Advertisement

Integration of Geometrical Root System Approximations in Hydromechanical Slope Stability Modelling Open image in new window

  • Elmar SchmaltzEmail author
  • Rens Van Beek
  • Thom Bogaard
  • Stefan Steger
  • Thomas Glade
Conference paper

Abstract

Spatially distributed physically based slope stability models are commonly used to assess landslide susceptibility of hillslope environments. Several of these models are able to account for vegetation related effects, such as evapotranspiration, interception and root cohesion, when assessing slope stability. However, particularly spatial information on the subsurface biomass or root systems is usually not represented as detailed as hydropedological and geomechanical parameters. Since roots are known to influence slope stability due to hydrological and mechanical effects, we consider a detailed spatial representation as important to elaborate slope stability by means of physically based models. STARWARS/PROBSTAB, developed by Van Beek (2002), is a spatially distributed and dynamic slope stability model that couples a hydrological (STARWARS) with a geomechanical component (PROBSTAB). The infinite slope-based model is able to integrate a variety of vegetation related parameters, such as evaporation, interception capacity and root cohesion. In this study, we test two different approaches to integrate root cohesion forces into STARWARS/PROBSTAB. Within the first approach, the spatial distribution of root cohesion is directly related to the spatial distribution of land use areas classified as forest. Thus, each pixel within the forest class is defined by a distinct species related root cohesion value where the potential maximum rooting depth is only dependent on the respective species. The second method represents a novel approach that approximates the rooting area based on the location of single tree stems. Maximum rooting distance from the stem, maximum depth and shape of the root system relate to both tree species and external influences such as relief or soil properties. The geometrical cone-shaped approximation of the root system is expected to represent more accurately the area where root cohesion forces are apparent. Possibilities, challenges and limitations of approximating species-related root systems in infinite slope models are discussed.

Keywords

Physical based modelling Soil reinforcement Root system approximation Slope stability 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Federal State of Vorarlberg for providing remote sensing data and the Digital Elevation Model. Moreover, we thank our project partners of the BioSLIDE-project, Di Wang, Markus Hollaus and Norbert Pfeifer as well as the Torrent and Avalanche Control in Austria for supporting this study with valuable information and their expertise.

References

  1. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration—guidelines for computing crop water requirements—FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. RomeGoogle Scholar
  2. Danjon F, Barker DH, Drexhage M, Stokes A (2002) Using three-dimensional plant root architecture in models of shallow-slope stability. Ann Bot 101(8):1281–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fan C-C, Chen Y-W (2008) Role of roots in the shear strength of root-reinforced soils with high moisture content. Ecol Eng 33(2):157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fan C-C, Chen Y-W (2010) The effect of root architecture on the resistance of root-permeated soils. Ecol Eng 36(6):813–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Friebe G (2013) Steine und Landschaft—Zur Geologie der Jagdberggemeinden. In: Naturmonographie Jagdberggebeinden. Dornbirn: inatura Erlebnis Naturschau:41–52Google Scholar
  6. Genet M, Kokutse N, Stokes A, Fourcaud T, Cai X, Ji J, Michovski SB (2008) Root reinforcement in plantations of cryptomeria japonica D. Don. effect of tree age and stand structure on slope stability. For Ecol Manage. 256(8):1517–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ghestem M, Sidle RC, Stokes A (2011) The influence of plant root systems on subsurface flow: implications for slope stability. Bioscience 61(11):869–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Greenway DR (1987) Vegetation and slope stability. In: Anderson MG, Richards KS (eds) slope stability: geotechnical engineering and geomorphology. Wiley and Sons, New York, pp 187–230Google Scholar
  9. Heimsath AM, Dietrich WE, Nishiizumi K, Finkel RC (1999) Cosmogenic nuclides, topography, and the spatial variation of soil depth. Geomorphology 27(1):151–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heimsath AM, Dietrich WE, Nishiizumi K, Finkel RC (2001) Stochastic processes of soil production and transport: erosion rates, topographic variation and cosmogenic nuclides in the Oregon Coast range. Earth Surf Process Land 26(5):531–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Imaizumi F, Sidle RC, Kamei R (2008) Effects of forest harvesting on the occurrence of landslides and debris flows in steep terrain of central Japan. Earth Surf Process Land 33(6):827–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Meng W, Bogaard T, Van Beek LPH (2014) How the stabilizing effect of vegetation on a slope changes over time: a review. Landslide Sci Safer Geoenvironment 1:363–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Montgomery DR, Schmidt KM, Greenberg HM, Dietrich WE (2000) Forest clearing and regional landsliding. Geology 28(4):311–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Papathoma-Köhle M, Glade T (2013) The role of vegetation cover change for landslide hazard and risk. In: Renaud G, Sudmeier-Rieux K, Estrella M (eds) The role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. UNU-Press, Tokyo, pp 293–320Google Scholar
  15. Pelletier JD, Rasmussen C (2009) Geomorphologically based predictive mapping of soil thickness in pland watersheds. Water Res Res 45(9):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pollen N, Simon A (2005) Estimating the mechanical effects of riparian vegetation on stream bank stability using a fiber bundle model. Water Resour Res 41(7):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Roering JJ (2008) How well can hillslope evolution models “explain” topography. Geol Soc Am Bull 120(9–10):1248–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ruff M, Czurda K (2008) Landslide susceptibility analysis with a heuristic approach in the Eastern Alps (Vorarlberg, Austria). Geomorphology 94(3):314–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schmaltz E, Steger S, Bell R, Glade T, Van Beek LPH, Bogaard T, Wang D, Hollaus M, Pfeifer N (2016a) Exploring possibilities of including detailed ALS derived biomass information into physically-based slope stability models at regional scale. In: Aversa et al. (eds) Landslides and engineered slopes. Experience, theory and practice,pp 1807–1815Google Scholar
  20. Schmaltz E, Steger S, Bell R, Glade T, Van Beek LPH, Bogaard T, Wang D, Hollaus M, Pfeifer N. (2016b) Evaluation of shallow landslides in the Northern Walgau (Austria) using morphometric analysis techniques. Procedia Earth and Planet Sci. Article in pressGoogle Scholar
  21. Schmid I, Kazda M (2002) Root distribution of Norway spruce in monospecific and mixed stands on different soils. For Ecol Manage 159(1–2):37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schwarz M, Cohen D, Or D (2012) Spatial characterization of root reinforcement at stand scale. Theory and case study Geomorphol 171:190–200Google Scholar
  23. Schwarz M, Lehmann P, Or D (2010) Quantifying lateral root reinforcement in steep slopes—from a bundle of roots to tree stands. Earth Surf Process Land 35(3):354–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sidle RC (1991) A conceptual model of changes in root cohesion in response to vegetation management. J Environ Qual 20(1):43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sidle RC, Ochiai H (2006) Landslides: processes, prediction, and land use. Water resources monograph 18, American Geophysical Union, Washington D CGoogle Scholar
  26. Sidle RC, Pearce AJ, O’Loughlin CL (1985) Hillslope stability and land use. Water Resources monograph 11, American Geophysical Union, Washington D CGoogle Scholar
  27. Stokes A, Douglas GB, Fourcaud T, Giadrossich F, Gillies C, Hubble T (2014) Ecological mitigation of hillslope instability. Ten key issues facing researchers and practitioners. Plant Soil 377(1–2):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stokes A, Norris JE, Van Beek LPH, Bogaard T, Cammeraat E, Michovski SB (2008) How vegetation reinforces soil on slopes. In: Norris JE et al. (eds) Slope stability and erosion control: ecotechnological solutions. Springer, pp 65–118Google Scholar
  29. Thomas RE, Pollen-Bankhead N (2010) Modelling root-reinforcement with a fibre-bundle model and Monte Carlo simulation. Ecol Eng 36(1):47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tilch N (2014) Identifizierung Gravitativer Massenbewegungen mittels multitemporaler Luftbild-auswertung in Vorarlberg und angrenzender Gebiete. Jahrbuch der Geologischen Bundesanstalt 154(1–4):21–39Google Scholar
  31. Van Beek LPH, Wint J, Cammeraat L, Edwards JP (2007) Observation and simulation of root reinforcement on abandoned Mediterranean slopes. In: Stokes A et al. (eds) Eco- and ground bio-engineering: the use of vegetation to improve slope stability. Springer, pp 91–109Google Scholar
  32. Ziemer, RR (1981) The role of vegetation in the stability of forested slopes. In: Proceedings of the International Union of Forestry Research Organizations, XVII World Congress, vol 1. pp 297–308Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elmar Schmaltz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rens Van Beek
    • 2
  • Thom Bogaard
    • 3
  • Stefan Steger
    • 1
  • Thomas Glade
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Geosciences, Geography and Astronomy, ENGAGE—Geomorphological Systems and Risk ResearchUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.Faculty of GeosciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of Civil Engineering and GeoscienceDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations