Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessing the effects of land use changes on soil sensitivity to erosion in a highland ecosystem of semi-arid Turkey

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There has been increasing concern in highlands of semiarid Turkey that conversion of these systems results in excessive soil erosion, ecosystem degradation, and loss of sustainable resources. An increasing rate of land use/cover changes especially in semiarid mountainous areas has resulted in important effects on physical and ecological processes, causing many regions to undergo accelerated environmental degradation in terms of soil erosion, mass movement and reservoir sedimentation. This paper, therefore, explores the impact of land use changes on land degradation in a linkage to the soil erodibility, RUSLE-K, in Cankiri–Indagi Mountain Pass, Turkey. The characterization of soil erodibility in this ecosystem is important from the standpoint of conserving fragile ecosystems and planning management practices. Five adjacent land uses (cropland, grassland, woodland, plantation, and recreational land) were selected for this research. Analysis of variance showed that soil properties and RUSLE-K statistically changed with land use changes and soils of the recreational land and cropland were more sensitive to water erosion than those of the woodland, grassland, and plantation. This was mainly due to the significant decreases in soil organic matter (SOM) and hydraulic conductivity (HC) in those lands. Additionally, soil samples randomly collected from the depths of 0–10 cm (D 1) and 10–20 cm (D 2) with irregular intervals in an area of 1,200 by 4,200 m sufficiently characterized not only the spatial distribution of soil organic matter (SOM), hydraulic conductivity (HC), clay (C), silt (Si), sand (S) and silt plus very fine sand (Si + VFS) but also the spatial distribution of RUSLE-K as an algebraically estimate of these parameters together with field assessment of soil structure to assess the dynamic relationships between soil properties and land use types. In this study, in order to perform the spatial analyses, the mean sampling intervals were 43, 50, 64, 78, 85 m for woodland, plantation, grassland, recreation, and cropland with the sample numbers of 56, 79, 72, 13, and 69, respectively, resulting in an average interval of 64 m for whole study area. Although nugget effect and nugget effect–sill ratio gave an idea about the sampling design adequacy, the better results are undoubtedly likely by both equi-probable spatial sampling and random sampling representative of all land uses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agassi, M. (1996). Soil erosion, conservation, and rehabilitation. New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, E. E., Wendt, R. C., & Piest, R. F. (1983). Physical and chemical properties of eroded soil aggregates. Transactions of the ASAE, 26, 465–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumhardt, R. L., & Lascano, R. J. (1996). Rain infiltration as effected by wheat residue amount and distribution in ridge tillage. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 60, 1908–1913.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bo, S., Shenglu, Z., & Qiguo, Z. (2003). Evaluation of spatial and temporal changes of soil quality based on geostatistical analysis in the hill region of subtropical China. Geoderma, 115, 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boix-Fayos, C., Calvo-Cases, A., Imeson, A. C., & Soriano-Soto, M. D. (2001). Influence of soil properties on the aggregation of some Mediterranean soils and the use of aggregate size and stability as land degradation indicators. Catena, 44, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brath, A., Castellarin, A., & Montanari, A. (2002). Assessing the effects of land use changes on annual average gross erosion. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 6(2), 255–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruijnzeel, L. A. (1990). The hydrology of moist tropical forest and effects of conversion: A state of knowledge review. International Association of Hydrology. Paris, Amsterdam: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruijnzeel, L. A. (1993). Land-use and hydrology in warm humid regions: Where do we stand? International Association of Hydrology Publication, 216, 3–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, T. M., & Webster, R. (1986a). Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: I. The semivariogram and punctual kriging. Journal of Soil Science, 31, 315–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, T. M., & Webster, R. (1986b). Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: II. Block kriging. Journal of Soil Science, 31, 333–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cambardella, C. A., Moorman, T. B., Novak, J. M., Parkin, T. B., Karlen, D. L., Turco, R. F., et al. (1994). Field scale variability of soil properties in Central Iowa soils. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 58, 1501–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, W. W., Mitchell, W. R., & Watt, W. J. (1991). Basic soil interpretations for forest development planning: Surface soil erosion and soil compaction. Land Management Report number 63. B. C. Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, Victoria, B. C., 17 p.

  • Celik, I. (2005). Land-use effects on organic matter and physical properties of soil in a Southern Mediterranean highland of Turkey. Soil and Tillage Research, 83(2), 270–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerri, C. E. P., Bernoux, M., Chaplot, V., Volkoff, B., Victoria, R. L., Melillo, J. M., et al. (2004). Assessment of soil property spatial variation in an Amazon pasture: Basis for selecting agronomic experimental area. Geoderma, 123, 51–68.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. Y., & Mead, J. A. (1988). Surface physical properties of a sandy loam soil under different tillage practices. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 26, 549–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Climo, W. J., & Richardson, M. (1984). Factors affecting the susceptibility of three soils in the Manawatu to stock treading. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 27, 247–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evrendilek, F., Celik, I., & Kilic, S. (2004). Changes in soil organic carbon and other physical soil properties along adjacent Mediterranean forest, grassland, and cropland ecosystems in Turkey. Journal of Arid Environments, 59, 743–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, G. W., & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle-size analysis. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis, 2nd ed. Part 1. Agron. Monogr. 9 (pp. 383–411). Madison, WI: ASA and SSSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, P. B., & McNamara, R. M. (1992). An analysis of the physical condition of two intensively grazed Southland soils. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association, 54, 71–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, D. T., & Home, D. J. (1988). The effect of treading damage on pasture utilisation and topsoil structure. In D. J. Home & I. F. H. Furkert (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth National Land Drainage Seminar, occasional report 9, pp. 133–141.

  • Haynes, R. J. (1999). Size and activity of the soil microbial biomass under grass and arable management. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 30, 210–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillel, D. (1980). Applications of soil physic (380 pp). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imeson, A. C., & Vis, M. (1984). Assessing soil aggregate stability by water-drop impact and ultrasonic dispersion. Geoderma, 34, 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaaks, H. E., & Srivastava, R. M. (1989). An introduction to applied geostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Journel, A. G., & Huijbregts, C. S. (1978). Mining geostatistics. New York: Akademic, p. 600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klute, A., & Dirksen, C. (1986). Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods, 2nd ed. Agron. Monogr. 9 (pp. 687–734). Madison, WI: ASA–SSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loch, R. J., & Pocknee, C. (1995). Effects of aggregation on soil erodibility: Australian experience. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 50, 504–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luk, S. H., & Hamilton, H. (1986). Experimental effects of antecedent moisture and soil strength on rainwash erosion of two luvisols, Ontario. Geoderma, 37, 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallants, D., Binayak, P. M., Diederik, J., & Feyen, J. (1996). Spatial variability of hydraulic properties in a multi-layered soil profile. Soil Science, 161, 167–181.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mapa, R. B., & Kumaragamage, D. (1996). Variability of soil properties in a tropical Alfisol used for shifting cultivation. Soil Technology, 9, 187–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matheron, G. (1965). Principles of geostatistics. Economic Geology, 58, 1246–1266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mays, M. D. (1996). Chapter 1: Data reliability and risk assessment in soil interpretations. Madison, WI: ASA–SSA (Special Pub. no. 47).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. P. C. (1995). Soil erosion and conservation. White Plains, NY: Longman.

  • Mulla, D. J., & McBratney, A. B. (2001). Soil spatial variability. In M. E. Sumner (Ed.), Handbook of soil science (pp. A321–A352). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nael, M., Khademi, H., & Hajabbasi, M. A. (2004). Response of soil quality indicators and their spatial variability to land degradation in Central Iran. Applied Soil Ecology, 27, 221–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1982). Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In A. L. Page (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis, 2nd ed. Part 2. Agron. Monogr. 9 (pp. 539–579). Madison, WI: ASA and SSSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renard, K. G., Foster, G. R., Weesies, G. A., McCool, D. K., & Yoder, D. C. (1997). Predicting soil erosion by water: A guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). USDA–ARS, Agriculture Handbook number 703.

  • Shepherd, T. G., Newman, R. H., Ross, C. W., & Dando, J. L. (2001). Tillage induced changes in soil structure and soil organic matter fraction. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 39, 465–489.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soil Survey Staff. (1951). Soil survey manual. Agriculture Hand Book no. 18. Washington, DC: Agricultural Research Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Survey Staff. (1999). Soil taxonomy. A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. Washington, DC: USDA (handbook no. 436).

  • Sparling, G. P., Shepherd, T. G., & Kettles, H. A. (1992). Changes in soil C, microbial C and aggregate stability under continuous maize and cereal cropping, and after restoration to pasture in soils from Manawatu region, New Zealand. Soil and Tillage Research, 24, 141–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, P. C., & Misra, R. K. (1997). Erosion and sediment characteristics of cultivated forest soils as affected by the mechanical stability of aggregates. Catena, 30, 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trangmar, B. B., Yost, R. S., & Uehara, G. (1985). Application of geostatistics to spatial studies of soil properties. Advances in Argonomy, 38, 45–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Western, A. W., Grayson, R. B., Bloschl, G., & Wilson, D. J. (2003). Spatial variability of soil moisture and its implication for scaling. In Y. Pachepsky, D. E. Radcliffe, & H. M. Selim (Eds.), Scaling methods in soil physics (pp. 119–142). Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, J. K., & Chang, C. (2002). Macroaggregate characteristics in cultivated soils after 25 annual manure applications. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 66, 1637–1647.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier, W. H., Johnson, C. B., & Cross, B. V. (1971). A soil erodibility nomograph for farmland and construction sites. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 26, 189–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier, W. H., & Smith, D. D. (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: A guide to conservation planning. USDA, Agriculture Handbook number 537.

  • Wu, R., & Tiessen, H. (2002). Effect of land use on soil degradation in Alpine grassland soil, China. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 66, 1648–1655.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to İlhami Bayramin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bayramin, İ., Basaran, M., Erpul, G. et al. Assessing the effects of land use changes on soil sensitivity to erosion in a highland ecosystem of semi-arid Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 140, 249–265 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-007-9864-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-007-9864-2

Keywords

Navigation