alberts EE, Ghidey F (2002) Saturated hydraulic conductivity and its impact on simulated runoff for claypan soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1596–1602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blevins DW, Wilkison DK, Kelly BP, Silva SR (1996) Movement of nitrate fertilizer to glacial till and runoff from a claypan soil. J Environ Qual 25:584–593Google Scholar
  4. Bouma J (1980) Field measurement of soil hydraulic properties characterizing water movement through swelling clay soils. J Hydrol 45:149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cadisch G, de Willigen P, Suprayogo D, Mobbs DC, van Noordwijk M, Rowe EC (2004) Catching and competing for mobile nutrients in soils. In: van Noordwijk M, Cadisch G, Ong CK (eds) Below-ground interactions in tropical agroecosystems. CABI Publishing, MA, USA, pp 171–191Google Scholar
  6. Chan KY, Mead JA (1989) Water movement and macroporosity of an Australian Alfisol under different tillage and pasture conditions. Soil Tillage Res 14:301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clausnitzer V, Hopmans JW, Starr JL (1998) Parameter uncertainty analysis of common infiltration models. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1477–1487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clothier B, Scotter D (2002) Unsaturated water transmission parameters obtained from infiltration. In: Dane JH, Topp GC (eds) Methods of soil analysis, Part 4. SSSA, Madison, WI, pp 879–898Google Scholar
  9. Dillaha TA, Reneau RB, Mostaghimi S, Lee D (1989) Vegetative filter strips for agricultural nonpoint-source pollution control. Trans ASAE 32:513–519Google Scholar
  10. Dinnes DL, Karlen DL, Jaynes DB, Kaspar TC, Hatfield JL, Colvin TS, Cambardella CA (2002) Nitrogen management strategies to reduce nitrate leaching in tile-drained Midwestern soils. Agron J 94:153–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dupraz C (1999) Adequate design of control treatments in long term agroforestry experiments with multiple objectives. Agrofor Syst 43:35–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farmer RE (1980) Relationship of leaf area and dry weight to height and volume in a young plantation of northern red oak. Tree Planters’ Notes. 16–17Google Scholar
  13. Garrity DP (2004) Agroforestry and the achievement of the millennium development goals. In: Nair PKR, Rao MR, Buck LE (eds) New vistas in agroforestry, A compendium for the 1st World Congress of Agroforestry. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, pp 5–17Google Scholar
  14. Gillespie AR , Jose S, Mengel DB, Hoover WL, Pope PE, Seifert JR, Biehle DJ, Stall T, Benjamin T (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alleycropping system in the Midwestern USA: I. Production physiology. Agrofor Syst 48:25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gilley JE, Eghball B, Kramer LA, Moorman TB (2000) Narrow grass hedge effects on runoff and soil loss. J Soil and Water Conserv 55:190–196Google Scholar
  16. Green WH, Ampt GA (1911) Studies on soil physics:1. Flow of air and water through soils. J Agric Sci 4:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haws NW, Liu B, Boast CW, Rao PSC, Kladivko EJ, Franzmeier DP (2004) Spatial variability and measurement scale of infiltration rate on an agricultural landscape. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68:1818–1826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jamison VC, Peters DB (1967) Slope length of claypan soil affects runoff. Water Resour Res 3:471–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jose S, Gillespie AR, Seifert JR, Biehle DJ (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alley cropping system in the midwestern USA: II. Competition for water. Agrofor Syst 48:41–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loveall ST, Sullivan WC (2006) Environmental benefits of conservation buffers in the United States: evidence, promise, and open questions. Agric Ecosyst & Environ 112:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lowrance R, Sheridan JM (2005) Surface runoff water quality in a managed three zone riparian buffer. J Environ Qual 34:1851–1859PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McGinty KS (1989) Tillage and temporal variability of infiltration. MS Thesis. University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MissouriGoogle Scholar
  23. Munoz-Carpena R, Parson JE, Gilliam JW (1993) Numerical approach to the overland flow process in vegetative filter strips. Trans ASAE 36:761–770Google Scholar
  24. Or D, Wraith JM (2002) Soil water content and water potential relationships. In: Warrick AW (ed) Soil physics companion. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 49–84Google Scholar
  25. Parlange JY, Lisle I, Braddock RD, Smith RE (1982) The three-parameter infiltration equation. Soil Sci 133:337–341Google Scholar
  26. Philip JR (1957) The theory of infiltration: 4. Sorptivity and algebraic infiltration equation. Soil Sci 84:257–264Google Scholar
  27. Rachman A, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ, Thompson AL (2004a) Influence of stiff-stemmed grass hedge systems on infiltration. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68:2000–2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rachman A, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ, Alberts EE (2004b) Soil hydraulic properties influenced by stiff-stemmed grass hedge systems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68:1386–1393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rasse DP, Smucker AJM, Santos D (2000) Alfalfa root and shoot mulching effects on soil hydraulic properties and aggregation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:725–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. SAS Institute (1989) SAS/STAT user’s guide. Ver. 6. 4th edn. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  31. Schwab GO, Fangmeier DD, Elliot WJ, Frevert KK (1993) Soil and water conservation engineering, 4th edn. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmitt TJ, Dosskey MG, Hoagland KD (1999) Filter strip performance and processes for different vegetation, widths, and contaminants. J Environ Qual 28:1479–1489Google Scholar
  33. Seobi T, Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Gantzer CJ (2005) Influence of grass and agroforestry buffer strips on soil hydraulic properties for an Albaqualf. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sharma ML, Gander GA, Hunt CG (1980) Spatial variability of infiltration in a watershed. J Hydrol (Amsterdam) 45:101–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tricker AS (1981) Spatial and temporal patterns of infiltration. J Hydrol (Amsterdam) 49:261–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Udawatta RP, Krstansky JJ, Henderson GS, Garrett HE (2002) Agroforestry practices, runoff, and nutrient loss: a paired watershed comparison. J Environ Qual 31:1214–1225PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Udawatta RP, Henderson GS (2003) Root distribution relationships to soil properties in Missouri oak stands: a productivity index. Soil Sci Soc Am J 67:1869–1878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Udawatta RP, Motavalli PP, Garrett HE (2004) Phosphorus loss and runoff characteristics in three adjacent agricultural watersheds with claypan soils. J Environ Qual 33:1709–1719PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Udawatta RP, Nygren P, Garrett HE (2005) Growth of three oak species during establishment in an agroforestry practice for watershed protection. Canadian J For Res 35:602–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Udawatta RP, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ, Garrett HE (2006a) Agroforestry and grass buffer influence on macropore characteristics: a computed tomography analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:1763–1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Udawatta RP, Motavalli PP, Garrett HE, Krstansky JJ (2006b) Nitrogen and nitrate losses in runoff from three adjacent corn-soybean watersheds. Agric Ecosyst and Environ 117:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wells RR, DiCarlo DA, Steenhuis TS, Parlange JY, Römkens MJM, Prasad SN (2003) Infiltration and surface geometry of a swelling soil following successive simulated rainstorm. Soil Sci Soc Am J 67:1344–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wienhold BJ, Tanaka DL (2000) Haying, tillage, and nitrogen fertilization influences on infiltration rates at a conservation reserve program site. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:379–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zahner R (1955) Soil moisture depletion by pine and hardwood stands during dry season. For Sci 1:258–265Google Scholar
  45. Zegelin SJ, White I, Russell GF (1992) A critique of the time domain reflectometry technique for determining field soil-water content. In: Topp C G et al. (eds). Advances in measurement of soil physical properties: Bringing theory into practice. Proc. Symp. SSSA, San Antonio, TX. 21–26 Oct. 1990. SSSA Spec. Publ. 30. SSSA, Madison, WI, pp 187–208Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen H. Anderson
    • 1
  • Ranjith P. Udawatta
    • 2
  • Tshepiso Seobi
    • 3
  • Harold E. Garrett
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  2. 2.Center for AgroforestryUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  3. 3.North West Provincial Department of Agriculture, Soil Science SectionPotchefstroomSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations