| Literature DB >> 28301524 |
Yusong Deng1, Chongfa Cai1, Dong Xia2, Shuwen Ding1, Jiazhou Chen1.
Abstract
Collapsing gullies are among the most severe soil erosion problems in the tropical and subtropical areas of southern China. However, few studies have examined the relationship of soil particle size distribution (PSD) changes with land-use patterns in the alluvial fans of collapsing gullies. Recently, the fractal method has been applied to estimate soil structure and has proven to be an effective tool in analyzing soil properties and their relationships with other eco-environmental factors. In this study, the soil fractal dimension (D), physico-chemical properties and their relationship with different land-use patterns in alluvial fans were investigated in an experiment that involved seven collapsing gully areas in seven counties of southern China. Our results demonstrated that different land-use patterns of alluvial fans had a significant effect on soil physico-chemical properties. Compared to grasslands and woodlands, farmlands and orchards generally contained more fine soil particles (silt and clay) and fewer coarse particles, whereas significant differences were found in the fractal dimension of soil PSD in different land-use patterns. Specifically, the soil fractal dimension was lower in grasslands and higher in orchards relative to that of other land-use patterns. The average soil fractal dimension of grasslands had a value that was 0.08 lower than that of orchards. Bulk density was lower but porosity was higher in farmlands and orchards. Saturated moisture content was lower in woodlands and grasslands, but saturated hydraulic conductivity was higher in all four land-use patterns. Additionally, the fractal dimension had significant linear relationships with the silt, clay and sand contents and soil properties and exhibited a positive correlation with the clay (R2 = 0.976, P<0.001), silt (R2 = 0.578, P<0.01), organic carbon (R2 = 0.777, P<0.001) and saturated water (R2 = 0.639, P<0.01) contents but a negative correlation with gravel content (R2 = 0.494, P<0.01), coarse sand content (R2 = 0.623, P<0.01) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (R2 = 0.788, P<0.001). However, the fractal dimension exhibited no significant correlation with pH, bulk density or total porosity. Furthermore, the second-degree polynomial equation was found to be more adequate for describing the correlations between soil fractal dimension and particle size distribution. The results of this study demonstrate that a fractal dimension analysis of soil particle size distribution is a useful method for the quantitative description of different land-use patterns in the alluvial fans of collapsing gullies in southern China.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28301524 PMCID: PMC5354277 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173555
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Number of collapsing gullies in areas of southern China.
Data are from Feng et al. (2009).
Fig 2A typical collapsing gully in the hilly granitic region of Anxi County, Fujian Province (photo: Shuwen Ding), consisting of (1) upper catchment; (2) collapsing wall; (3) colluvial deposit; (4) scour channel; (5) alluvial fan.
Fig 3Farmland covered by an alluvial fan from a collapsing gully in Tongcheng County, Hubei Province (photo: Shuwen Ding)
Different particle-size distributions under different land-use patterns in the alluvial fans of collapsing gullies (%).
| Code | Soil particle-size distribution (mm) | Soil texture | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gravel | Coarse sand | Total of coarse sand | Fine sand | Total of fine sand | Silt | Clay | |||||
| 2.0–1.0 | 1.0–0.5 | 0.5–0.25 | 0.25–0.1 | 0.1–0.05 | 0.05–0.002 | <0.002 | |||||
| TC | Farmland | 18.02±0.20b | 14.16±0.14a | 8.64±0.31c | 22.80 | 11.39±0.73a | 11.64±1.37b | 23.03 | 23.02±0.69c | 13.13±0.55b | Sandy loam |
| Orchard | 19.35±0.11ab | 13.21±0.24ab | 9.32±0.22c | 22.53 | 7.34±0.30b | 7.79±1.18c | 15.12 | 26.46±1.34b | 16.54± 0.46a | Sandy clay loam | |
| Woodland | 19.22±0.11ab | 11.04±0.67c | 13.52±0.42a | 24.56 | 5.79±0.23c | 10.97±0.77b | 16.76 | 28.62±2.18a | 10.84±1.51c | Sandy loam | |
| Grassland | 20.11±0.19a | 14.41±0.90a | 11.72±0.58b | 26.12 | 10.39±0.60a | 14.95±3.51a | 25.34 | 18.77±2.32d | 9.67±0.69c | Sandy loam | |
| LH | Farmland | 17.57±0.52c | 9.55±0.38c | 9.41±1.35a | 18.97 | 9.82±0.19b | 8.95±1.24b | 18.77 | 29.60±1.57b | 15.09±0.97b | Sandy clay loam |
| Orchard | 19.24±0.76b | 10.71±0.85b | 5.29±0.23b | 16.01 | 4.82±0.34c | 9.72±1.55a | 14.54 | 30.22±1.39b | 19.99±1.20a | Clay loam | |
| Woodland | 15.47±0.37d | 10.05±0.91b | 9.89±1.28a | 19.94 | 3.68±0.81c | 8.86±0.70b | 12.54 | 36.59±2.29a | 15.47±0.76b | Clay loam | |
| Grassland | 21.69±1.76a | 12.61±0.57a | 6.93±0.36b | 19.55 | 11.38±0.55a | 7.32±0.34c | 18.71 | 28.14±1.91c | 11.92±1.31c | Sandy loam | |
| GX | Farmland | 18.49±0.68ab | 14.44±1.22b | 8.14±0.33b | 22.58 | 12.49±1.22a | 16.46±1.64a | 28.95 | 20.46±1.08c | 9.53±0.50bc | Sandy loam |
| Orchard | 10.56±0.48b | 13.94±0.53b | 10.46±0.55a | 24.40 | 8.30±0.42c | 13.62±0.89b | 21.92 | 25.83±2.01b | 17.29±2.51a | Sandy clay loam | |
| Woodland | 21.37±0.64a | 17.63±0.79a | 4.44±0.39c | 22.07 | 10.80±0.56b | 11.07±0.76c | 21.87 | 25.70±3.12b | 8.99±1.57c | Sandy clay loam | |
| Grassland | 20.21±0.66a | 13.02±0.87b | 10.05±0.24a | 23.07 | 10.14±0.76b | 7.69±1.00d | 17.83 | 28.35±1.69a | 10.54±1.20b | Sandy clay loam | |
| CT | Farmland | 12.76±1.54d | 8.48±0.63c | 8.13±0.30b | 16.61 | 7.58±0.50c | 10.64±3.19b | 18.22 | 32.85±1.95a | 19.56±0.62a | Clay loam |
| Orchard | 18.70±1.05c | 10.06±1.17b | 5.93±0.29c | 16.00 | 7.12±0.47c | 13.02±0.65a | 20.14 | 30.06±3.62ab | 15.10±0.50b | Clay loam | |
| Woodland | 20.57±0.64b | 16.61±1.15a | 11.16±0.96a | 27.78 | 10.52±0.73b | 14.59±1.85a | 25.12 | 16.72±0.32c | 9.81±1.24d | Sandy clay loam | |
| Grassland | 23.23±2.23a | 15.87±1.90a | 5.94±0.27c | 21.80 | 14.19±0.04a | 9.11±1.07b | 23.30 | 20.47±2.13b | 11.20±0.63c | Sandy clay loam | |
| AX | Farmland | 24.29±1.11a | 15.45±0.86b | 12.84±0.75b | 28.29 | 10.45±0.59b | 11.17±1.87a | 21.62 | 17.66±0.31c | 8.14±1.92c | Sandy clay loam |
| Orchard | 11.03±0.97c | 8.35±0.39d | 6.41±0.28d | 14.76 | 12.99±0.05a | 5.54±0.38c | 18.54 | 37.61±0.65a | 18.06±0.68a | Clay loam | |
| Woodland | 21.58±1.64b | 12.30±0.90c | 9.35±0.28c | 21.65 | 10.35±0.47b | 10.57±0.20a | 20.93 | 22.55±1.21b | 13.29±0.37b | Sandy clay loam | |
| Grassland | 19.85±0.25bc | 17.66±0.40a | 14.44±0.16a | 32.10 | 9.31±0.01c | 9.21±0.59b | 18.52 | 20.83±1.49bc | 8.70±0.41c | Sandy clay loam | |
| WH | Farmland | 17.70±0.77c | 12.56±0.43c | 8.76±0.21b | 21.32 | 10.74±1.27a | 10.02±0.59a | 20.76 | 27.65±1.15ab | 12.57±0.86b | Sandy clay loam |
| Orchard | 14.74±0.71d | 14.69±0.49b | 7.27±0.28c | 21.96 | 3.50±0.22c | 11.70±3.00a | 15.20 | 30.13±2.05a | 17.98±1.85a | Clay loam | |
| Woodland | 26.25±2.86b | 21.24±1.05a | 11.63±1.23a | 32.87 | 9.54±0.44b | 6.01±1.87b | 15.55 | 15.83±0.86b | 9.49±1.74c | Loamy sand | |
| Grassland | 30.03±0.33a | 21.18±1.13a | 8.37±0.35b | 29.54 | 9.02±0.29b | 6.90±0.89b | 15.92 | 16.37±2.48b | 8.14±0.19c | Loamy sand | |
| CW | Farmland | 17.38±0.54bc | 11.28±0.33a | 4.71±0.28c | 15.99 | 6.24±0.21b | 12.09±0.26a | 18.32 | 28.09±1.23a | 20.22±0.68a | Sandy clay loam |
| Orchard | 14.33±0.69c | 9.08±0.79b | 10.161.12b | 19.24 | 10.43±0.23a | 9.92±0.67b | 20.35 | 26.69±0.25b | 19.38±1.92a | Sandy clay loam | |
| Woodland | 25.24±1.45a | 8.37±0.69b | 14.39±0.33a | 22.76 | 5.24±0.22b | 11.34±2.23ab | 16.58 | 25.36±0.44b | 10.06±1.74c | Sandy clay loam | |
| Grassland | 19.67±0.63b | 12.70±0.26a | 8.38±0.43b | 21.08 | 3.85±0.36c | 12.26±0.72a | 16.11 | 28.58±2.07a | 14.55±0.44b | Sandy clay loam | |
Soil fractal dimension of different land-use patterns in the alluvial fans of collapsing gullies.
| Soil sample | TC | LH | GX | CT | AX | WH | CW | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | R2 | D | R2 | D | R2 | D | R2 | D | R2 | D | R2 | D | R2 | |
| Farmland | 2.708 | 0.994 | 2.733 | 0.979 | 2.658 | 0.985 | 2.769 | 0.964 | 2.639 | 0.998 | 2.705 | 0.982 | 2.777 | 0.976 |
| orchard | 2.748 | 0.990 | 2.779 | 0.969 | 2.745 | 0.988 | 2.736 | 0.965 | 2.757 | 0.950 | 2.76 | 0.971 | 2.764 | 0.991 |
| woodland | 2.687 | 0.974 | 2.741 | 0.945 | 2.661 | 0.978 | 2.662 | 0.994 | 2.713 | 0.995 | 2.666 | 0.991 | 2.679 | 0.981 |
| grassland | 2.661 | 0.993 | 2.703 | 0.981 | 2.683 | 0.98 | 2.688 | 0.997 | 2.649 | 0.997 | 2.649 | 0.992 | 2.732 | 0.972 |
Fig 4Soil physical and chemical properties of different land-use patterns in the alluvial fans of collapsing gullies
Fig 5Correlations between soil fractal dimension and soil particle-size distribution.
Regression and correlation analysis of the soil fractal dimension with soil physico-chemical properties.
| Regression equations | R2 | Regression equations | R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gravel content | 0.494 | 0.496 | ||
| Coarse sand content | 0.623 | 0.637 | ||
| Fine sand content | 0.171 | 0.172 | ||
| Coarse and fine content | 0.685 | 0.690 | ||
| Silt content | 0.578 | 0.615 | ||
| Clay content | 0.976 | 0.991 | ||
| Soil organic carbon | 0.777 | 0.792 | ||
| pH value | 0.063 | 0.110 | ||
| Bulk density | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
| Saturated water content | 0.639 | 0.639 | ||
| Total porosity | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
| Saturated hydraulic conductivity | 0.788 | 0.789 |
Fig 6Correlations between soil fractal dimension and soil physical and chemical properties.