Assessment of soil erosion in the Irga watershed on the eastern edge of the Chota Nagpur Plateau, India

doi:10.1016/j.regsus.2024.03.006

Abstract

Abstract:

Human activities to improve the quality of life have accelerated the natural rate of soil erosion. In turn, these natural disasters have taken a great impact on humans. Human activities, particularly the conversion of vegetated land into agricultural land and built-up area, stand out as primary contributors to soil erosion. The present study investigated the risk of soil erosion in the Irga watershed located on the eastern fringe of the Chota Nagpur Plateau in Jharkhand, India, which is dominated by sandy loam and sandy clay loam soil with low soil organic carbon (SOC) content. The study used the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) and Geographical Information System (GIS) technique to determine the rate of soil erosion. The five parameters (rainfall-runoff erosivity (R) factor, soil erodibility (K) factor, slope length and steepness (LS) factor, cover-management (C) factor, and support practice (P) factor) of the RUSLE were applied to present a more accurate distribution characteristic of soil erosion in the Irga watershed. The result shows that the R factor is positively correlated with rainfall and follows the same distribution pattern as the rainfall. The K factor values in the northern part of the study area are relatively low, while they are relatively high in the southern part. The mean value of the LS factor is 2.74, which is low due to the flat terrain of the Irga watershed. There is a negative linear correlation between Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and the C factor, and the high values of the C factor are observed in places with low NDVI. The mean value of the P factor is 0.210, with a range from 0.000 to 1.000. After calculating all parameters, we obtained the average soil erosion rate of 1.43 t/(hm²•a), with the highest rate reaching as high as 32.71 t/(hm²•a). Therefore, the study area faces a low risk of soil erosion. However, preventative measures are essential to avoid future damage to productive and constructive activities caused by soil erosion. This study also identifies the spatial distribution of soil erosion rate, which will help policy-makers to implement targeted soil erosion control measures.

Key words: Soil erosion, Soil organic carbon, Rainfall-runoff erosivity factor, Soil erodibility Factor, Slope length and steepness factor, Cover-management factor, Support practice Factor, Irga watershed

Ratan PAL, Buddhadev HEMBRAM, Narayan Chandra JANA. Assessment of soil erosion in the Irga watershed on the eastern edge of the Chota Nagpur Plateau, India[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2024, 5(1): 100112.

Figures/Tables 15

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Table 1

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Table 2

Description of the collected 19 soil samples."

Soil sample	Latitude (N)	Longitude (E)	Weight of sand (g)	Weight of silt (g)	Weight of clay (g)	Percentage of sand (%)	Percentage of silt (%)	Percentage of clay (%)	Soil texture
b1	24°25′57′′	85°54′48′′	139.72	44.17	66.11	55.89	17.67	26.44	Sandy clay loam
b2	24°25′57′′	85°57′23′′	124.11	50.73	75.16	49.64	20.29	30.06	Sandy clay loam
b3	24°25′58′′	86°00′49′′	133.01	51.02	65.97	53.20	20.41	26.39	Sandy clay loam
b4	24°25′59′′	86°03′17′′	103.68	45.15	101.17	41.47	18.06	40.47	Clay
c2	24°23′38′′	85°57′24′′	118.59	47.87	83.54	47.44	19.15	33.42	Sandy clay loam
c3	24°23′37′′	86°00′39′′	89.10	55.86	105.04	35.64	22.34	42.02	Clay
c4	24°23′57′′	86°03′46′′	145.18	61.09	43.73	58.07	24.44	17.49	Sandy loam
c5	24°23′55′′	86°06′22′′	112.55	75.87	61.58	45.02	30.35	24.63	Loam
d2	24°20′43′′	85°57′56′′	163.65	43.55	42.8	65.46	17.42	17.12	Sandy loam
d3	24°20′45′′	86°00′11′′	104.74	57.01	88.25	41.90	22.80	35.30	Clay loam
d4	24°20′56′′	86°03′57′′	136.96	50.79	62.25	54.78	20.32	24.90	Sandy clay loam
d5	24°20′25′′	86°06′35′′	131.61	63.92	54.47	52.64	25.57	21.79	Sandy clay loam
e3	24°17′21′′	86°00′20′′	101.42	73.46	75.12	40.57	29.38	30.05	Clay loam
e4	24°17′49′′	86°03′10′′	106.38	65.76	77.86	42.55	26.30	31.14	Clay loam
e5	24°17′ 46′′	86°07′10′′	116.59	73.24	60.17	46.64	29.30	24.07	Loam
f3	24°14′27′′	86°00′54′′	126.30	86.53	37.17	50.52	34.61	14.87	Loam
f4	24°14′42′′	86°03′33′′	179.27	38.76	31.97	71.71	15.50	12.79	Sandy loam
f5	24°14′22′′	86°05′48′′	134.86	66.97	48.17	53.94	26.79	19.27	Sandy loam
g4	24°12′22′′	86°03′30′′	114.75	65.67	69.58	45.90	26.27	27.83	Sandy clay loam

Table 2

Table 3

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7.

Table 4

Fig. 8.

Fig. 9.

Fig. 10.

Table 5

References 54

[1]	Achibeta, M., Balevb, S., Dutotb, A., et al., 2014. A model of road network and buildings extension co-evolution agent-based modeling and simulation of cities. Procedia Computer Science. 32, 828-833.
[2]	Almagro, A., Thome, T.C., Colman, C.B., et al., 2019. Improving cover and management factor (C-factor) estimation using remote sensing approaches for tropical regions. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 7(4), 325-334.
[3]	Ayoub, A.T., Olderman, L.R., Hakkeling, R.T.A., et al., 1991. World Map of the Status of Human-Induced Soil Degradation. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), International Soil Reference and Information Centre (ISRIC), 1-27.
[4]	Babu, R., Tejwani, K.G., Agarwal, M.P., et al., 1978. Distribution of erosion index and iso-erosion map of India. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation. 6(1), 1-12.
[5]	Bhandari, A.K., Kumar, A., Singh, G.K., 2012. Feature extraction using Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI): A case study of Jabalpur City. Procedia Technology. 6(9), 612-621. doi: 10.1016/j.protcy.2012.10.074
[6]	Bhattacharyya, T., Chandran, P., Ray, S.K., et al., 2015. Walkley-Black recovery factor to reassess soil organic matter: Indo-Gangetic Plains and black soil region of India case studies. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 46(20), 2628-2648. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2015.1089265
[7]	Biggelaar, C., Lal, R., Wiebe, K., et al., 2003. The global impact of soil erosion on productivity. Adv. Agron. 81, 49-95.
[8]	Brown, L.R., Wolf, E., 1984. Soil Erosion: Quiet Crisis in the World Economy. Washington: World Watch Institute, 1-44.
[9]	Colman, C.B., Oliveira, P.T.S., Almagro, A., et al., 2018. Impacts of climate and land use changes on soil erosion in the Upper Paraguay Basin. Campo Grande: Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, 66-78.
[10]	Deep, S., Saklani, A., 2014. Urban Sprawl modelling using cellular automata. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences. 17(2), 179-187. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrs.2014.07.001
[11]	Ding, L., Chen, K.L., Cheng, S.G., et al., 2015. Water ecological carrying capacity of urban lakes in the context of rapid urbanization: A case study of East Lake in Wuhan. Phys. Chem. Earth. 89- 90, 104-113.
[12]	Don, L., Leet, S.J., 1965. Physical Geology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 143-144.
[13]	Durigon, V.L., Carvalho, D.F., Antunes, M.A.H., et al., 2014. NDVI time series for monitoring RUSLE cover management factor in a tropical watershed. Int. J. Remote Sens. 35(2), 441-453. doi: 10.1080/01431161.2013.871081
[14]	Eaton, D., 1996. The Economics of Soil Erosion: A Model of Farm Decision-Making. Environmental Economics Programme. London: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), 1-52.
[15]	El-Swaify, S.A., 1997. Factors affecting soil erosion hazards and conservation needs for tropical steep lands. Soil Technol. 11(1), 3-16. doi: 10.1016/S0933-3630(96)00111-0
[16]	FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019. Soil Erosion: The Greatest Challenge to Sustainable Soil Management. [2022-12-25]. https://www.rural21.com/english/news/detail/article/soil-erosion-the-greatest-challenge-for-sustainable-soil-management.html.
[17]	Gandhi, G.M., Parthiban, S., Thummalu, N., et al., 2015. NDVI: Vegetation change detection using remote sensing and GIS-A case study of Vellore District. Procedia Computer Science. 57, 1199-1210.
[18]	Hu, Y.F., Ban, Y.F., Zhang, Q., et al., 2008. Spatial-temporal pattern of GIMMS NDVI and its dynamics in Mongolian Plateau. In: 2008 International Workshop on Earth Observation and Remote Sensing Applications. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). Beijing, China.
[19]	Issaka, S., Ashraf, M.A., 2017. Impact of soil erosion and degradation on water quality: A review. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes. 1(1), 1-11. doi: 10.1080/24749508.2017.1301053
[20]	Kumar, M., Denis, D.M., Suryavanshi, S., 2016. Long-term climatic trend analysis of Giridih district, Jharkhand (India) using statistical approach. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2, doi: 10.1007/s40808-016-0162-2.
[21]	Lal, R., 1994. Soil erosion by wind and water:Problems and prospects. In: Lal, R., (ed.). Soil Erosion Research Methods. London: Routledge, 1-9.
[22]	Leh, M., Bajwa, S., Chaubey, I., 2011. Impact of land use change on erosion risk: An integrated remote sensing, geographic information system, and modelling methodology. Land Degrad. Develop. 24(5), 409-421.
[23]	Liu, Y., 2016. Landscape connectivity in Soil Erosion Research: concepts, implication, quantification. Geogr. Res. 35(1), 195-202.
[24]	Mhaske, S.N., Pathak, K., Dash, S.S., et al., 2021. Assessment and management of soil erosion in the hilltop mining dominated catchment using GIS integrated RUSLE model. J. Environ. Manage. 294(11), doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112987.
[25]	Moncef, B., Leidig, M., Gloaguen, R., 2011. Optimal parameter selection for qualitative regional erosion risk monitoring: A remote sensing study of SE Ethiopia. Geosci Front. 2(2), 237-245. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2011.03.004
[26]	Montgomery, D.R., Huang, M.Y.F., Huang, A.Y.L., 2014. Regional soil erosion in response to land use and increased typhoon frequency and intensity, Taiwan. Quat. Res. 81(1), 15-20. doi: 10.1016/j.yqres.2013.10.005
[27]	Moore, L.D., Burch, G.J., 1985. Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50(5), 1294-1298. doi: 10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000050042x
[28]	Nadeu, E., Berhe, A.A., de Vente, J., et al., 2012. Erosion, deposition, and replacement of soil organic carbon in Mediterranean catchments: A geomorphological, isotopic and land use change approach. Biogeosciences. 9(3), 1099-1111. doi: 10.5194/bg-9-1099-2012
[29]	Nageswara, P.P.R., Shobha, S.V., Ramesh, K.S., et al., 2005. Satellite-based assessment of agricultural drought in Karnataka State. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 33(3), 429-434. doi: 10.1007/BF02990014
[30]	Narayan, V.V.D., Babu, R., 1983. Estimation of soil erosion in India. J. Irrig. Drainage Eng-ASCE. 109(4), 419-434. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1983)109:4(419)
[31]	NBSS & LUP National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, 2014. Soil erosion in Jharkhand. Nagpur: NBSS & LUP Publication, 159.
[32]	Niu, X.Y., Wang, Y.H., Hao, Y., et al., 2015. Effect of land use on soil erosion and nutrients in Dianchi Lake Watershed, China. Pedosphere. 25(1), 103-111. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(14)60080-1
[33]	Oldeman, L.R., 1992. The global extent of soil degradation. In: Greenland, D.J., Szabolcs, T., (eds.). Soil Resilience and Sustainable Land Use. Wallingford: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International, 99-118.
[34]	Oliveira, A.H., da Silva, M.A., Silva, M.L.N., et al., 2013. Development of topographic factor modeling for application in soil erosion models. In: Soriano, H.M.C., (ed.). Soil Processes and Current Trends in Quality Assessment. Shanghai: InTech Open Access Publisher, 111-138.
[35]	Pandey, A., Chowdary, V.M., Mal, B.C., 2007. Identification of critical erosion prone areas in the small agricultural watershed using USLE, GIS and remote sensing. Water Resour. Manag. 21, 729-746.
[36]	Pimentel, D., 2006. Soil erosion: A food and environmental threat. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 8, 119-137.
[37]	Rahaman, S.A., Aruchamy, S., Jegankumar, R., et al., 2015. Estimation of annual average soil loss, based on RUSLE Model in Kallar Watershed, Bhavani Basin, Tamil Nadu, India. In: ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. Joint International Geoinformation Conference 2015. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
[38]	Rebecca, B., 2009. Soil Survey Field and Laboratory Methods Manual. Nebraska: U.S.Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 38-42.
[39]	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). Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 1-366.
[40]	Roy, P., 2019. Application of USLE in a GIS environment to estimate soil erosion in the Irga watershed, Jharkhand, India. Phys. Geogr. 40(4), 361-383. doi: 10.1080/02723646.2018.1550301
[41]	Shit, P.K., Nandi, A.K., Bhunia, G.S., 2015. Soil erosion risk mapping using RUSLE model on Jhargram sub-division at West Bengal in India, Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 1(28), 1-12.
[42]	Singh, G., Babu, R., Narain, P., et al., 1992. Soil erosion rates in India. J. Soil Water Conserv. 47(1), 97-99.
[43]	Smoot, J.L., Smith, R.D., 1999. Soil Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee, 7-8.
[44]	UNEP United Nations Environment Programme, 2001. India: State of the Environment 2001. [2022-11-17]. http://envfor.nic.in/soer/ 2001/ind_toc.pdf.
[45]	USDA-NRCS United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2000. Soil Texture Calculator. [2022-12-25]. .
[46]	USDA-SCS United States Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service, 1972. National Engineering Handbook. Washington: USDA-SCS, 1-12.
[47]	van der Knijff, J., Jones, R., Montanarella, L., 2000. Soil Erosion Risk Assessment in Europe. Ispra: European Soil Bureau, 1-38.
[48]	Velayutham, M., Mandal, D.K., Mandal, C., et al., 1999. Agro-Ecological Subregions of India for Planning and Development. Nagpur: National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning, 28-32.
[49]	Walkley, A., Black, I.A., 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37(1), 29-38. doi: 10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003
[50]	Williams, J.R., 1995. The EPIC Model. In: Singh, V.P., (ed.). Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology. Colorado: Water Resources Publications, 909-1000.
[51]	Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1965. Predicting Rainfall-Erosion Losses from Cropland East of the Rocky Mountains. Washington: U.S Department of Agriculture, 47.
[52]	Wu, J., Xie, H., 2011. Research on characteristics of changes of lakes in Wuhan’s main urban area. Procedia Engineering. 21, 395-404.
[53]	Xie, Y.W., Zhao, X.J., Li, L.L., et al., 2010. Calculating NDVI for landsat 7-ETM data after atmospheric Correction using 6s model: A case study in Zhangye City, China. In: 18^th International Conference on Geoinformatics. IEEE. Beijing, China, 1-4.
[54]	Zuazo, V.H.D., Pleguezuelo, C.R.R., 2009. Soil erosion and runoff prevention by plant covers:A review. In: Lichtfouse, E., Navarrete, M., Debaeke, P., et al., (eds.). Sustainable Agriculture. Dordrecht: Springer, 785-811.

LULC type	P factor value	LULC type	P factor value
Built-up area	0.002	Water body	0.000
Agricultural land	0.280	Barren land	1.000
Vegetated land	0.005

Soil sample	f_csand	f_cl−si	f_orgc	f_hisand	K factor (t/(hm²•h•MJ•mm))	SOC content (%)
b1	0.200002	0.759957	0.978409	0.996884	0.148248	1.66
b2	0.200012	0.761346	0.975602	0.999146	0.148436	2.04
b3	0.200006	0.77961	0.974846	0.998209	0.151732	2.34
b4	0.200050	0.702759	0.976176	0.999847	0.137217	1.92
c2	0.200016	0.738636	0.978914	0.999462	0.144546	1.62
c3	0.200251	0.728054	0.983048	0.999956	0.143316	1.38
c4	0.200004	0.850468	0.985746	0.995129	0.166856	1.26
c5	0.200098	0.836715	0.982229	0.999676	0.164396	1.42
d2	0.200000	0.814362	0.985746	0.978726	0.157136	1.26
d3	0.200076	0.755338	0.991004	0.999833	0.149740	1.04
d4	0.200004	0.786618	0.985276	0.997517	0.154626	1.28
d5	0.200013	0.831183	0.988640	0.998405	0.164097	1.14
e3	0.200196	0.809519	0.987670	0.999873	0.160044	1.18
e4	0.200098	0.791087	0.986702	0.999808	0.156160	1.22
e5	0.200065	0.835349	0.990543	0.999545	0.165468	1.06
f3	0.200064	0.898337	0.988640	0.998975	0.177501	1.14
f4	0.200000	0.834899	0.981460	0.932127	0.152761	1.46
f5	0.200012	0.849956	0.985276	0.997913	0.167149	1.28
g4	0.200052	0.805135	0.978914	0.999610	0.157611	1.62

Slope (%)	Area (10⁴ hm²)	Area percentage (%)	Mean slope (%)	Standard deviation (%)
0.00-2.00	0.84	17.53	4.94	3.09
2.00-5.00	2.52	52.58
5.00-10.00	1.03	21.50
10.00-15.00	0.31	6.39
15.00-20.00	0.07	1.53
20.00-36.00	0.02	0.47

Soil erosion rate (t/(hm²•a))	Risk category	Area (10⁴ hm²)	Area percentage (%)
<1.00	Very low	2.42	50.41
1.00−2.00	Low	0.38	7.95
2.00−3.00	Moderate	1.64	34.28
3.00−4.00	High	0.26	5.32
>4.00	Very high	0.10	2.04