برآورد حجم هدررفت خاک ناشی از فرسایش خندقی و ارتباط آن با ویژگی‌های خاک و آبخیز در آبخیزهای شریف و هدام استان خوزستان

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار پژوهشی، بخش تحقیقات حفاظت خاک و آبخیزداری، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی خوزستان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، اهواز، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری علوم و مهندسی آبخیزداری، دانشکده ی منابع طبیعی و علوم دریایی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

3 استادیار پژوهشی، بخش تحقیقات حفاظت خاک و آبخیزداری، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ایلام، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، ایلام، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه و هدف
فرسایش خندقی متأثر از عامل‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌های فراوانی است، که همراه با زیان‌های فراوان اقتصادی و اجتماعی موجب ازبین‌رفتن و هدررفت حجم وسیعی از خاک می‌شود. متغیر بودن تنوع، تعداد و اندازه‌ی تأثیر عامل‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌های مختلف از نقطه‌ای به نقطه دیگر و متفاوت بودن سهم مشارکت آن‌ها در شکل‌گیری و گسترش خندق‌ها در تبعیت از شرایط زمین است. چنین شرایطی سبب شده تحقیقات بیش‌تری جهت شناسایی هر چه بیش‌تر عامل‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌های اثرگذار در رخداد فرسایش خندقی و اندازه مشارکت آن‌ها در شکل‌گیری و گسترش این پدیده انجام شود. پژوهش حاضر، باهدف برآورد حجم هدررفت خاک ناشی از فرسایش خندقی در آبخیزهای هدام و شریف استان خوزستان برنامه‌ریزی شده ‌است. آبخیز مدرس شوشتر با داشتن زیرآبخیزهای شریف و هدام به‌عنوان یکی از آبخیزهای مهم و خاص استان هرساله وسعت زیادی از زمین‌های کشاورزی آن مورد تهدید فرسایش خندقی قرار می‌گیرد.
مواد و روش‌ها
برای انجام این پژوهش، نخست در منطقه‌ی موردمطالعه در طول دوره‌ی 20 ساله (1391-1372) بخش‌های دارای خندق روی نقشه‌ی پستی‌وبلندی با مقیاس 1:250000 مشخص شد. سپس از هر طبقه‌ اقلیمی گرم- خشک بیابانی و گرم- نیمه‌خشک، 15 خندق شناسایی و بررسی شد. ویژگی‌هایی از قبیل شیب نقطه‌ی اولیه‌ی ایجاد خندق و شیب پیشانی خندق از روش میدانی و با استفاده از متر نواری، تراز و دستگاه شیب‌سنج اندازه‌گیری و مساحت سراب پیشانی خندق در محیط گوگل ارث محاسبه شد. هم‌چنین ویژگی‌های فیزیکی و شیمیایی خاک هرکدام از خندق‌ها آزمایش شد.
نتایج و بحث
نتایج نشان داد که متوسط درصد خاک لخت در بالای پیشانی خندق‌های انتخاب‌شده آبخیزهای هدام و شریف به ترتیب 99/8 و 97/26 % بود. بر اساس ویژگی‌های خاک، عامل اصلی‌ ناپایداری خاک و ایجاد فرسایش در خندق‌های هر دو آبخیز شوری خاک ((EC است. ویژگی‌های ریخت‌شناسی خندق‌ها نشان داد که تمامی خندق‌ها در آبخیز هدام دارای مقطع V شکل هستند. در آبخیز شریف تنها خندق B12، دارای مقطع V شکل و مابقی U شکل ‌است. آبخیز هدام دارای بیش‌ترین ژرفا، بیش‌ترین عرض پایین و بیش‌ترین عرض بالای خندق نسبت به آبخیز شریف است. در آبخیز شریف و هدام مجموع حجم هدررفت خاک به ترتیب 23000 و 51579 مترمکعب است. در آبخیز هدام، خندق‌های A18 و B1 به ترتیب دارای بیش‌ترین و کم‌ترین حجم هدررفت خاک، به‌اندازه‌ی 11599 و 1612 مترمکعب است. در آبخیز شریف نیز خندق‌های A2 و B4 به ترتیب دارای بیش‌ترین و کم‌ترین حجم هدررفت خاک به‌اندازه‌ی 5282 و 369 مترمکعب است.
نتیجه ­گیری و پیشنهادها
مهم‌ترین عامل در هدررفت خاک و گسترش خندق‌ها، ویژگی‌های آبخیز در سراب پیشانی خندق (گستره و شیب آبخیز) و هم‌چنین ریزدانه‌بودن خاک (لای زیاد) و بالا بودن شوری خاک بوده است. با توجه به لخت‌بودن بیش‌ازحد خاک، افزایش زبری سطح خاک با استقرار پوشش گیاهی، به‌عنوان یکی از روش‌های سازگار و کم‌هزینه در امر حفاظت منابع خاک است. برای مهارکردن گسترش فرسایش خندقی افزایش ماده‌ی آلی خاک، اصلاح خاک‌های شور و سدیمی با کاربرد اصلاح‌کننده‌ها و هم‌چنین انحراف رواناب‌های پیشانی خندق ضروری است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Estimation of Soil Loss Volume Due to Gully Erosion and its Relationship with Soil and Watershed Characteristics in Sharif and Haddam Watersheds of Khuzestan Province

نویسندگان [English]

  • Freidoon Soleimani 1
  • Mahin Kalehhouei 2
  • Shamsolah Asgari 3
1 Assistant Professor, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, Khuzestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Ahvaz, Iran
2 Ph.D., Student in Department of Watershed Management Engineering, Faculty of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University
3 Assistant Professor, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, Ilam Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Ilam, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction and Objective
Gully erosion affected by many factors causes the destruction and loss of large volumes of soil along with great economic and social damage. The variability of diversity, the number and size of the influence of different factors from one point to another and the difference of their participation in the formation and expansion of gullies is based on the conditions of the land. Such conditions have caused more researches to be carried out to identify as many factors as possible in the phenomenon of gully erosion and the extent of their participation in the formation and expansion of this phenomenon. In this regard, the present study has been planned with the aim of monitoring and evaluating the effective factors in the development of gullies in the Haddam and Sharif watersheds of Khuzestan province. Modares Shushtar watershed, having Sharif and Hadam subwatersheds, as one of the important and typical basins of the province, every year a large area of its agricultural land is threatened by gully erosion.
Materials and Methods
In order to carry out this research, first, the parts with gullies in the study area were identified on the topography map with a scale of 1:250,000 during the 20-year period (1993-2012). Then, 15 gullies have been identified and investigated from each climate class of hot-dry desert and hot-semi-arid. Features such as the slope of the initial point of creating a gully and the slope of the front of the gully were calculated by the field method and using a tape measure, level and inclinometer measuring device and the mirage area of the gully front in the Google Earth softwave. Also, the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil of each gully were tested.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the average percentage of bare soil above the head cut of selected gullies in Haddam and Sharif watersheds is 99.8% and 97.26%, respectively. Based on soil characteristics, the main cause of soil instability and erosion in gullies in both watersheds is EC. The morphometric characteristics of the gullies showed that in the Haddam watershed, all gullies are V-shaped in terms of cross section, and in the Sharif watershed, only gullies are B12, V-shaped and the rest are U-shaped. The Haddam watershed has the highest depth, width, and top of the gully compared to the Sharif watershed. The total volume of soil loss in Sharif and Haddam watersheds is 23000 and 51579 m3, respectively. Gullies A18 and B1 in Haddam watershed have the highest and lowest soil loss volume, at 11599 and 1612 m3, respectively. In the Sharif watershed, the maximum and minimum soil loss volume of gullies related to gullies A2 and B4 are 5282 and 369 m2, respectively.
Conclusion and Suggestions 
The most important factors in the volume of soil loss and expansion of gulies are the characteristics of the watershed located upstream of the gully front (such as the extent and slope of the watershed) as well as the fineness of the geological formation (silt) and high soil salinity. Due to the excessive bareness of the soil, increasing the roughness of the soil surface with the establishment of vegetation is one of the compatible and low-cost methods in protecting soil resources. In order to control the spread of gully erosion, it is necessary to increase soil organic matter, modify saline and sodium soils with the use of modifiers, and also divert the runoff from the gully front.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Gully cross section
  • Haddam watershed
  • land use
  • morphometric
  • soil erosion
  • sediment yield

مراجع

Ahmadi H. 2006. Applied geomorphology, University of Tehran press, Volume 1, 688 p. (In Persian).
Ansari M, Soleimani F, Ahmadi A. 2020. Evaluation and zonation of sensitive areas to gully erosion using fuzzy logic (Case study: Ghaleh Gorg watershed- Shushtar). Water and Soil, 34(5): 1033–1045. (In Persian).
Bai Y, Guo M, Kang H, Wang W, Su H, Guo W, Ma Ch. 2021. Morphodynamics of gully development on the platform–slope system of spoil dumps under platform concentrated flow. Land, 10(11): 1270–1279.
Bernatek-Jakiel A, Wrońska-Wałach D. 2018. Impact of piping on gully development in mid-altitude mountains under a temperate climate: A dendrogeomorphological approach. Catena, 165: 320–332.
Damizadeh M, Shadfar S. 2021. Assessment of long-term changes of Gully eroiosn growth in Kondouran Catchment, Hormozgan Province. Environmental Erosion Research Journal, 11(3): 140–159. (In Persian).
Blanco H, Lal R. 2008. Principles of soil conservation and management. Edition number: 1, Springer Dordrecht, 617 p.
Che Othaman NN, Md Isa MN, Ismail RC, Ahmad M I, Hui CK. 2020. Factors that affect soil electrical conductivity (EC) system for smart farming application. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2203(1): 020055.
De Vente J, Poesen J, Verstraeten G. 2005.The application of semi-quantitative methods and reservoir sedimentation rates for the prediction of basin sediment yield in Spain. Journal of Hydrology, 305(1–4): 63–86.
Evans R. 1980. Mechanics of water erosion and their spatial and temporal controls: An empirical viewpoint. Soil Erosion. Chichester, Wiley, 109–128.
Egbueri JC, Igwe O. 2022. Assessing the role of soil engineering properties in gully development and enlargement in southeast Nigeria using geostatistical and novel indexical techniques. Environmental Earth Sciences, 81(7): 1–24.
Eteraph H. 2008. Effects of loose land utilization on fertility and soil erosion in maraveh tappeh region, M.Sc. Thesis, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, 103 p. (In Persian).
Feiznia S, Heshmati M, Ahmadi H, Ghodosi J. 2007. Investigation of gully erosion in marly Agha-Jari formation in Zagross (case study: Ghasre-shirin, Kermanshah). Pajouhesh-va-sazandegi, 20(1): 32–40. (In Persian).
Frankl A, Nyssen J, Vanmaercke M, Poesen J. 2021. Gully prevention and control: Techniques, failures and effectiveness. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 46(1): 220–238.
Jokar Sarhangi E, Khalkhali N. 2019. Evaluation and zonation the gully erosion hazard using bivariate statistical methods (Case Study: Nemarestagh Watershed). Journal of Natural Environmental Hazards, 8(19): 195–208. (In Persian).
Hadley RF, Rolfe BN. 1955. Development and significance of seepage steps in slope erosion. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 36(5): 792–804.
Hoveisi A. 2000. Investigating the factors of the gully erosion expansion in Darkhazine watershed. Master's Thesis of Imam Khomeini Higher Education Center, 98 p. (In Persian).
Kalehhouie M, Kavian A, Gholami L, Jafarian Z. 2020. Influence of start time and coefficient of runoff to application of organic mulch under small laboratory plots. Iranian Journal of Watershed Management Science and Engineering, 13(47): 9–17. (In Persian).
Kavian A, Hayavi F, Boroghani M. 2014. Polyacrylamide effects on splash erosion rate in different soils using rainfall simulator. Journal of Range and Watershed Managment, 67(2): 203–216. (In Persian).
Kheir RB, Chorowicz J, Abdallah C, Dhont D. 2008. Soil and bedrock distribution estimated from gully form and frequency: A GIS-based decision-tree model for Lebanon. Geomorphology, 93(3–4): 482–492.
Kirkby, M.J., & L.J., Bracken. (2009). Gully process and gully dynamics. Earth Surface processes and Landforms. 34(14):1841–1851.
Lafen JM, Roose EJ. 1988. Methodologies for assessment of soil degradation due to water erosion. In Law R. Balum, W. E. and Valentine, c. (Eds.), Soil degrading, CRC press, Bo Ca Raton. 320 p.
Leopold L. B. 1951. Rainfall frequency: an aspect of climatic variation. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 32(3): 347–357.
Li C, Li F, Dai Z, Yang X, Cui X, Luo L. 2020. Spatial variation of gully development in the loess plateau of China based on the morphological perspective. Earth Science Informatics, 13(4), 1103–1117.
Madadi A, Asghari S, marhamat M. (2022). The role of soil characteristics and topographic threshold on gully erosion in Shoor River Watershed (Mohr Township). Quantitative Geomorphological Research, 10(4): 75–95. (In Persian).
Martınez-Casasnovas J. A. 2003. A spatial information technology approach for the mapping and quantification of gully erosion. Catena, 50(2–4): 293–308.
Martins B, Nunes A, Meira-Castro A, Lourenço L, Hermenegildo C. 2022. Local factors controlling gully development in a mediterranean environment. Land, 11(2): 204–305.
Mohammed S, Alsafadi K, Talukdar S, Kiwan S, Hennawi S, Alshihabi O, Sharaf M, Harsanyie E. 2020. Estimation of soil erosion risk in southern part of Syria by using RUSLE integrating geo informatics approach. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 20(14): 100375–100803.
Mosaffaie J, Talebi A. 2014. A statistical view to the water erosion in Iran. Extension and Development of Watershed Management, 2(5): 9–17. (In Persian).
Nachtergaele JJ, Poeson A, Steegen I, Takken L, Beuselinck L, Vandekereckove G, Grovers G. 2001. The value of a physically based model versus an empirical approach in the prediction of Ephemeral gully erosion for loss-dierived soils. Geomorphology, 40(3–4): 237–252.
Olabode OP, San HL. 2022. Hydrogeological assessment of hydraulic conductivity on gully formation in erosion degraded residual soil of an unstable slope. Indian Geotechnical Journal, 52(3): 519–536.
Phinzi K, Abriha D, Bertalan L, Holb I, Szabó S. 2020. Machine learning for gully feature extraction based on a pan-sharpened multispectral image: multiclass vs. Binary Approach. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(4): 252–271.
Poesen J, Nachtergaele J, Verstraeten G, Valentin C. 2003. Gully erosion and environmental change: importance and research needs. Catena, 50(2–4): 91–133.
Ocheli A, Ogbe, OB, Aigbadon GO. 2021. Geology and geotechnical investigations of part of the Anambra Basin, Southeastern Nigeria: implication for gully erosion hazards. Environmental Systems Research, 10(1): 1–16.
Qudusi J. 2003. Modeling the morphology of moat erosion and its zoning, PhD thesis in watershed management, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran. 366 p.
Refahi H. 2009. Water erosion and its control. University of Tehran Press. 551 p. (In Persian).
Richter G, Negendank J. F. 1977. Soil erosion processes and their measurement in the German area of the Moselle River. Earth Surface Processes, 2(2‐3): 261–278.
Rode M., op de Hipt F., Collins A. L., Zhang Y., Theuring P., Schkade U. K., Diekkrüger B. 2018. Subsurface sources contribute substantially to fine‐grained suspended sediment transported in a tropical West African watershed in B urkina F aso. Land Degradation & Development, 29(11): 4092–4105.
Rostamizad G, Salageghe A, Nazari Samani A. A, Ghodoosi J. 2019. Modeling of geometrical characteristics of gully erosion (Case study: Ilam province). Journal of Range and Watershed Managment, 71(4): 915–928. (In Persian).
Roy P, Chakrabortty R, Chowdhuri I, Malik S, Das B, Pal S. C. 2020. Development of different machine learning ensemble classifier for gully erosion susceptibility in Gandheswari Watershed of West Bengal, India. Machine learning for intelligent decision science, pp. 1–26.
Servati M, Makhtumi A. 2006. Erosion assessment of loess deposits in Jigh watershed (Golestan Province). Geographical Research, 58: 115–128. (In Persian).
Servati M, Qudusi J, Dadkhah M. 2008. Factors effecting initiation and advancement of gully erosion in loesses. Pajouhesh & Sazandegi (In Natural Resources), 21(78): 20–33. (In Persian).
Servati M, Qudusi J, Teymouri Yansari Z. 2010. Geomorphology of Yali Badraq loesses in northeastern Golestan province, north of Kalaleh county, Physical Geography, 1(3): 97–114. (In Persian).
Soleimani F., Soufi M., & Arsham A. 2017. Determination of effective factors in gullies development in Modares watershed of Shushtar. Journal of Water and Soil, 31(5): 1433–1446. (In Persian).
Soleimani F. 2016. Investigation of effective factors on gullies development in Khuzestan province. Report of research projet. Soil conversation and watershed management research institute. Register number 50815. 58 p. (In Persian).
Soleimanpour SM, Soufi M, Rousta MJ, Shadfar S. 2019. Determination of soil volume loss due to gully erosion and estimation of its economic cost (Case study: Ghazeian watershed, Fars province). Iranian Journal of Watershed Management Science and Engineering, 13(46): 112–120. (In Persian).
Soleimanpour SM, Soufi M, Rousta MJ, Shadfar S, jowkar L, Keshavarzi H. 2019. Determination of the Influencing Factors on the Length Extension of Gullies in Ghazeian Watershed, Fars Province. Journal of Watershed Management Research, 10(20): 72–82. (In Persian).
Soleimanpour SM, Rahmati O, Shadfar S, Enayati M. 2022. Calculation of annual soil loss due to gully erosion in Mahourmilati watershed of Fars province. Fifth National Conference on Soil Conservation and Watershed Management, Tehran, May, Iran. (In Persian).
Solomon Ehiz O, Omougbo UN. 2013. Evaluating factors responsible for gully Development at the University of Bennin. Journal of Emerging Trend in Engineering and Applied Science, 4(5):707–713.
Soufi M, Esaei H. 2010. Estimation of the volume of gully erosion using morphometric and soil characteristics in the gullies of Golestan province. Journal of Watershed Engineering and Management, 2(2): 73–82. (In Persian).
Tang J, Xie Y, Liu C, Dong H, Liu G. 2022. Effects of rainfall characteristics and contour tillage on ephemeral gully development in a field in Northeastern China. Soil and Tillage Research, 218, 105312.
Tebebu TY, Abiy AZ, Zegeye AD, Dahlke HE, Easton ZM, Tilahun SA, Collick AS, Kidnau S, Moges S, Dadgari F, Steenhuis TS. 2010. Surface and subsurface flow effect on permanent gully formation and upland erosion near Lake Tana in the northern highlands of Ethiopia. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 14(11): 2207–2217.
Torri D, Poesen J. 2014. A review of topographic threshold conditions for gully head development in different environments. Earth–Science Reviews, 130: 73–85.
Wang C, Zhang G, Zhu P, Wang Z, Xing S. 2022. Sediment connectivity of small watershed affected by gully development and vegetation restoration on the loess plateau. Geoderma, 410, 115663.
Wu H, Xu X, Zheng F, Qin C, He X. 2018. Gully morphological characteristics in the loess hilly‐gully region based on 3D laser scanning technique. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 43(8): 1701–1710.
Yamani M, Goorabi A, Maghsoudi M, Mahboobi S. 2020. Investigating the relation between sediments texture and gullies development in plains in the southern part of eastern Alborz using statistical analysis method (Case study: Garmsar-Seyyed Abad). Quantitative Geomorphological Research, 9(3): 203–226.
Zachar D. 1982. Soil erosion. Elsvier Scientific Publishing Company. 584 p.
Zarei H, Najafinejad A, Hossein Alizadeh M, Alipour K. 2017. Efficiency assessment of the EGEM to estimate gully erosion in Iky-Aghzly watershed of Golestan province. Journal of Water and Soil Conservation, 24(5): 147–162. (In Persian).
Zinck A, Lopez J, Metternich GI, Shrestha DP, Vazqez-Selem L. 2001. Mapping and modelling mass movement and gullies in montainous areas using remote sensing and GIS techniques. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 3(1): 43–53.

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 20 اردیبهشت 1401
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 17 تیر 1401
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 30 شهریور 1401

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار