4.3 Article

USLE-Based Assessment of Soil Erosion by Water in the Nyabarongo River Catchment, Rwanda

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13080835

关键词

soil erosion; water pollution; cropland; land-cover and land-use; USLE; GIS; remote sensing; Nyabarongo River Catchment; Rwanda

资金

  1. National Natural Scientific Foundation of China [U1503301]
  2. National Basic Research Programs of China [2014CB954204]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil erosion has become a serious problem in recent decades due to unhalted trends of unsustainable land use practices. Assessment of soil erosion is a prominent tool in planning and conservation of soil and water resource ecosystems. The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) was applied to Nyabarongo River Catchment that drains about 8413.75 km(2) (33%) of the total Rwanda coverage and a small part of the Southern Uganda (about 64.50 km(2)) using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Remote Sensing technologies. The estimated total annual actual soil loss was approximately estimated at 409 million tons with a mean erosion rate of 490 t.ha(-1).y(-1) (i.e., 32.67 mm.y(-1)). The cropland that occupied 74.85% of the total catchment presented a mean erosion rate of 618 t.ha(-1).y(-1) (i.e., 41.20 mm.y(-1)) and was responsible for 95.8% of total annual soil loss. Emergency soil erosion control is required with a priority accorded to cropland area of 173,244 ha, which is extremely exposed to actual soil erosion rate of 2222 t.ha(-1).y(-1) (i.e., 148.13 mm.y(-1)) and contributed to 96.2% of the total extreme soil loss in the catchment. According to this study, terracing cultivation method could reduce the current erosion rate in cropland areas by about 78%. Therefore, the present study suggests the catchment management by constructing check dams, terracing, agroforestry and reforestation of highly exposed areas as suitable measures for erosion and water pollution control within the Nyabarongo River Catchment and in other regions facing the same problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据