| |
DOI: | 10.2134/jeq2007.0094 |
Web URL(s): | https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/jeq/articles/37/1/79 Last checked: 11/07/2016 Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/jeq/pdfs/37/1/79 Last checked: 11/08/2016 Requires: PDF Reader Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website |
Publication Type:
| Refereed |
Author(s): | Boomer, Kathleen B.;
Weller, Donald E.;
Jordan, Thomas E. |
Author Affiliation: | Boomer, Weller, Jordan: Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, Maryland |
Title: | Empirical models based on the universal soil loss equation fail to predict sediment discharges from Chesapeake Bay catchments |
Column Name: | Technical reports Other records with the "Technical reports" Column
|
Section: | Technical reports: Landscape and watershed processes Other records with the "Technical reports: Landscape and watershed processes" Section
|
Source: | Journal of Environmental Quality. Vol. 37, No. 1, January/February 2008, p. 79-89. |
Publishing Information: | Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America |
# of Pages: | 11 |
Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Bank erosion; Erosion control; Models; Sediment test; Soil loss; Watershed management; Watersheds
|
Abstract/Contents: | "The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and its derivatives are widely used for identifying watersheds with a high potential for degrading stream water quality. We compared sediment yields estimated from regional application of the USLE, the automated revised RUSLE2, and five sediment delivery ratio algorithms to measured annual average sediment delivery in 78 catchments of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. We did the same comparisons for another 23 catchments monitored by the USGS. Predictions exceeded observed sediment yields by more than 100% and were highly correlated with USLE erosion predictions (Pearson r range, 0.730.92; p < 0.001). RUSLE2-erosion estimates were highly correlated with USLE estimates (r = 0.87; p < 001), so the method of implementing the USLE model did not change the results. In ranked comparisons between observed and predicted sediment yields, the models failed to identify catchments with higher yields (r range, 0.280.00; p > 0.14). In a multiple regression analysis, soil erodibility, log (stream flow), basin shape (topographic relief ratio), the square-root transformed proportion of forest, and occurrence in the Appalachian Plateau province explained 55% of the observed variance in measured suspended sediment loads, but the model performed poorly (r2 = 0.06) at predicting loads in the 23 USGS watersheds not used in fitting the model. The use of USLE or multiple regression models to predict sediment yields is not advisable despite their present widespread application. Integrated watershed models based on the USLE may also be unsuitable for making management decisions." |
Language: | English |
References: | 77 |
Note: | Figures Tables Graphs |
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete): Boomer, K. B., D. E. Weller, and T. E. Jordan. 2008. Empirical models based on the universal soil loss equation fail to predict sediment discharges from Chesapeake Bay catchments. J. Environ. Qual. 37(1):p. 79-89. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=132726 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 132726. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
| DOI: 10.2134/jeq2007.0094 |
| Web URL(s): https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/jeq/articles/37/1/79 Last checked: 11/07/2016 Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/jeq/pdfs/37/1/79 Last checked: 11/08/2016 Requires: PDF Reader Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website |
| MSU catalog number: b2225072a |
| Find from within TIC: Digitally in TIC by record number. |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |