Soil erodibility assessment under various conservation measures at Babina watershed in Bundelkhand region
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53550/Keywords:
Bundelkhand soils, Erodibility, Erosion ratio, Soil conservation measures, Soil seriesAbstract
The study was conducted in Operational Research Project, Babina watershed Jhansi district of Bundelkhand region for resource conservation on sustained yield basis. Soils of the watershed consists of black and red soils; former represents Bedaura (Mar) and Chamraua (Kabar) soil series which were richer in water stable aggregate and less erodible as compared to red soil represents Imilia (Parwa) and Amarpur (Rakar) soil series and followed the erodibility order as: Bedaura < Chamraua < Imilia < Amarpur. The results showed that erodibility in project area varies according to soil conservation measures adopted. Ravines lands with conventional up and down cultivated soils are more erodible in comparison to land treated by various soil conservation practices. On the basis of erosion ratio, erosion index and water stable aggregate as principle indices of erodibility, soil under various soil conservation practices may be arranged in the order of: conventional method > sowing across the slope > sunken structure > submerged bund with vegetation > check dam > contour bunding > land levelling and field bunding > vegetative barriers. Significant positive correlation has been observed between erosion ratio with suspension percentage, clay ratio, dispersion ratio and erosion index while significant negative correlations have been observed between erosion ratio and WHC, ME, WSA (>0.25 mm), clay/ME ratio, OC, exchangeable ++ ++ Ca and Mg . Among established eight soil conservation practices, soil erodibility decreased with increasing clay content. In view of above facts, soils of Babina watershed were found erosive in nature and require immediate attention for implementing appropriate soil and water conservation measures in the watershed area to reduce soil erosion and sustained crop productivity. We found that socioeconomic conditions have also been uplifted considerably due to diversified agriculture and judicious use of natural resources in the watershed area.
References
Agnihotri, R.C., Yadav, R.C. and Jha, P. 2007. Erodibility characteristics of Entisol soils of riparian zone of the Yamuna river in Agra : Impacts of land form and land uses. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 35(3): 226-229.
Chandra, M. and Bhan, S. 2000. Effect of vegetative barriers on erosion losses, soil properties and yield of sorghum. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 28(3): 250-252.
Dabral, P.P., Murry, R.L. and Lallu, P. 2001. Erodibility status under different land uses in Dikrong river basin of Arunachal Pradesh. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 29(3): 280-282.
Das, K., Sarkar, D., Mukhopadyaya, K. and Singh, R. 2007. Evaluation of soil erodibility factor 'K' and its relationship with some soil properties of Mamring-Patle Micro-watershed in Darjeeling. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 35(2): 125-128.
Grewal, S.S. 2014. Impact of soil conservation measures on soil properties in Sukhna Lake catchment. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 42(2): 216-223.
Frankenberger Smith Gupta, R.D., Arora, S., Gupta, G.D. and Sumberia, N.M. 2010. Soil physical variability in relation to soil erodibility under different land uses in foot hill of Siwalik in North-West India. Trop. Ecology, 51(2): 183-197.
Her, Y., Chaubey, I., , J. and , D. 2016. Effect of conservation practices implemented by USDA programs at field and water. J. Soil Water Conserv., 71(3): 249-266.
Joshi, B.K., Verma, P.K. and Kathuria, B.P. 2004. Erosion studies under different land use systems in Bhetagad watershed of Central Himalayas. Ind. J. Soil Cons., 32(2): 139-142.
Kumar, K., Gangwar, M. and Singh, D. 2005. Impact of land use capability classes and present land use on erosional behaviour of Rendhar watershed in Bundelkhand regions of Uttar Pradesh. Farm Sci. J., 14(2):7-11.
Kumar, Kaushal, Gangwar, Munish and Chaudhary, H.P. 2004 Effect land of use capability classes and present land use on erosional behaviour of Rendhar watershed in Bundelkhand, U.P. Int. J. Ecology Environ. Sci.,30(3): 317-323.
Lal, B., Biswas, H. and Sant, R. 2006. Soil erodibility characteristics under different land uses in Bundelkhand. Ind. J. Agroforestry, 8(1): 69-73.
Maji, A.K., Obi Reddy, G.P. and Sarkar, D. 2010. Degraded and Wastelands of India-Status and Spatial Distribution (eds. Virmani, S.M., Prasad, R. and Pathak, P.S.), Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, 2010.
Middleton, H.E. 1930. Properties of soil which influence soil erosion. Tech. Bull U.S.D.A., 178: 1-16.
Nitant, H.C. 1989. Soil and water conservation problems specific to Bundelkhand region. J. Am. Trop. Forestry, 5: 117-127.
Nitant, H.C. and Tiwari, R.K. 1990. Proc. 3rd IWRS Nat.Symp., CSAUA&T, Kanpur, pp 91-100.
Pal, M., Kumar, K. and Gangwar, M. 2014. Impact of land use capability classes and present land use on soil properties and erodibility behaviour of Sheetalpur watershed in district Hamirpur of Bundelkhand region of U.P. Plant Archives, 14(1): 241-248.
Piper, C.S. 1950. Soil and plant analsis. Academic Press. Ram Babu, Dhyani, B.L. and Kumar, N. 2004. Assessment of erodibility status and refined Iso-Erodent map of India. J. Soil Conserv., 32(3): 171-177.
Singh, M.J. and Khera, K.L. 2009. Monographic estimation and evaluation of soil erodibility under stimulated and natural rainfall condition. Land Degrad. Dev., 20(5): 471-480.
Wischmeier, W.H. and Smith, D.D. 1965. Predicting rainfall erosion losses from crop land East of rocky mountain. Agriculture Hand Book no. 282, USDA, Washington, DC
