Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 56, Issue 3, pp 249–257 | Cite as

Soil-water infiltration under crops, pasture, and established riparian buffer in Midwestern USA

  • L. Bharati
  • K.-H. Lee
  • T.M. Isenhart
  • R.C. Schultz
Article

Abstract

The production-oriented agricultural system of Midwestern United States has caused environmental problems such as soil degradation and nonpoint source (NPS) pollution of water. Riparian buffers have been shown to reduce the impacts of NPS pollutants on stream water quality through the enhancement of riparian zone soil quality. The objective of this study was to compare soil-water infiltration in a Coland soil (fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Cumulic Endoaquoll) under multi-species riparian buffer vegetation with that of cultivated fields and a grazed pasture. Eight infiltration measurements were made, in each of six treatments. Bulk density, antecedent soil moisture, and particle size were also examined. The average 60-min cumulative infiltration was five times greater under the buffers than under the cultivated field and pasture. Cumulative infiltration in the multi-species riparian buffer was in the order of silver maple > grass filter > switchgrass. Cumulative infiltration did not differ significantly (P < 0.05) among corn and soybean crop fields and the pasture. Soil bulk densities under the multi-species buffer vegetation were significantly (P < 0.05) smaller than in the crop fields and the pasture. Other measured parameters did not show consistent trends. Thus, when using infiltration as an index, the established multi-species buffer vegetation seemed to improve soil quality after six years.

Conservation buffer Filter strip Riparian forest buffer Soil quality Switchgrass 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blake G.R. and Hartge K.H. 1986. Bulk density. In: Klute A. (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 363-376.Google Scholar
  2. Bouwere H. 1986. Intake rate: cylinder infiltrometer. In: Klute A. (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 825-844.Google Scholar
  3. Broersma K., Robertson J.H. and Chanasyk D.S. 1995. Effects of different cropping systems on soils water properties of a Boralf soil. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 26: 1795-1811.Google Scholar
  4. Bruce R.R., Langdale G.W., West L.T. and Miller W.P. 1992. Soil surface modification by biomass inputs affecting rainfall infiltration. Soil Sci Soc Am J 56: 1614-1620.Google Scholar
  5. Corre M.D., Schnabel R.R. and Shaffer J.A. 1999. Evaluation of soil organic carbon under forests, cool-season and warm-season grasses in the northeastern US. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 31: 1531-1539.Google Scholar
  6. Gee G.W. and Bauder J.W. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In: Klute A. (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. 2nd ed. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 383-411.Google Scholar
  7. Gebhar D.L., Johnson H.B., Mayeux H.S. and Polley H.W. 1994. The CRP increases soil organic carbon. J Soil Water Conserv 49(5): 488-492.Google Scholar
  8. Gish T.J. and Jury W.A. 1981. Estimating solute travel times through a crop root zone. Soil Sci 133: 124-130.Google Scholar
  9. Goldhammer D.A. and Peterson C.M. 1984. A Comparison of Linear Move Sprinkler and Furrow Irrigation on Cotton: A Case Study. University of California, Davis, CA, Dep. of Land, Air, and Water Resources, Land, Air and Water Resource, Pap. 10012.Google Scholar
  10. Hammer R.D., O'Brien R.G. and Lewis R.J. 1987. Temporal and spatial soil variability on three forested landtypes on the Mid-Cumbreland Plateau. Soil Sci Soc Am J 51: 1320-1326.Google Scholar
  11. Hille D. 1982. Introduction to Soil Physics. Academic Press Inc., Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
  12. Jaiyeoba I.A. 1995. Changes in soil properties related to different land uses in part of the Nigerian semi-arid savannah. Soil Use and Management 11: 84-89.Google Scholar
  13. Lee K.-H., Isenhart T.M., Schultz R.C. and Mickelson S.K. 2000. Multispecies riparian buffers trap sediment and nutrients during rainfall simulations. J Environ Quality 29: 1200-1205.Google Scholar
  14. Lindstrom M.J., Schumacher T.E., Cogo N.P. and Blecha M.L. 1998. Tillage effects on water runoff and soil erosion after sod. J Soil Water Conserv 53: 59-63.Google Scholar
  15. Marquez C.O., Cambardella C.A., Isenhart T.M. and Schultz S.C. 1999. Assessing soil quality in a riparian buffer by testing organic matter fractions in central Iowa, USA. Agroforestry Systems 44: 133-140.Google Scholar
  16. Meek B.D., Rechel E.R., Carter L.M., DeTar W.R. and Urie A.L. 1992. Infiltration rate of a sandy loam soil: effects of traffic, tillage, and plant roots. Soil Sci Soc Am J 56: 908-913.Google Scholar
  17. Mukhtar S., Baker J.L., Horton R. and Erbach D.C. 1985. Soil water infiltration as affected by the use of the paraplow. Transaction of ASAE 28: 1811-1816.Google Scholar
  18. Pikul J.L. Jr and Aase J.K. 1995. Infiltration and soil properties as affected by annual cropping in the northern great plains. Agron J 87: 656-662.Google Scholar
  19. Radke J.K. and Berry E.C. 1993. Infiltration as a tool for detecting soil changes due to cropping, tillage, and grazing livestock. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 8: 164-174.Google Scholar
  20. Schultz R.C., Colletti J.P., Isenhart T.M., Simpkins W.W., Mize C.W. and Thompson M.L. 1995. Design and placement of a multi-species riparian buffer strip system. Agroforestry Systems 29: 201-226.Google Scholar
  21. Sikora L.J. and Stott D.E. 1996. Soil organic carbon and nitrogen. In: Doran J.W. and Johns A.J. (eds), Methods for Assessing Soil Quality. SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 157-167.Google Scholar
  22. Soil Science Society of America 1995. SSSA Statement on Soil Quality. Agronomy News. June 7. SSSA, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  23. Stolt M.H., Genthner M.H., Daniels W.L. and Groover V.A. 2001. Spatial variability in palustrine wetlands. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65: 527-535.Google Scholar
  24. Swartzendruber D. and Hogarth W.L. 1991. Water infiltration into soil in response to ponded-water head. Soil Sci Soc Am J 55: 1511-1515.Google Scholar
  25. Taboada M.A. and Lavado R.S. 1993. Influence of cattle trampling on soil porosity under alternate dry and ponded conditions. Soil Use and Management 9: 139-143.Google Scholar
  26. Tufekcioglu A., Raich J.W., Isenhart T.M. and Schultz R.C. 1999. Fine root dynamics, coarse root biomass, root distribution, and soil respiration in a multispecies riparian buffer in Central Iowa, USA. Agroforestry Systems 44: 163-174.Google Scholar
  27. Trousdell K.B. and Hoover M.D. 1955. A change in ground-water level after clearcutting of loblolly pine in the coastal plain. J For 53: 493-498.Google Scholar
  28. Warner G.S. and Young R.A. 1991. Measurement of preferential flow beneath mature corn. In: Proceedings of the National Symposium on Preferential Flow. St. Joseph, Michigan, pp. 150-159.Google Scholar
  29. Wood H.B. 1977. Hydrologic differences between selected forested and agricultural soils in Hawaii. Soil Sci Soc Amer J 41: 132-136.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Bharati
    • 1
  • K.-H. Lee
    • 2
  • T.M. Isenhart
    • 3
  • R.C. Schultz
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Development ResearchEcology and Resource ManagementBonnGermany
  2. 2.School of Forest Resources and ConservationUniversity of FloridaMiltonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Natural Resource Ecology and ManagementIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations