נגישות
menu      
חיפוש מתקדם
תחביר
חפש...
הספר "אוצר וולקני"
אודות
תנאי שימוש
ניהול
קהילה:
אסיף מאגר המחקר החקלאי
פותח על ידי קלירמאש פתרונות בע"מ -
Clay mineralogy effect on rain infiltration, seal formation and soil losses
Year:
1991
Source of publication :
Soil Science
Authors :
בן-חור, מני
;
.
שיינברג, יצחק
;
.
Volume :
152
Co-Authors:
Stern, R., Soil and Irrigation Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa
Ben-Hur, M., Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, P.O.B. 6, Bet Dagan, 50-250, Israel
Shainberg, I., Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, P.O.B. 6, Bet Dagan, 50-250, Israel
Facilitators :
From page:
455
To page:
462
(
Total pages:
8
)
Abstract:
The effect of clay mineralogy on seal formation, infiltration rate (IR) and soil loss was studied on 19 cultivated soils from South Africa (SA) using a laboratory rainfall simulator. Two soil treatments were applied: Control and spreading phosphogypsum (PG) at the rate of 5 mg ha-1 The IR and soil losses were compared with the same parameters of smectitic soils from Israel. Based on the final IR values the SA soils were divided into two groups: (1) stable soils, in which the final IRs of untreated and PG treated soils were >8 and >18 mm h−1 respectively; and (2) dispersive soils, in which the final IRs were <4.5 and >12.5 mm h−1 respectively. The final IRs of the SA dispersive soils were similar to those of the smectitic soils from Israel. The soil loss rates of the SA dispersive soils were higher than those of the stable soils. However, the soil loss rates of the smectitic soils from Israel were significantly higher than those of the SA dispersive soils. It was suggested that soils in which either kaolinite or illite clay predominated, but that contained small amounts of smectite, were dispersive and as susceptible to seal formation as smectitic soils. However, the smectitic soils were more erodible than-the soils that contained only small amounts of smectites. Conversely, soils that do not contain smectite are more stable, less erodible, and less susceptible to seal formation. © 1991 Williams & Wilkins.
Note:
Related Files :
Clay mineralogy
Infiltration rate
Phosphogypsum
rain infiltration
Seal formation
SMECTITE
soil
Soil loss
South Africa
עוד תגיות
תוכן קשור
More details
DOI :
Article number:
Affiliations:
Database:
סקופוס
Publication Type:
מאמר
;
.
Language:
אנגלית
Editors' remarks:
ID:
21339
Last updated date:
02/03/2022 17:27
Creation date:
16/04/2018 23:43
Scientific Publication
Clay mineralogy effect on rain infiltration, seal formation and soil losses
152
Stern, R., Soil and Irrigation Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa
Ben-Hur, M., Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, P.O.B. 6, Bet Dagan, 50-250, Israel
Shainberg, I., Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, P.O.B. 6, Bet Dagan, 50-250, Israel
Clay mineralogy effect on rain infiltration, seal formation and soil losses
The effect of clay mineralogy on seal formation, infiltration rate (IR) and soil loss was studied on 19 cultivated soils from South Africa (SA) using a laboratory rainfall simulator. Two soil treatments were applied: Control and spreading phosphogypsum (PG) at the rate of 5 mg ha-1 The IR and soil losses were compared with the same parameters of smectitic soils from Israel. Based on the final IR values the SA soils were divided into two groups: (1) stable soils, in which the final IRs of untreated and PG treated soils were >8 and >18 mm h−1 respectively; and (2) dispersive soils, in which the final IRs were <4.5 and >12.5 mm h−1 respectively. The final IRs of the SA dispersive soils were similar to those of the smectitic soils from Israel. The soil loss rates of the SA dispersive soils were higher than those of the stable soils. However, the soil loss rates of the smectitic soils from Israel were significantly higher than those of the SA dispersive soils. It was suggested that soils in which either kaolinite or illite clay predominated, but that contained small amounts of smectite, were dispersive and as susceptible to seal formation as smectitic soils. However, the smectitic soils were more erodible than-the soils that contained only small amounts of smectites. Conversely, soils that do not contain smectite are more stable, less erodible, and less susceptible to seal formation. © 1991 Williams & Wilkins.
Scientific Publication
You may also be interested in