Influence of a Compacted Subsurface Layer

on Soil Erosion
Svetla Rousseva1
N. Poushkarov Research Institute for Soil Science and Agroecology,
Sofia, Bulgaria

Lecture given at the

College on Soil Physics
Trieste, 3-21 March 2003
LNS0418026

svetrou@yahoo.com

Influence of a Compacted Subsurface Layer on Soil Erosion

301

It has been recognized that water erosion of soil and soil compaction are
among the major soil degradation processes in Europe (Varallyay, 1992; Oldeman et
al., 1991; Fraters, 1996). Little is known about the relationships between soil
compaction and the soil erosion processes (van den Akker et al., 1999; Froese et al.,
1999). Effect of rainfall on soil erosion, i.e. the rainfall erosivity has been related
logarithmically to rainfall intensity (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978). Texture, structure,
water permeability and humus content are the soil properties, which have been
considered as most important for evaluating the effect of soil on water erosion rates
(Wischmeier and Mannering, 1969; Wischmeier et al., 1971). I will discuss a
mathematical model developed for estimating the influence of compacted subsurface
layer formed below a shallow tillage layer on soil erosion.
The mathematical model is developed on the basis of data from field
experiments with simulated rainfalls of intensities from 18 to 120 mm h-1 to study the
influence of compacted subsurface layer caused by continuous shallow tillage on the
soil erosion processes on Haplic Kastanozem (Rousseva and Lozanova, 2000). A soil
with a compacted subsurface layer can be represented conceptually as a media
consisting of two layers tilled layer TL and compacted layer CL which differ in
their physical properties, such as bulk density BD and water retention W.

T
C

BDTL WTL
BDCL WCL

Indices of compaction IBD and soil water distribution IW are defined to

characterize the profile variability of the antecedent soil physical conditions. The
index of compaction characterizes the degree of compaction by the relative change of
soil bulk density in CL with regard to TL while the index of soil water distribution
identifies the respective change of soil water content.
IBD = BD = 100 (BDCL BDTL) / BDTL

(1)

where IBD (100 > IBD > 0) is the index of subsurface compaction, %; BD the relative
increase of soil bulk density in CL with regard to TL; BDCL the value of BD in CL,
and BDTL the value of BD in TL.
IW = W = 100 (WCL WTL) / WTL

(2)

where IW (100 > IW > -100) is the index of the soil water distribution profile, %; W
the relative change of gravimetric soil water content in CL with regard to TL; WCL the
value of W in CL, and WTL the value of W in TL.

302

S. Rousseva

Considered characteristics of the soil erosion processes are the minimal

rainfall impacting energy needed to initiate runoff E0, the sediment load per unit
rainfall impacting energy SL and the net sediment load per 50 mm rainfall SLnet. The
model for estimating the influence of compacted subsurface layer formed below a
shallow tillage layer on soil erosion links E0, SL and SLnet [i.e. f(IBD, IW, IR)] with the
indices of compaction and soil water distribution, and the rainfall intensity. Hence,
we have
(3)
f(IBD, IW, IR)= a0 + [a1 (IW) m + a2 (IBD) n] [a3 + a4 log10 (IR)]
where a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, m and n are parameters to be evaluated by quasi-Newton nonlinear estimation fit of Equation (3) to measured values of E0, SL (or SLnet), IBD, IW
and IR the rainfall intensity, mm.h-1.
The data shown in Tables 1 and 2 give an idea about the value ranges of the
input parameters evaluating the parameters of Equation (3) presented in Table 3.
Table 1. Means and standard deviations of the input (dependent) variables for the left side of
Equation (3): the minimal rainfall impact energy needed to initiate runoff E0, the sediment
load per unit rainfall impact energy SL and the net sediment load per 50 mm rainfall SLnet.

Intensity
level

IR1a
IR2a
IR3a
IR4a
IR1b
IR2b
IR3b
IR4b

E0 (MJ.ha-1)
Mean
Std. Dev.
5.009
6.658
4.013
5.060
1.902
2.337
1.326
1.198
1.909
2.478
2.329
3.060
1.806
2.120
1.251
1.063

compaction of the layer 10-30 cm;

SL (t.MJ-1)
Mean
Std. Dev.
0.205
0.164
1.511
0.735
3.889
0.575
7.294
1.047
0.209
0.076
0.523
0.054
1.098
0.099
2.779
0.521

SLnet (t.ha-1)
Mean
Std. Dev.
2.473
1.973
17.945
13.200
48.390
14.423
94.831
23.475
2.610
0.987
6.636
2.250
13.511
4.036
36.875
6.321

no subsurface compaction of the layer 10-30 cm.

Influence of a Compacted Subsurface Layer on Soil Erosion

303

Table 2. Means and standard deviations of the input variables for the right side of Equation
(3): rainfall intensity IR and the indices of subsurface compaction IBD, and soil water profile
I W.

Intensity
level
IR1a
IR2a
IR3a
IR4a
IR1b
IR2b
IR3b
IR4b

IBD (%)
Mean
Std. Dev.
16.3
2.6
14.9
3.2
14.6
4.2
13.8
4.0
8.4
1.1
9.3
0.5
8.9
0.9
8.1
1.8

IW (%)
Mean
Std. Dev.
27.0
60.3
26.0
61.1
26.0
61.5
24.0
62.6
3.3
8.5
-1.6
12.3
-2.2
12.9
-3.6
13.8

compaction of the subsurface layer 10-30 cm;

IR (mm.h-1)
Mean
Std. Dev.
20.1
1.8
29.1
3.1
52.8
6.0
107.3
9.7
19.7
1.3
34.5
5.1
57.9
5.5
110.2
9.4

no subsurface compaction.

Table 3. Values of the parameters of Equation (3) obtained by non-linear fit to the measured
input characteristics.

f
E0
E0
SL
SL
SLnet
SLnet

IW
0
<0
0
<0
0
<0

a0
4.6
0.46
-0.19
0.0
-5.2
-7.3

a1
0.08
-0.04
0.07
-0.32
0.27
-3.3

m
1
1
1
1
1
1

a2
2.8
0.5
3.58
0.03
13.7
0.03

n
-0.8
1
0.2
2
0.6
3

a3
2.9
-0.5
-0.7
-0.9
-1.3
-1.7

a4
-1.5
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.03
1.4

The plots in Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 illustrate that the model shows good
capability of predicting the soil erosion characteristics depending on the degree of
compaction and the rainfall intensity. The estimates of E0, SL and SLnet, predicted by
the model for three levels of the index of soil water distribution and four levels of the
rainfall intensity, demonstrate the basic trends of soil erosion behaviour under
conditions of a compacted subsurface layer. It is established that the type of the
relationships between the soil erosion characteristics and the degree of compaction
depends considerably on the index of soil water distribution. Generally, a compacted
subsurface layer affects soil erosion much more significantly when the water content
is higher in TL than in CL. Verification of the model is needed for still broader
ranges of the input soil characteristics to confirm its suitabilility for predictive
purposes.

304

S. Rousseva

14

Estimated E 0 , MJ ha

-1

12
10
8
6
4
Me asured
1:1conformity

2
0
0

6
8
10- 1
Measured E 0 , MJ ha

12

14

Estimated SL , t MJ

-1

2
Measured
1:1conformity

0
0

4
6
-1
Measured SL , t MJ

120

Estimated SL net, t ha

-1

100
80
60
40
20

M easured
1:1conformity

0
0

20

40
60
80 -1 100
Measured SL net, t ha

120

Figure 1. Soil erosion characteristics estimated by Equation (3) versus measured values. The
parameters of Equation (3) are as listed in Table 3.

Influence of a Compacted Subsurface Layer on Soil Erosion

10

I W = -20 %

I=0.3 mm/min
I=0.5 mm/min
I=1 mm/min
I=2 mm/min

-1

8
E 0 , MJ ha

305

6
4
2
0
0

10

10

15 20
I BD, %

25

30

25

30

25

30

I W= 0%

-1

8
E 0 , MJ ha

6
4
2
0
0

10

10

15 20
I BD, %

I W =20 %

E 0 , MJ ha

-1

8
6
4
2
0
0

10

15 20
I BD, %

Figure 2. Predicted relationships between the minimal rainfall impact energy needed to initiate
runoff E0 and the index of subsurface compaction IBD for four levels of rainfall intensity I and
three levels of the index of soil water distribution IW.

306

S. Rousseva

20

I W =-20 %

I=0.3 mm/min
I=0.5 mm/min
I=1 mm/min
I=2 mm/min

SL , t MJ

-1

15
10
5
0
0

10

15 20
I BD, %

25

30

25

30

25

30

I W = 0%

SL , t MJ

-1

4
3
2
1
0
0

10

15 20
I BD, %

I W=20%

SL , t MJ

-1

4
3
2
1
0
0

10

15 20
I BD, %

Figure 3. Predicted relationships between the sediment load per unit rainfall, impact energy SL
and the index of subsurface compaction IBD for four levels of rainfall intensity I and three
levels of the index of soil water distribution IW.

Influence of a Compacted Subsurface Layer on Soil Erosion

1200

I W =-20%

I=0.3 mm/min
I=0.5 mm/min
I=1 mm/min
I=2 mm/min

1000
-1

800

SL net, t ha

307

600
400
200
0
0

80

10

15 20
I BD, %

25

30

25

30

25

30

I W = 0%

SL net , MJ ha

-1

60
40
20
0
0

100

10

15 20
I BD, %

I W =20 %

SL net , t ha

-1

80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15 20
I BD, %

Figure 4. Predicted relationships between the net sediment load SLnet caused by 50 mm rainfall
and the index of subsurface compaction IBD for four levels of rainfall intensity I and three
levels of the index of soil water distribution IW.

308

S. Rousseva

References
Fraters, B. (1996): Generalized Soil Map of Europe. Aggregation of the FAO-Unesco
soil units based on the characteristics determining the vulnerability to
degradation processes. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment
(RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands. RIVM Report no. 481505006. 60 pp.
Froese, J.C., Cruse, R.M. and Ghaffarzadeh, M. (1999): Erosion mechanics of soils
with an impermeable subsurface layer. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63: 1836-1841.
Oldeman, R., Hakkeling, R.T.A. and Sombroek, W. (1991): World Map on the Status
of Human-Induced Soil Degradation. An Explanatory Note. Global Assessment
of Soil Degradation. GLASOD. ISRIC Winand Centre ISSS FAO ITC,
Wageningen.
Rousseva, S. and Lozanova, L. (2000): Influence of subsoil compaction of
Kastanozem on the soil erosion processes. In: M. Birkas, C. Gyuicza, C. Farkas
and M. Gecse (Eds.) Proceedings of the 2-nd Workshop and International
Conference on Subsoil Compaction. Gdll, Hungary (29-31 May 2000), pp.
73-79.
Van den Akker, J.J.H., Arvidsson, J. and Horn, R. (Eds.) (1999): Experiences with the
impact and prevention of subsoil compaction in the European Community.
Proceedings of the first workshop of the Concerted Action Experiences with the
impact of subsoil compaction on soil, crop growth and environment and ways to
prevent subsoil compaction, 28-30 May 1998, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Wageningen, DLO-Staring Centrum. Report 168, 344 pp.
Varallyay, G. (1992): Central and East European erosion overview. In: Soil erosion
prevention and remediation workshop, US-Central and Eastern European AgroEnvironmental Program, April 27 May 1 1992, Budapest, Hungary.
USDA/SCS, pp. 26-37.
Wischmeier, W.H, Johnson, C.B., Cross, B.V. (1971): A soil erodibility nomograph
for farmland and construction sites. J. Soil and Water Conservation. 26: 189-193.
Wischmeier, W.H. and Smith, D.D. (1978): Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses A
Guide to Conservation Planning. USDA, Agricultural Handbook No. 537. US
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., 58 pp.
Wischmeier, W.H. and Mannering, J.V. (1969): Relation of soil properties to its
erodibility. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 33: 131-137.