Quantitative attribution analysis of soil erosion in different geomorphological types in karst areas: Based on the geodetector method

doi:10.1007/s11442-019-1596-z

Abstract

Abstract:

The formation mechanism and influencing factors identification of soil erosion are the core and frontier issues of current research. However, studies on the multi-factor synthesis are still relatively lacked. In this study, the simulation of soil erosion and its quantitative attribution analysis have been conducted in different geomorphological types in a typical karst basin based on the RUSLE model and the geodetector method. The influencing factors, such as land use type, slope, rainfall, elevation, lithology and vegetation cover, have been taken into consideration. Results show that the strength of association between the six influencing factors and soil erosion was notably different in diverse geomorphological types. Land use type and slope were the dominant factors of soil erosion in the Sancha River Basin, especially for land use type whose power of determinant (q value) for soil erosion was much higher than other factors. The q value of slope declined with the increase of relief in mountainous areas, namely it was ranked as follows: middle elevation hill> small relief mountain> middle relief mountain. Multi-factors interactions were proven to significantly strengthen soil erosion, particularly for the combination of land use type with slope, which can explain 70% of soil erosion distribution. It can be found that soil erosion in the same land use type with different slopes (such as dry land with slopes of 5° and above 25°) or in the diverse land use types with the same slope (such as dry land and forest with a slope of 5°), varied much. These indicate that prohibiting steep slope cultivation and Grain for Green Project are reasonable measures to control soil erosion in karst areas. Based on statistics of soil erosion difference between diverse stratifications of each influencing factor, results of risk detector suggest that the amount of stratification combinations with significant difference accounted for 55% at least in small relief mountain and middle relief mountainous areas. Therefore, the spatial heterogeneity of soil erosion and its influencing factors in different geomorphological types should be investigated to control karst soil loss more effectively.

Key words: soil erosion distribution, influencing factors, RUSLE model, geodetector, karst, Sancha River basin

Huan WANG, Jiangbo GAO, Wenjuan HOU. Quantitative attribution analysis of soil erosion in different geomorphological types in karst areas: Based on the geodetector method[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2019, 29(2): 271-286.

Figures/Tables 10

Figure 1

Figure 2

Table 1

Table 2

Figure 3

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

References 34

[1]	Arnoldus H M J, 1980. An approximation of the rainfall factor in the universal soil loss equation. In: De Boodt M, Gabriels D. Assessment of Erosion. Chichester UK: Wiley, 127-132.
[2]	Bai X, Zhang X, Long Y et al., 2013. Use of 137Cs and 210Pbex measurements on deposits in a karst depression to study the erosional response of a small karst catchment in southwest China to land-use change.Hydrological Processes, 27(6): 822-829. doi: 10.1002/hyp.v27.6
[3]	Cai Y, Wan J, Wang Y et al., 2015. Study on Land Change in Guizhou Karst Plateau Mountain Area. Beijing: Science Press, 61-62. (in Chinese)
[4]	Chen S, Yang X, Xiao L et al., 2014. Study of soil erosion in the southern hillside area of China based on RUSLE model.Resources Science, 36(6): 1288-1297. (in Chinese)
[5]	Dai Q, Peng X, Wang P et al., 2018. Surface erosion and underground leakage of yellow soil on slopes in karst regions of southwest China.Land Degradation & Development, 29(8): 2438-2448.
[6]	Febles-Gonzalez J M, Vega-Carreno M B, Tolon-Becerra Aet al., 2012. Assessment of soil erosion in karst regions of Havana, Cuba.Land Degradation & Development, 23(5): 465-474. doi: 10.1002/ldr.1089
[7]	Feng T, Chen H, Polyakov V O et al., 2016. Soil erosion rates in two karst peak-cluster depression basins of northwest Guangxi, China: Comparison of the RUSLE model with 137Cs measurements.Geomorphology, 253: 217-224. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.10.013
[8]	Gutierrez F, Parise M, De Waele J et al., 2014. A review on natural and human-induced geohazards and impacts in karst.Earth-Science Reviews, 138: 61-88. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.08.002
[9]	Hou W, Gao J, Peng T et al., 2016. Review of ecosystem vulnerability studies in the karst region of southwest China based on a structure-function-habitat framework.Progress in Geography, 35(3): 320-330. (in Chinese) doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.03.006
[10]	Hu Y, Wang J, Li X et al., 2011. Geographical detector-based risk assessment of the under-five mortality in the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, China. Plos One, 6(6): e21427. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021427 pmid: 3124508
[11]	Hutchinson M F, 2002. Anusplin Version 4.2 User Guide. Centre for resource and environment studies. Canberra: Austrilian National University.
[12]	Li J, Lu D, Xu C et al., 2017. Spatial heterogeneity and its changes of population on the two sides of Hu Line.Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(1): 148-160. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/dlxb201701012
[13]	Li Z, Cao W, Liu B et al., 2008. Current status and developing trend of soil erosion in China.Science of Soil & Water Conservation, 6(1): 57-62. (in Chinese)
[14]	Luo W, Jasiewicz J, Stepinski T et al., 2016. Spatial association between dissection density and environmental factors over the entire conterminous United States. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(2): 692-700. doi: 10.1002/2015GL066941
[15]	McCool D K, Brown L C, Foster G Ret al., 1987. Revised slope steepness factor for the universal soil loss equation.Transactions of the Asae, 30(5): 1387-1396. doi: 10.13031/2013.30576
[16]	McCool D K, Foster G R, Mutchler C Ket al., 1989. Revised slope length factor for the universal soil loss equation.Transactions of the ASAE, 32(5): 1571-1576. doi: 10.13031/2013.30576
[17]	Peng T, Wang S, 2012. Effects of land use, land cover and rainfall regimes on the surface runoff and soil loss on karst slopes in southwest China. Catena, 90(1): 53-62. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2011.11.001
[18]	Peng X, Dai Q, Li C et al., 2018. Role of underground fissure flow in near-surface rainfall-runoff process on a rock mantled slope in the karst rocky desertification area.Engineering Geology, 243: 10-17. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.06.007
[19]	Renard K G, Foster G R, Weesies G A et al., 1997. Predicting soil erosion by water: A guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Agriculture handbook. USDA, Washington, DC.
[20]	Tong L, Xu X, Fu Y et al., 2014. Impact of environmental factors on snail distribution using geographical detector model.Progress in Geography, 33(5): 625-635. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.05.004
[21]	Wang J, Li X, Christakos G et al., 2010. Geographical detectors-based health risk assessment and its application in the neural tube defects study of the Heshun region, China.International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24(1): 107-127. doi: 10.1080/13658810802443457
[22]	Wang J, Xu C, 2017. Geodetector: Principle and prospective.Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(1): 116-134. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/dlxb201701010
[23]	Wang S, Liu Q, Zhang D, 2004. Karst rocky desertification in southwestern China: Geomorphology, landuse, impact and rehabilitation.Land Degradation & Development, 15(2): 115-121.
[24]	Wang Y, Cai Y, Pan M, 2013. Analysis on the relationship between soil erosion and land use in Wujiang River Basin in Guizhou province.Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 20(3): 11-18. (in Chinese)
[25]	Williams J, Jones C A, Kiniry J R et al., 1989. The EPIC crop growth-model. Transactions of the ASAE, 32(2): 497-511. doi: 10.13031/2013.31032
[26]	Xiong K, Li J, Long M, 2012. Features of soil and water loss and key issues in demonstration areas for combating karst rocky desertification.Acta Geographica Sinica, 67(7): 878-888. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/xb201207002
[27]	Xu Y, Shao X, 2006. Estimation of soil erosion supported by GIS and RUSLE: A case study of Maotiaohe watershed, Guizhou province.Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 28(4): 67-71. (in Chinese)
[28]	Yan Y, Dai Q, Yuan Y et al., 2018. Effects of rainfall intensity on runoff and sediment yields on bare slopes in a karst area, SW China. Geoderma, 330: 30-40. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.05.026
[29]	Zeng C, Wang S, Bai X et al., 2017. Soil erosion evolution and spatial correlation analysis in a typical karst geomorphology using RUSLE with GIS.Solid Earth, 8(4): 1-26. doi: 10.5194/se-8-1-2017
[30]	Zhan D, Zhang W, Yu J et al., 2015. Analysis of influencing mechanism of residents’ livability satisfaction in Beijing using geographical detector.Progress in Geography, 34(8): 966-975. (in Chinese) doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2015.08.004
[31]	Zhang H, Yang Q, Li R et al., 2013a. Extension of a GIS procedure for calculating the RUSLE equationLS factor. Computers & Geosciences, 52: 177-188. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2012.09.027
[32]	Zhang X, Wang S, Bai X et al., 2013b. Relationships between the spatial distribution of karst land desertification and geomorphology, lithology, precipitation, and population density in Guizhou province.Earth & Environment, 41(1): 1-6. (in Chinese)
[33]	Zhang X, Wang S, He Xet al., 2007. Soil creeping in weathering crusts of carbonate rocks and underground soil losses on karst slopes. Earth & Environment, 35(3): 202-206. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1631/jzus.2007.A1858
[34]	Zhou C, Cheng W, Qian Jet al., 2009. Research on the classification system of digital land geomorphology of 1:1000000 in China.Journal of Geo-information Science, 11(6): 707-724. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1016/S1874-8651(10)60080-4

Land use type	Paddy field	Dry land	Forest	Open forest	Shrub	Grassland	Water	Construction land	Bare rock
C value	0.1	0.22	0.006	0.01	0.01	0.04	0	0	0
P value	0.15	0.4	1	1	1	1	0	0	0

Description	Interaction
q(X1∩X2)<Min(q(X1), q(X2))	Weakened, nonlinear
Min(q(X1), q(X2))<q(X1∩X2)<Max(q(X1), q(X2))	Weakened, single factor nonlinear
q(X1∩X2)>Max(q(X1), q(X2))	Enhanced, double factors
q(X1∩X2)=q(X1) + q(X2)	Independent
q(X1∩X2)>q(X1) + q(X2)	Enhanced, nonlinear

	Soil erosion (t ha^-1 a^-1)	Slope (°)	Rainfall (mm)	Elevation (m)	Area of dry land (km²)	Area of steep slopes (km²)	Total area (km²)
Middle elevation plain	8.32	4.80	1233.82	1256.51	17.54	0.06	98.30
Middle elevation terrace	6.49	3.97	1172.98	1445.74	19.92	0.02	99.64
Middle elevation hill	12.62	11.00	1199.28	1383.46	159.60	3.41	717.72
Small relief mountain	11.87	14.91	1136.88	1482.15	656.15	51.67	3016.14
Middle relief mountain	10.22	16.34	1096.33	1775.38	189.62	23.70	928.89

	Land use	Slope	Rainfall	Lithology	VC	Elevation
Middle elevation plain	0.622	0.082	0.091	-	-	0.028
Middle elevation terrace	0.685	0.086	0.037	-	-	-
Middle elevation hill	0.513	0.126	0.010	0.031	0.059	0.010
Small relief mountain	0.567	0.071	0.051	0.01	0.005	0.013
Middle relief mountain	0.620	0.062	0.089	0.037	0.005	0.193

Geomorphology	Middle elevation plain	Middle elevation terrace	Middle elevation hill	Small relief mountain	Middle relief mountain
Interaction 1	Land use∩rainfall	Land use∩slope	Land use∩slope	Land use∩slope	Land use∩slope
q	0.710	0.764	0.726	0.707	0.742
Interaction 2	Land use∩VC	Land use∩VC	Land use∩ elevation	Land use∩ rainfall	Land use∩ rainfall
q	0.695	0.720	0.567	0.648	0.679
Interaction 3	Land use∩ lithology	Land use∩ rainfall	Land use∩ rainfall	Land use∩ lithology	Land use∩elevation
q	0.682	0.708	0.566	0.586	0.665