Catena 63 (2005) 85 108 www.elsevier.

com/locate/catena

Spatial modeling of soil erosion potential in a tropical watershed of the Colombian Andes
Natalia Hoyos *
Department of Geography, University of Florida, P.O. Box 117315, Gainesville, FL 32611-7315, USA Received 8 July 2004; received in revised form 11 January 2005; accepted 30 May 2005

Abstract Soil erosion potential of a 58 km2 watershed in the coffee growing region of the Colombian Andes was assessed using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) in a GIS environment. The RUSLE factors were developed from local rainfall, topographic, soil and land use data. Seasonal erosivity factors (R) were calculated for six pluviographic stations (19871997) located within 22 km of the basin. Two regression models, one for the wet and one for the dry seasons, were created and used to estimate seasonal erosivity for 10 additional stations with pluviometric data. Erosivity was on average higher in the wet seasons (4686 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1) than the dry ones (2599 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1). Seasonal erosivity surfaces were generated using the local polynomial interpolation method, and showed increases from west to east in accordance with regional elevation. Soil erodibility was calculated from field measurements of water stable aggregates (N 2 mm) and infiltration, which were influenced by land use. Three erodibility scenarios were considered (high, average and low) to represent the variability in infiltration measurements within each land use. The topographic and land cover factors were developed from existing contour and land use data. Model results indicated that in the dry seasons, and under the average erodibility scenario, 534 ha (11%) of the basins rural area were within the extreme erosion potential category (above 3.5 t ha 1 season 1). During the wet seasons, this area increased to 1348 ha (28%). In general, areas under forest and shrub had low erosion potential values, while those under coffee and pasture varied according to topography. Modeling of probable

* Fax: +1 352 392 8855. E-mail address: nhoyos@ufl.edu. 0341-8162/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.catena.2005.05.012

86

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

land use change scenarios indicated that the erosion potential of the basin would decrease as a result of coffee conversion to pasture. D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Soil erosion potential; RUSLE; Andisol; Coffee; Andes; Colombia

1. Introduction Erosion by water is a primary agent of soil degradation at the global scale, affecting 1094 million hectares, or roughly 56% of the land experiencing human induced degradation (Oldeman et al., 1991). This process is considered the major form of soil degradation in the Colombian Andes, and has been related to overgrazing and inadequate agricultural practices such as frequent burning, tillage and lack of cover crops (Oldeman et al., 1991; Muller Samann, 1999). Undesirable effects include reduced soil productivity and deterioration of water quality (Lal, 2003). Therefore, the study of soil erosion patterns in the landscape, and interactions among the major factors that affect this process is essential, particularly in humid tropical mountainous areas, due to their steep topography and frequently high rainfall amounts and intensities. One of the most widely used models to study water soil erosion is the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE, Renard et al., 1997), an empirically based model founded on the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE, Wischmeier and Smith, 1978). It is designed to predict long-term average annual soil loss from field slopes under a specific land use and management system, based on the product of rainfall erosivity (R), soil erodibility (K), slope length and steepness (LS), surface cover and management (C) and support conservation practices ( P). The R factor is calculated by adding individual storm EI30 values (product of total storm energy and maximum 30-min intensity) over a year, and averaging annual values over a period longer than 22 years to account for cyclical patterns of rainfall (Renard et al., 1997). It is also recommended that this factor be calculated on a seasonal basis to reflect intra-annual patterns of rainfall (Yu, 1998; Millward and Mersey, 1999; Santos and Azevedo, 2001; Dias and Silva, 2003). The K factor reflects the susceptibility of soil particles to detachment by rainfall splash or surface flow, and is related to the integrated effect of rainfall, runoff, and infiltration. It is measured from runoff plots or through predictive relationships (nomographs, Renard et al., 1997). Specific properties of Andisols that have been related to their stability include mean weighted aggregate diameter (dominant aggregate size class), clay content, delta pH (pH in potassium chloride minus pH in distilled water), organic matter, permeability, and presence of allophane (El-Swaify and Dangler, 1977; Rivera et al., 1998). The LS factor accounts for the effect of slope length and gradient. In a slope, the length factor (L) is defined as the horizontal distance from the origin of overland flow to the point where deposition starts or runoff goes into a channel (Renard et al., 1997). In a two- and three-dimensional situation however, it should be replaced by the unit contributing area, i.e., upslope drainage area per unit of contour length (Moore and Wilson, 1992; Desmet and Govers, 1996). The C factor reflects the effects of cover and management variables, while the P factor represents the effects of support practices such as contouring, strip cropping, terracing and subsurface drainage (Renard et al., 1997). Although the USLE and RUSLE were developed to predict soil loss under temperate

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

87

conditions, their use in other regions is possible by the determination of its factors from local data (Millward and Mersey, 1999; Mati et al., 2000; Angima et al., 2003; Lufafa et al., 2003). Additional advantages include attainable data requirements under the limitations common in developing countries, its compatibility with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allowing prediction of erosion potential on a cell by cell basis, and the wealth of information already available for its factors. The objective of this study was to predict the spatial patterns of soil erosion potential for a watershed of the Colombian Andes, by adapting each of the RUSLE factors to local conditions.

2. Data and methods 2.1. Site description The Dosquebradas basin is located in the coffee-growing region of the Central Cordillera of Colombia and covers an area of 58 km2 (Fig. 1). Elevation ranges from 1350 to 2150 m, with a relief characterized by a valley floor surrounded by moderate (up to 25%) to steep (25% to more than 75%) slopes to the west, north and east (Instituto Geografico Agustn Codazzi [IGAC], 1988). Annual precipitation ranges between 2600 mm in the south and 3200 mm at the northern watershed divide, and has a bimodal distribution, with two wet (MarchMay, SeptemberNovember) and two dry (December February, JuneAugust) seasons (Guzman and Jaramillo, 1989). The predominant soil mapping unit is Chinchina, made up mostly of Melanudands (80%) derived from volcanic ash deposits (IGAC, 1988). About 16% (908 ha) of the basin has been urbanized, most of it concentrated on the valley floor. Coffee and pasture are the major land uses in the rural area (62% and 18% of the rural area, respectively), while forests (natural, planted, bamboo), shrub and temporary crops make up the remaining 20% (Corporacion Autonoma Regional de Risaralda [CARDER], 1997). Modeling of soil erosion potential was limited to the rural area of the basin (4923 ha). Digital topographic, land use and stream data were provided by the regional environmental office (CARDER, 1997). The spatial distribution of coffee systems (sun and shade) was derived from maps of the Colombian Coffee Federation (Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros [FNC]), and was used for soil sampling and for the models land cover and management factor surface. The Federation regards these data as private so both categories are presented as one in all maps. All spatial data were processed within a Geographic Information System GIS (ArcGIS, ArcINFO and IDRISI) with a spatial resolution of 25 m, equivalent to 1 mm in the topographic base maps (1:25,000). Fig. 2 summarizes the methods used to derive each of the factors required by RUSLE. 2.2. Erosivity factor Data for the calculation of the EI30 factor were available from 16 gauging stations located within 27 km from the center of the basin, operated by the National Coffee Research Center (CENICAFE) and the National Environmental Institute (IDEAM). From

88

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Cen tral
7545'0"W
1200

Mag d

alen a

River

Cord illera

Cauca

Riv er

00

7530'0"W
21 00
12 00

50'0"N

iv e r

900

Ca uc

3 2
1800

2400

aR

3000

Legend
Rainfall stations

0 360

Pluviographic
1. Catalina 2. Jazmn 3. Cenicaf 4. Naranjal 5. Pta. Tratamiento 6. Cedral

445'0"N

5 1
1200

6
1500

un t O

r ve Ri

10

km

Pluviometric

Fig. 1. Location of the Dosquebradas basin on the western flank of the Central Andean Cordillera of Colombia. Rainfall gauging stations also shown. Only stations with pluviographic data are labeled (modified from Digital Chart of the World [DCW], 1992; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical [CIAT] y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente [PNUMA], 1998; CARDER, 1997).

these, only 6 stations had the rainfall intensity (pluviographic) data required to calculate EI30 values (Renard et al., 1997). In order to use the rainfall totals (pluviometric data) from the other 10 stations, the following steps were taken: ! Individual storm EI30 values were calculated for the stations with pluviographic data according to the RUSLE methodology (Renard et al., 1997). A period of 11 years (1987

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

89

Digital contours

Rainfall data

Infiltration and aggregate stability

Land use

DEM

Regional erosivity model

Slope length and steepness surface

Erosivity surface

Erodibility surface

Cover management surface

Soil erosion potential

Fig. 2. Summary of data and methods used to derive the RUSLE factors.

to 1997) was used because 1987 was the earliest date with available data at all 6 stations, and because it represented a reasonable compromise between the number of available stations and the amount of data to be analyzed. ! For each pluviographic station, EI30 values were added on a seasonal basis and differences among seasons were tested through analysis of variance. Two regression models (one for the wet and one for the dry seasons) of seasonal EI30 (dependent variable) and seasonal rainfall (independent) were built and subsequently used to estimate seasonal EI30 at the pluviometric stations. ! Seasonal EI30 surfaces for the wet and dry seasons were generated by interpolating the seasonal values from all stations with the local polynomial interpolation technique (ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst). 2.3. Slope length and steepness factor The LS factor for this study was calculated with the USLE2D (Desmet and Govers, 1996), a program readily available over the Internet that works within IDRISI. The LS surface was derived by: ! Creating the basins DEM from 50 m interval contours (Arc/INFO Topogrid command). ! Running the USLE2D using the multiple flow algorithm (Quinn et al., 1991) as it was considered more appropriate than the single flow algorithm, given the complex relief of the basin. ! Calculating the LS algorithm by using the USLE slope length function (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978) and Nearings slope steepness function (Nearing, 1997). The original USLE slope length function was selected as it has performed better on steep slopes (up to 60%) than the RUSLE algorithm (Liu et al., 2001). Nearings slope steepness function, developed with empirical data from slopes up to 55%, was also considered a

90

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

better fit for this basin than the RUSLE algorithm, developed with data from slopes up to 25% (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978; McCool et al., 1987). As a reference, the Dosquebradas basin has 43% of its rural area on slopes between 25% and 55%, and 13% on slopes above 55%. ! Modifying the generated LS surface by (a) removing a 25 m strip from the watershed divide as unrealistically high LS values were generated at the edge of the basin, and (b) removing the urban areas which were assigned a bno dataQ value so that they were excluded from further analyses. 2.4. Soil erodibility factor Erodibility is determined largely by the stability of soil aggregates and the hydrological properties of the soil profile (Keersebilck, 1990; Barthes et al., 2000; Barthes and Roose, ` ` 2002). The former is an indication of how susceptible soil particles are to detachment, while the latter indicates how easily water moves and is retained in the soil profile, thus the probability of runoff generation. The soil erodibility (K) factor for the study area was estimated as a qualitative index based on soil properties measured in the field (June August 2002), i.e., the percentage of water stable aggregates and infiltration. Soil sampling units were defined based on land use and topography as follows (Table 1): ! The urban land use was discarded. Within the rural area (4923 ha), minor land uses were also discarded as their combined area represented only 2.1% (108 ha). These included annual crops (tomatoes, yuca, beans, maize) and bamboo forests. ! Slopes were classified into three major categories: 015% (ridges and footslopes), 15 50% (shoulders and backslopes) and N 50% (very steep slopes), based on the DEM. ! The selected land uses were subdivided by slope class and the area of each land use/ slope combination was determined. The number of sampling locations within each land use/slope unit was calculated proportional to its areal extent. ! In the field, sampling locations were determined with a GPS (Magellan 315) and later downloaded to the GIS. At each location, soil samples were collected for aggregate stability (020 cm). The percent of water stable aggregates was measured using a method modified from Arshad et al. (1996). Soil samples were air-dried in the shade for 24 h and passed through 2 mm and 1 mm sieves to obtain three aggregate sizes (N 2 mm, 1 to 2 mm and b 1 mm). Ten grams of each of these subsamples were oven dried at 105 8C to determine the dry weight (W 1). Another 10 g were spread evenly over (a) a 2 mm sieve for the aggregates N 2 mm, (b) a 1 mm sieve for the 1 to 2 mm aggregates, and (c) a 0.05 mm sieve for aggregates b1 mm. Sieves were placed on a saturated terry cloth sheet for 5 min to let aggregates absorb water slowly. Sieves with aggregate samples were placed in a container filled with distilled water, so that the water level was just above the aggregates. Then, sieves were moved up and down at a rate of 30 oscillations per min (one oscillation being an up and down stroke of 3.7 cm in length) for 3 min. After wet sieving, aggregates were placed in a weighing can and oven dried at 105 8C to determine their weight (W 2). The weight of the sand fraction (W 3) of each subsample was determined by (a) removing organic matter with

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

91

Table 1 Soil sampling units defined by land use and slope categories, and number of sampling locations within each unit Land use Slope (%) Area (ha) Each class Coffee-sun (COS) 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 015 1550 N50 724.3 1588.9 439.3 37.4 185.0 61.3 366.1 416.6 102.5 39.3 84.1 70.6 66.6 133.3 60.9 5.6 39.3 8.0 16.6 220.3 150.0 4815.8a Total for land use 2752.5 Sampling locations Each class 6 21 14 3 6 4 8 10 5 2 2 260.7 2 52.9 2 1 386.8 3 89 3 3 2 Total for land use 41

Coffee-shade (COSSH)

283.7

13

Pasture (PA)

885.2

23

Pasture-shrub (PASHR)

194.0

Shrub (SHR)

Planted forest (PF)

Natural forest (NF)

Total
a

4815.8a

89

This area represents the total rural area (4923.3 ha) minus discarded rural land uses (107.5 ha).

peroxide, and (b) chemical dispersion through the addition of 20 ml of sodium hexametaphosphate followed by overnight shaking. The percent of water stable aggregates for each aggregate size was calculated as Water stable aggregates% W2 W3 100 W1 W3

Infiltration was measured in the field with a single ring infiltrometer by pouring 500 ml of water at a time (USDA, 1999). This process was repeated until infiltration was fairly constant and these values were taken to approximate the saturated infiltration rate. The probability that the 30-min rainfall intensity exceeded the saturated infiltration rate at each location was calculated by: ! Assigning each sampling location to the closest rainfall intensity station (Thiessen polygons, Spatial Analyst Distance Allocation function in ArcGIS). ! Calculating the cumulative probability distribution for each rainfall stations maximum 30-min intensity (I30), with data from 1987 to 1997 transformed with natural logarithm since they were log-normally distributed. ! Using the I30 distribution parameters (mean and standard deviation) and measured saturated infiltration rate to calculate the probability of exceedance at each location.

92

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

The selection of properties to calculate the erodibility index was performed in the following way. Correlation analyses were run to determine which properties were redundant in order to exclude them from further analysis (a = 0.05). Exploratory spatial analysis on the surviving properties showed no spatial pattern suggesting that interpolation of values between sampling locations would be meaningless. Therefore, it was decided to study the effect of land use on selected soil properties to use the land use grid as the base for the erodibility surface. The K value for each land use was then calculated as the product of the selected soil properties (average value for that specific land use) scaled to the range of K values reported in the literature for this soil unit (Hincapie et al., 2000). 2.5. Cover management factor Coffee and pasture cover 80% of the rural area (Table 1). Most of the coffee is grown as sun or btechnifiedQ coffee with very little or no shade, while there are some patches of shade coffee clustered on the west side of the basin. Major differences between the coffee systems include (a) coffee varieties, with short varieties used for sun coffee and tall varieties used for shade coffee, (b) planting densities, higher in sun coffee systems (up to 10,000 plants ha 1) than in shade coffee (around 2500 plants ha 1), (c) plot cycle, which lasts between 7 and 12 years for sun coffee, and 20+ years for shade coffee before the plot is renewed, and (d) input levels, higher in sun coffee in terms of fertilizers (Perfecto et al., 1996; Moguel and Toledo, 1999; FNC, 2000). The following characteristics on growth and management practices were used to estimate the C factor: ! Coffee: usually planted at the beginning of the rainy seasons (MarchMay, SeptemberNovember). Planting preparation includes clearing with machete and burning, or herbicide spraying. Planting densities and plot cycle as mentioned before. Cultural practices include: weeding with machete, hoe or brush cutter every 2.53 months (early stages of shade coffee, regularly for sun coffee during whole plot cycle), and insecticide spraying as needed to control pests and diseases like coffee borer, leaf rust and leaf cutting ants (FNC, 2000; Ariza, 2003, pers. commun.). According to these characteristics, values of 0.035 and 0.030 were assigned to sun and shade coffee, respectively (RUSLE program; Weesies, 2003, pers. commun.). Both represented the average over an 8-year period (average plot cycle for sun coffee). ! Pasture: although some plots were being managed for milk production, most of them had little management and were used for occasional grazing. A value of 0.01 was assumed, corresponding to pasture in good condition (Morgan, 1995), or to pasture with rotational grazing with 50% growth removal in each grazing cycle (RUSLE program for Puerto Rico humid uplands). This value was selected because although it was common to see some signs of overgrazing (cattle trampling), the pasture cover was usually dense. For pasture-shrub, a value of 0.0028 was used (RUSLE program for Puerto Rico humid uplands), described as dense grass with low vigor and not harvested. ! Forest and shrub: a value of 0.001 was used for natural and planted forest, and shrub (Roose, 1977).

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

93

2.6. Support practice factor A value of 1 (no support practice factor) was assumed for the entire basin, since the only support practice observed on some sun coffee plots was contouring but was not consistent throughout the area, and detailed information for each agricultural plot was not available. 2.7. Erosion potential surfaces The seasonal erosion potential surfaces were calculated as the product of the seasonal erosivity, erodibility, slope length and steepness, and land cover and management surfaces, on a cell by cell basis. In addition, an annual erosion potential surface was generated following the same procedure but using an annual erosivity surface created by interpolation of annual erosivity values (local polynomial interpolation, ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst). This annual surface allowed for comparison with published erosion potential values under similar conditions, usually expressed on an annual basis. 2.8. Assumptions and limitations Several assumptions were made in this analysis, such as the use of single erodibility and land cover/management factors, which in reality vary over time. For example, erodibility changes seasonally depending on temperature, moisture conditions, cultivation and cultural practices (Roose and Sarrailh, 1989; Renard et al., 1997). On the other hand, the land cover/management factor for land uses such as planted forest, coffee and pasture varies throughout the plot cycle (higher C factor during early stages of the growing season, when the soil is exposed). Another assumption was the consideration of a single C factor for all plots within each land use, although they had different management levels. For instance, at the time of field work (JuneAugust 2002), most sun coffee plots were in a semi-abandoned state due to low international coffee prices. Nevertheless, there were still a few plots with fertilization, weeding and pest control practices. In terms of the GIS processing, it was assumed that topographic, erosivity, erodibility and land use conditions within each cell (25 25 m) were uniform. Finally, rill erosion, sediment delivery and the effects of single rainfall events were not considered as they are not modeled by RUSLE.

3. Results The layers used to predict soil erosion potential (seasonal EI30, LS, C and K) are presented in Fig. 3, while model results are presented in Fig. 6 (only for average soil erodibility conditions). 3.1. Erosivity surface Seasonal erosivity at the six pluviographic stations showed a pattern similar to rainfall, being generally higher during the wet seasons although differences were not statistically

94

(a)
26 00

28

00

30 00

Dry season EI30 (MJ mm ha h season )

-1 -1 -1

(b)

Wet season EI30 (MJ mm ha h season )

-1 -1 -1

50 00

4800

4 km

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

0 420

00 46

22

24
00

440

00

4000

(c)

(d)

(e)

LS factor 0 - 25 25 - 50 50 - 75 >75 Urban area

K average factor 0.0009 0.0010 0.0011 0.0013

Excluded rural land uses Urban area

C factor 0.0010 - NF,PF 0.0028 - PASHR 0.0100 - PA 0.0300 - COSSH 0.0350 - COS Excluded rural land uses Urban area

Fig. 3. Surfaces used to calculate the soil erosion potential of the basin. (a, b) Dry and wet seasons EI30 (MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1), (c) slope length and steepness LS, (d) average erodibility K (t ha h ha 1 MJ 1 mm 1), and (e) land cover and management C. Transverse Mercator Projection with origin at 4835V56W N and 77804V51W W, International Spheroid 1924, Bogota Observatory Datum.

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

95

significant for all stations (Table 2). Nevertheless, it was considered worthwhile to carry out subsequent analyses at the seasonal scale to reflect the bimodal rainfall pattern identified in long-term regional studies (Guzman and Jaramillo, 1989) and analyze its effect on soil erosion potential. The dry seasons erosivity surface had an average value of 2599 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1. Its spatial distribution followed the regional elevation pattern, increasing from the southwest (2103 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1) to the northeast (3074 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1). The wet seasons erosivity surface had an average value of 4686 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1. Its spatial pattern presented more local influences, particularly evident in the high values towards the central and northern part of the basin (up to 5147 MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1). 3.2. Slope length and steepness surface The LS surface replicated the local drainage network as well as the slope gradient. Lines of flow concentration (concave), where overland flow tends to accumulate, had the highest LS values. On the other hand, areas of convex topography such as ridges, where flow diverges, had low LS values. A comparison with the slope gradient map (not shown) revealed a clear effect of steepness on the LS factor, with areas of greater slopes having high LS values and usually corresponding to the backslopes between the summits and drainage lines. 3.3. Erodibility surface The correlation analysis of measured soil properties revealed that water aggregate stability of all size classes had a significant positive correlation, but was not correlated with infiltration (Table 3). When land uses with a large enough sample size were analyzed separately (sun coffee, shade coffee and pasture), there was still a positive correlation among aggregate sizes, but its strength varied among land uses (Table 3). In addition, the water stability of 12 mm aggregates under pasture had a positive correlation with infiltration. The general trend, however, was for water stable aggregates of all size classes

Table 2 Seasonal EI30 for pluviographic stations Station n Seasonal EI30 (MJ mm ha 1 h 1 season 1)a Dry season 1 Catalina Jazmn Cenicafe Naranjal Pta. Tratamiento Cedral 43 43 43 43 43 42 1947 3004 3319 3006 2895 2920 a ab a a a Wet season 1 3220 4528 4952 5183 4908 3384 b a b b a Dry season 2 1854 2242 3131 3409 2566 819 a b ab a b Wet season 2 3345 4310 4670 4350 4673 4298 b a ab b a

Values followed by different letters within the same line are significantly different from each other (a = 0.05, TukeyKramer test). Location of stations shown in Fig. 1. a Dry season 1 = DecemberFebruary, Wet season 1 = MarchMay, Dry season 2 = JuneAugust, Wet season 2 = SeptemberNovember.

96

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Table 3 Significant correlation coefficients (Spearmans r) among water stable aggregates and infiltration (*a = 0.05, **a = 0.10, n = 89) Variable Water stable aggregates (%) N2 mm Water stable aggregates (%) N2 mm 12 mm 0.63* (all) 0.55* (COS) 0.89* (COSSH) 0.38** (PA) 0.51* (all) 0.39* (COS) 0.64* (COSSH) 0.36** (PA) 12 mm b1 mm

b1 mm

Infiltration (cm h 1)

0.51* (all) 0.40* (COS) 0.71* (COSSH) 0.37** (PA) 0.19** (all) 0.55*(PA)

0.19** (all)

COS = sun coffee (n = 41), COSSH = shade coffee (n = 13) and PA= pasture (n = 23).

to be positively correlated, while little or no correlation existed between water stable aggregates and infiltration. Land use influenced the water stability of aggregates N2 mm and infiltration, but did not affect the stability of smaller aggregates. Average water stability of aggregates N 2 mm was above 80% for all land uses (Fig. 4), being greatest under planted forest (99.3%) and lowest under shrub (82.5%). Both values may have been affected by the small number of samples (3 and 2) and by a rocky substrate in one of the shrub sites. The same is true for natural forest, with only 3 sampling locations and one of them on rocky substrate, with particularly low values of water stable aggregates N2 mm (71.2% versus 100% at the other two forest locations). Infiltration was significantly different across two land use groups (Fig. 5a), being higher under forests and coffee and lower under pasture and pasture-shrub. There was however, great variability within each land use. For example, sun coffee, with 41 samples, had infiltration values ranging from 1.2 cm h 1 to 148.5 cm h 1. Sixty-eight of the sampling locations were within Pta. Tratamiento stations area, with a mean maximum 30-min intensity of 28.6 mm h 1. The remaining 21 locations were assigned to Jazmn, with a mean maximum 30-min intensity of 27.8 mm h 1. The probability of exceeding these thresholds was affected by land use, but there was also large variability within each category (Fig. 5b). Two properties were selected to generate the erodibility surface, water stability of aggregates N 2 mm and infiltration. These were chosen because they did not provide redundant information (not correlated), and were affected by land use. Since there was large variability within each land use, particularly for infiltration, three surfaces were generated (Table 4): ! Average erodibility: each land use had an erodibility value calculated as the product of the average percent of water stable aggregates N 2 mm and average probability of not exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity.

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

97

a
100

ab

a c abc abc

bcd cd d

Water stable aggregates >2 mm (%)

75

50

25

0 PF COS PA NF PASHR COSSH SHR

Fig. 4. Effect of land use on water stable aggregates N2 mm. All samples taken at 020 cm depth. Error bars represent standard error. Land uses under same letter are not significantly different from each other (a = 0.10, KruskalWallis Z-test).

! Low erodibility: each land use was assigned an erodibility value calculated as the product of the 75th percentile for water stable aggregates N 2 mm and the 75th percentile for probability of not exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity (high water aggregate stability and low probability of runoff). ! High erodibility: each land use was assigned an erodibility value calculated as the product of the 25th percentile for water stable aggregates N 2 mm and the 25th

(a)
500

(b)
1.0

Itnfiltration (cm h-1)

400 300

Probability of exceeding the infiltration rate

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0

ab

a
200 100 0 NF PF SHR COS COSSH PA PASHR

ab a a b b

cd bcd c d

PASHR PA COS NF SHR COSSH PF

Land use
Fig. 5. Effect of land use on (a) infiltration (cm h 1) and (b) probability of exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity. Error bars represent standard deviation. Land uses under same letter are not significantly different from each other (a = 0.10, TukeyKramer and KruskalWallis Z-test).

98

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Table 4 Values for average, low and high erodibility (K avg, K low, K high in t ha h ha 1 MJ 1 mm 1) Land use Average erodibility WSA N 2 Coffee-sun Coffee-shade Pasture Pasture-shrub Shrub Natural forest Planted forest 95.6 90.7 95.4 92.1 82.6 90.4 99.3 P 0.8792 0.9694 0.6637 0.3058 0.9672 0.8947 0.9999 Kavg 0.0010 0.0010 0.0011 0.0013 0.0010 0.0010 0.0009 Low erodibility WSA N 2 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 90.0 100.0 100.0 P 0.9999 0.9999 0.9852 0.7057 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999 Klow 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009 0.0011 0.0010 0.0009 0.0009 High erodibility WSA N 2 93.1 83.9 92.0 84.5 75.1 71.2 97.8 P 0.9001 0.9850 0.4204 0.0378 0.9345 0.6842 0.9999 Khigh 0.0010 0.0010 0.0012 0.0014 0.0011 0.0012 0.0009

Numbers are based on water stable aggregates N2 mm (WSA N 2) and the probability ( P) that the maximum 30min rainfall intensity does not exceed the saturated infiltration rate.

percentile for probability of not exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity (low water aggregate stability and high probability of runoff). Finally, these values were scaled to a range of 0.00090.0014 t ha h ha 1 MJ 1 mm 1 found by Hincapie et al. (2000) on field runoff plots on bare soil from this same soil unit.

Fig. 6. Soil erosion potential under average erodibility conditions for the (a) dry seasons (t ha 1 year 1), (b) wet seasons (t ha 1 season 1), and (c) annual summary (t ha 1 year 1). Categories defined by quintile values as indicated in the legend. Transverse Mercator Projection with origin at 4835V56W N and 77804V51W W, International Spheroid 1924, Bogota Observatory Datum.

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

99

3.4. Erosion potential surfaces Seasonal erosion potential values were grouped into five ordinal classes defined by the average quintile value (Fig. 6a and b): ! ! ! ! ! Minimal: 00.2 t ha 1 season 1 Low: 0.20.7 t ha 1 season 1 Medium: 0.71.7 t ha 1 season 1 High: 1.73.5 t ha 1 season 1 Extreme: 3.510.0 t ha 1 season 1

Maps showed particularly well the influence of land use, topography and rainfall seasonality, on erosion potential. In general, minimal and low erosion potential occurred in areas under forest, shrub, and pasture-shrub, regardless of the relief and erodibility. Areas under pasture and coffee (sun and shade) showed the combined effects of the cover management factor and the slope length and steepness factor. Minimal and low erosion potential was present under these land uses when the slope length and steepness factor was also low, but increased with higher LS values. There were few cells with extreme erosion potential in the dry seasons, and these were usually restricted to corridors along stream channels on coffee and pasture with very high LS values. In the wet seasons, extreme erosion potential comprised larger areas on coffee and pasture along the drainage network (high LS values). The annual erosion potential surface had a spatial pattern similar to the seasonal ones (Fig. 6c). Categories were also defined by quintiles as follows: ! Minimal: 00.7 t ha 1 year 1 ! Low: 0.72.7 t ha 1 year 1 ! Medium: 2.77.0 t ha 1 year 1
Table 5 Land area (ha) under each erosion potential category for all model scenarios Erodibility scenario Erosion potential category t ha Average
1

Wet seasons (ha)a

Dry seasons (ha)a

season

Category Minimallow Mediumhigh Extreme Minimallow Mediumhigh Extreme Minimallow Mediumhigh Extreme 1725.4 1667.9 1348.3 1834.1 1709.8 1197.8 1693.4 1692.4 1355.9 (36.4%) (35.2%) (28.4%) (38.7%) (36.1%) (25.3%) (35.7%) (35.7%) (28.6%) 2239.5 1968.1 534.1 2371.6 1945.6 424.4 2211.4 1994.6 535.6 (47.2%) (41.5%) (11.3%) (50.0%) (41.0%) (8.9%) (46.6%) (42.1%) (11.3%)

Low

High

00.7 0.73.5 N3.5 00.7 0.73.5 N3.5 00.7 0.73.5 N3.5

Categories have been grouped for easiness of interpretation. Wet seasons: MarchMay and September November. Dry seasons: DecemberFebruary and JuneAugust. a In parenthesis, percent out of 4742 ha (basins rural area minus discarded rural land uses and 25 m strip along watershed divide removed during LS surface generation).

100

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

! High: 7.014.4 t ha 1 year 1 ! Extreme: N14.4 t ha 1 year 1 Erosion potential was clearly affected by seasonality, and to a lesser extent by erodibility (Table 5). There was consistently more land below the high erosion potential category during the dry seasons. By comparison, during the wet seasons there were between 2 and 3 times more hectares with extreme erosion potential. The effect of erodibility was less evident. Still, under the high erodibility scenario, there was between 1.1 (wet seasons) and 1.3 (dry seasons) more land under the extreme erosion potential category than under the low erodibility scenario.

4. Discussion 4.1. Model results Although many assumptions were made in this study, the erosion potential values obtained were reasonable when compared to measured soil losses from erosion plots under similar conditions. Studies in Colombia, Venezuela and Indonesia on runoff plots measured soil losses ranging from 0.2 to 8.9 t ha 1 year 1 in established coffee plantations (Suarez de Castro, 1953; Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez, 1962; Ataroff and Monasterio, 1997; Ijima et al., 2003; Table 6). These studies found that soil losses under both coffee systems were low after the plantation became established, and that pasture was very effective in preventing soil loss but generated greater runoff than coffee due to lower infiltration. In addition, a large proportion of the soil loss took place during a few

Table 6 Soil losses from studies on runoff plots under similar conditions Land use Location Plot characteristics Slope (%) Shade coffee Established Established Established Recent Established Recent Recent Colombia Colombia Venezuela Colombia Venezuela Venezuela Indonesia Colombia Colombia Colombia 53 1060 60 45 60 60 27 21 21 Measurement time (years) 8 2 2 8 2 1 4 2 8 8 Area (m2) 90 6000 12 120 12 12 108 2500 1040 30 Averagea Soil loss (t ha 1 year 1) 0.21.1 10.4 0.6 0.64.8 1.2 3.2 2.08.9c 0.5 34.061.4 514.0873.3 (a) (b) (c) (a) (c) (c) (d) (b) (a) (a) Sourceb

Sun coffee

Pasture Pasture-corn rotation Bare soil

a b

Ranges correspond to the minimum and maximum values from different plots. (a) Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez (1962), (b) Suarez de Castro (1953), (c) Ataroff and Monasterio (1997); (d) Ijima et al. (2003). c Under various treatments: tillage, no-tillage, alley cropping and no alley cropping.

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

101

large and intense rainfall events, which should be kept in mind when interpreting the average values predicted by RUSLE. The erosion potential model for the Dosquebradas basin indicated that 50% of the area planted in coffee had values below 9 t ha 1 year 1. The maximum value, however, was very high, reaching 300 t ha 1 year 1. By comparison, 50% of the land on pasture was below 2 t ha 1 year 1, and the maximum value was 134 t ha 1 year 1. Higher median and maximum values under coffee are the product of higher C values, as well as higher LS values related to the steeper slopes found under this land use relative to pasture (Fig. 7). Overall, a large percentage (70%) of the area analyzed was below the frequently cited soil loss tolerance value (1011 t ha 1 year 1), described as the maximum permissible rate of erosion at which soil fertility can be maintained over 20 to 25 years (Morgan, 1995). This tolerance value, however, varies depending on factors such as the rate of soil formation, subsoil characteristics, and effects of erosion on soil productivity and water quality (Wischmeier and Smith, 1965; El-Swaify and Dangler, 1982; Morgan, 1995). Specific aspects of tropical mountainous regions that need to be considered include rainfall aggressiveness and steep topography. Soil formation may also be limited by the supply of parent material which is the case in the study area where soils form through weathering of volcanic ash. Studies have identified at least six paleosols, the upper three being younger than 10,930 F 65 years BP (Toro et al., 2001). Unfortunately, these data are not detailed enough to infer formation rates for the most recent soil layer. Restrepo and Kjerfve (2000) estimated an average sediment yield of 5.6 t ha 1 year 1 for the entire Magdalena Basin of Colombia (daily data 19751995), which contains the study area. According to this value, they placed the Magdalena as the river with highest sediment yield along the Caribbean and Atlantic coasts of South America, even surpassing the Amazon (1.9 t ha 1 year 1, Milliman and Syvitski, 1992). Such results
30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Land use Coffee (sun and shade) Pasture

Percent of total land use area

0-10

10-20

20-30

30-40

40-50

50-60

60-70

70-80

80-90

90-100

100-110

Slope (%)

Fig. 7. Land (%) under coffee and pasture discriminated by slope categories. Percent calculated from total land under each land use.

110-120

102

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

suggest that a threshold lower than 10 t ha 1 year 1 may better represent the conditions of the study area. 4.2. Relative importance of erosion factors The strength of this model relies on the relative spatial differences rather than on exact values. Therefore, the resulting patterns of erosion potential should indicate which factors are more or less influential and under what conditions. The spatial distribution of the erosion potential categories showed the effects of: ! The cover management factor, which was particularly important in areas under forest, shrub and pasture-shrub where it minimized the effect of topography. Agricultural land uses (coffee and pasture) showed a more dynamic interaction with topography. The similarity of C values for shade and sun coffee lead to similar, low erosion potential values. This was explained by both being the average over a long period (8 years); nevertheless, the sun coffee factor was 17% higher than the shade coffee factor. This difference came from different agricultural practices, mainly weeding with soil disturbance in sun coffee, versus no soil disturbance under shade coffee. ! The topographic factor was reflected by the similar spatial distribution of erosion potential (in pasture and coffee) with the LS surface. Quantification of the relation between topography and erosion potential was performed by generating 1000 random points within the basin coordinates, 506 of which were located in the basins rural area. LS and erosion potential values for these points yielded correlation coefficients (Spearman r) ranging from 0.57 to 0.59 (a = 0.01). The LS surface also showed the effect of both subfactors, the slope steepness (S) and the contributing area (L). Slope steepness was the major control on LS except in areas of flow concentration where L values were very high (along stream channels). ! The effect of the erosivity factor was evident as there was more area in the extreme erosion potential category during the wet seasons. This effect varied with land use, affecting most areas in pasture and coffee regardless of their topography, but only areas with high (N 25) LS values under forests, shrub and pasture-shrub. Although there was an erodibility effect as shown by the results (Table 5), it was spatially difficult to differentiate because it had the same spatial distribution as the cover factor, and a very narrow numerical range. 4.3. Sources of error and assessment In addition to the intrinsic model limitations already mentioned, each of the layers had errors associated with its data source and generation technique. Their combined effect on the model results would be multiplicative, since erosion potential was calculated as the product of all layers. On the other hand, the use of local data whenever possible, instead of extrapolations, was intended to maintain relative differences in the model outcome as close to reality as possible. Furthermore, model results were pooled into qualitative categories in order to keep the focus on relative differences instead of numerical values. Although it was

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

103

not possible to quantify the overall effect of each surfaces error on the model outcome, an independent error assessment of each layer provided an idea of the uncertainty associated with the model results. The erosivity surfaces had a prediction error associated with the interpolation technique, with maximum values of 43% in the wet seasons and 69% in the dry seasons. Both of these values were returned from stations located at the edges of the interpolation surfaces (16 km and 22 km from the watershed divide) and for this reason were not expected to have a significant effect within the basin. The second largest interpolation errors were in the order of 28% (wet seasons) and 24% (dry seasons) at stations near the northern watershed divide (1.5 km and 4 km, respectively). Over- and underprediction at these stations seemed to result from a combination of interannual rainfall variability and local topographic effects. There was also uncertainty associated with the low number of stations used to generate the interpolation surface (16). The final precision of the slope length and steepness factor surface was a function of the accuracy of the DEM and the algorithms used to calculate flow, slope length and slope steepness. To assess the precision of the digital contours, three random sections of 10 km2 each were printed on transparencies and overlaid on the original paper maps. A distance of 12 mm between digitized and original contours was found in localized sections that represented no more than 5% of the area evaluated. Finally, quantification of the error associated with the algorithms used to generate the surface was not possible. Nevertheless, a visual assessment of the topographic map and the LS surface indicated a good correspondence between ridges and low LS values, and depressions and high LS values. The land cover and management factor surface was developed from the digital land use map provided by CARDER (1997). Five categories were used, sun coffee, shade coffee, pasture, pasture-shrub and shrub-forests. Error assessment of this map was carried out in two ways. First, a visual assessment during the fieldwork of JuneAugust 2002 confirmed by interviews with local residents was used to correct a few major inconsistencies. Second, random points were generated within the coordinates of the study area and exported as a point layer within the GIS. Then, approximately 30 points within each category in the land use map were compared with the actual land use in the aerial photos used to generate the map. These photos were taken in July 1997, with a scale of 1:21,000 to 1:22,000 (Area Metropolitana Pereira-Dosquebradas, 1997). This assessment showed accuracies ranging from 75% (sun coffee) to 91% (pasture). The erodibility surface was affected by the same error of the land cover surface (as it was based on it), and by the inaccuracy of the field infiltration measurements, which were a rough estimate. Finally, the chosen cell size (25 m) would also affect the accuracy of model predictions. This cell size was selected based on the original topographic and land use data. Although there is no hard rule to determine the appropriate cell size, a common procedure is to set it at half the distance of the smallest feature to be represented. The smallest topographic features (e.g. hilltops) and land use patches (shade coffee) had dimensions close to 50 m, so the cell size was set to 25 m. A visual assessment of the elevation and land use grids indicated that this resolution adequately represented contours and land use polygons.

104

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Model predictions, however, would have the limitations inherent to the original data, particularly topography with a fairly coarse scale (1:25,000) for a landscape where relief is highly variable. 4.4. Implication for current land use change trends During the fieldwork of the summer of 2002, two major trends on coffee plots were observed. First, many were completely abandoned, or received few agricultural practices (no fertilization or harvesting). Second, several pasture areas had been recently (past 5 years) established from previous coffee plots. Conversations with local environmental officers confirmed that one of the major land use changes at the regional scale was the conversion of coffee to pasture (Orozco, 2002, pers. commun.). Data from other coffee producing municipalities throughout the Colombian Andes show this same trend starting in the late 1990s (Guhl, 2003, pers. commun.). To understand the effects of this land use change on erosion potential, two model scenarios were run based on the current distribution of land use and topography. The current land use distribution has pasture areas on lower slopes than coffee, with approximately half of the pasture on slopes lower than 20% (Fig. 7). Accordingly, the modeled scenarios included (a) conversion of sun and shade coffee plots on land with slopes lower than 20% to pasture, and (b) conversion of sun and shade coffee plots on slopes lower than 50% to pasture. The model was then run for the wet and dry seasons, with average soil erodibility conditions. Results showed that under both scenarios and for both seasons, the percent of land in the minimallow (b0.7 t ha 1 season 1) erosion
70 60
Dry season Wet season Land use scenario

Percent of analyzed area

50 40 30 20 10 0

current coffee on slopes lower than 20% to pasture coffee on slopes lower than 50% to pasture

Minimal-low

Minimal-low

Medium-high

Medium-high

Extreme

Erosion potential category

Fig. 8. Effect of coffee conversion to pasture on seasonal soil erosion potential (t ha 1 season 1) under average erodibility conditions.

Extreme

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

105

potential categories increased while that in the extreme category (N 3.5 t ha 1 season 1) decreased (Fig. 8). They also suggested that the protective effect of the pasture cover (lower C value) would override its higher erodibility (higher K value due to lower infiltration). Other studies at the runoff plot and basin level have shown minimal erosion potential under well managed pasture (Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez, 1962; Veloz and Logan, 1988; Mati et al., 2000). On the other hand, if water movement, sediment delivery and land use spatial distribution were considered, results may differ. Although increased runoff generation was indirectly included in the erodibility factor, its effect on soil detachment from neighboring cells and sediment delivery to streams was not analyzed.

5. Summary and conclusions The modeling of soil erosion potential for this basin provided several insights into the interactions among erosion factors in a tropical, mountainous environment. The cover and management factor was particularly important in areas under forest, shrub and pastureshrub. Its numerical value for these covers was so low that the resulting erosion potential was low regardless of the topography and erosivity. This point should be kept in mind when considering areas for conservation. For example, two of the sampled forest areas were located on very steep slopes, with thin soils underlaid by weathered, fragmented bedrock. Under such conditions, forest would probably be the only appropriate cover to maintain soil stability. The influence of topography was evident in areas with agricultural land uses (coffee and pasture). Land use conversion to less protective covers such as annual crops, would require use of soil conservation measures if the impact of topography and climate on erosion potential is to remain minimized. Modeling of land use change scenarios that are likely to happen given the current trends, indicated that the erosion potential of the basin would decrease as a result of coffee conversion to pasture. These results must be interpreted in the context of other issues such as the gradual deterioration of soil structure under pasture, greater sediment production due to higher runoff (associated with pasture), and socioeconomic effects. Major changes on labor availability and land tenure may be expected as coffee usually requires intensive labor and is planted on smaller plots (b 3 ha for most farms at the state level; FNC, 1997) compared to pasture.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank A. Jaramillo from CENICAFE for the pluviographic data, R. Ariza for the information on local cultivation practices, G. Weesies for the C factor values for the coffee systems and J. Orozco from CARDER for the digital topographic and land use data. Thanks also to P. Waylen and J. Southworth for their valuable comments on this manuscript. Funds for this study were provided by the Tropical Conservation and Development Program and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences of the University of Florida, the Colombian Institute for Science and Technology COLCIENCIAS, the Tinker Foundation and LASPAU.

106

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

References
Angima, S.D., Stott, D.E., ONeill, M.K., Ong, C.K., Weesies, G.A., 2003. Soil erosion prediction using RUSLE for central Kenyan highland conditions. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 97, 295 308. Area Metropolitana Pereira-Dosquebradas, 1997. Fotos aereas Municipo de Dosquebradas, scale 1:21,000 1:22,000. Pereira, Colombia. Arshad, M.A., Lowery, B., Grossman, B., 1996. Physical tests for monitoring soil quality. In: Doran, J.W., Jones, A.J. (Eds.), Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, Special Publication Soil Science Society of America, vol. 49. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 123 141. Ataroff, M., Monasterio, M., 1997. Soil erosion under different management of coffee plantations in the Venezuelan Andes. Soil Technology 11, 95 108. Barthes, B., Roose, E., 2002. Aggregate stability as an indicator of soil susceptibility to runoff and erosion; ` validation at several levels. Catena 47, 133 149. Barthes, B., Azontonde, A., Boli, B.Z., Prat, C., Roose, E., 2000. Field-scale run-off and erosion in relation to ` topsoil aggregate stability in three tropical regions (Benin, Cameroon, Mexico). European Journal of Soil Science 51, 485 495. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA), 1998. Atlas de Indicadores Ambientales y de Sustentabilidad para America Latina y el Caribe. Cali, Colombia. Corporacio n Auto noma Regional de Risaralda (CARDER), 1997. Informacion digital Municipio de Dosquebradas, escala 1:25,000. Pereira, Colombia. Desmet, P.J.J., Govers, G., 1996. A GIS procedure for automatically calculating the USLE LS factor on topographically complex landscape units. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51, 427 433. Dias, A.S., Silva, J.R.C., 2003. Rainfall erosivity in Fortaleza, Ceara state, Brazil. I. Distribution, probability of occurrence and return period1st approximation. Revista Brasileira de Ciencias Solo 27, 335 345. Digital Chart of the World (DCW), 1992. Digital chart of the world layer interface for Colombia. Penn State University Libraries. http://www.maproom.psu.edu/dcw/. Accessed in August 2004. El-Swaify, S.A., Dangler, E.W., 1977. Erodibilities of selected tropical soils in relation to structural and hydrologic parameters. In: Foster, G.R. (Ed.), Soil Erosion: Prediction and Control. Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, IA, pp. 105 114. El-Swaify, S.A., Dangler, E.W., 1982. Rainfall erosion in the tropics: a state of the art. In: Kussow, W., El-Swaify, S.A., Mannering, J. (Eds.), Soil Erosion and Conservation in the Tropics, American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America Special Publication, vol. 43. American Society of Agronomy: Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 1 25. Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (FNC), 1997. Encuesta Nacional de Cafeteros SICA. Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros, Bogota, Colombia. Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (FNC), 2000. Cartilla cafetera. Comite Departamental de Cafeteros del Valle del Cauca, Cali, Colombia. Guzman, O., Jaramillo, A., 1989. Estudio climatico de Risaralda y Quindo. Boletn Tecnico Cenicafe 15, 1 64. Hincapie, E., Rivera, J.H., Obando, F.H., 2000. Determinacion del factor erodabilidad de un andisol en cuatro localidades de la zona cafetera Colombiana. X Congreso Colombiano de Ciencia del Suelo, Medelln, Colombia. Ijima, M., Izumi, Y., Yuliadi, E., Afandi, S., Utomo, M., 2003. Erosion control on a steep sloped coffee field in Indonesia with alley cropping, intercropped vegetables, and no-tillage. Plant Production Science 6, 224 229. Instituto Geografico Agustn Codazzi (IGAC), 1988. Estudio General de Suelos del Departamento de Risaralda. Ministerio de Hacienda y Credito Publico, Bogota, Colombia. Keersebilck, N.C., 1990. Erosion control in the tropics. In: De Boodt, M.F., Hayes, M.H.B., Herbillon, A. (Eds.), Soil Colloids and their Associations in Aggregates. Plenum Press, New York, NY, pp. 567 576. Lal, R., 2003. Soil erosion and the global carbon budget. Environmental International 29, 437 450. Liu, Q.Q., Chen, L., Li, J.C., 2001. Influences of slope gradient on soil erosion. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 22, 510 519. Lufafa, A., Tenywa, M.M., Isabirye, M., Majaliwa, M.J.G., Woomer, P.L., 2003. Prediction of soil erosion in a Lake Victoria basin catchment using a GIS-based universal soil loss model. Agricultural Systems 76, 883 894.

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

107

Mati, B.M., Morgan, R.P.C., Gichuki, F.N., Quinton, J.N., Brewer, T.R., Liniger, H.P., 2000. Assessment of erosion hazard with the USLE and GIS: a case study of the Upper Ewaso Ngiro North basin of Kenya. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 2, 78 86. McCool, D.K., Brown, L.C., Foster, G.R., Mutchler, C.K., Meyer, L.D., 1987. Revised slope steepness factor for the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 30, 1387 1396. Milliman, J.D., Syvitski, J.P.M., 1992. Geomorphic tectonic control of sediment transport to the ocean: the importance of small mountainous rivers. Journal of Geology 100, 525 544. Millward, A.A., Mersey, J.E., 1999. Adapting the RUSLE to model soil erosion potential in a mountainous tropical watershed. Catena 38, 109 129. Moguel, P., Toledo, V.M., 1999. Biodiversity conservation in traditional coffee systems of Mexico. Conservation Biology 13, 11 21. Moore, D., Wilson, J.P., 1992. Length-slope factors for the revised universal soil loss equation: simplified method of estimation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 47, 423 428. Morgan, R.P.C., 1995. Soil Erosion and Conservation. John Wiley & Sons, Essex, England. Muller-Samann, K.M., 1999. Conservacion de suelos y aguas en la Zona Andina: hacia un concepto integral con mas interaccion, mas adopcion y mas impacto. In: Muller-Samann, K.M., Restrepo, J.M. (Eds.), Conservacion de Suelos y Aguas en la Zona Andina. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Cali, Colombia, pp. 9 20. Nearing, M.A., 1997. A single, continuous function for slope steepness influence on soil erosion. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61, 917 919. Oldeman, L.R., Hakkeling, R.T.A., Sombroek, W.G., 1991. World Map of the Status of Human-Induced Soil Degradation. International Soil Reference and Information CenterUnited Nations Environmental Programme, Wageningen, Netherlands. Perfecto, I., Rice, R.A., Greenberg, R., Van der Voort, M.E., 1996. Shade coffee: a disappearing refuge for biodiversity. Bioscience 46, 598 608. Quinn, P.F., Beven, K.J., Chevallier, P., Planchon, O., 1991. The prediction of hillslope flow paths for distributed hydrologic modelling using digital terrain models. Hydrological Processes 5, 59 79. Renard, K.G., Foster, G.R., Weesies, G.A., McCool, D.K., Yoder, D.C., 1997. Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). USDA Handbook, vol. 703. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Restrepo, J.D., Kjerfve, B., 2000. Magdalena river: interannual variability (19751995) and revised water discharge and sediment load estimates. Journal of Hydrology 235, 137 149. Rivera, J.H., Lal, R., Amezquita, E., Mesa, O., Chaves, B., 1998. Erodabilidad de cinco suelos de la zona cafetera central Colombiana mediante simulacion de lluvias. Cenicafe 49, 197 210. Roose, E.J., 1977. Use of the universal soil loss equation to predict erosion in West Africa. In: Foster, G.R. (Ed.), Soil Erosion: Prediction and Control. Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, IA, pp. 60 74. Roose, E.J., Sarrailh, M., 1989. Erodibilite de quelques sols tropicaux. Cahiers ORSTOM. Serie Pedologie 25, 7 30. Santos, N., Azevedo, M., 2001. A new procedure to estimate the RUSLE EI30 index, based on monthly rainfall data and applied to the Algarve region, Portugal. Journal of Hydrology 250, 12 18. Suarez de Castro, F., 1953. Perdidas de suelo y agua en un cafetal y en un potrero. Boletn Tecnico Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros 1, 1 13. Suarez de Castro, F., Rodrguez, A., 1962. Investigaciones sobre la erosion y la conservacion de suelos en Colombia. Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros, Bogota, Colombia. Toro, G., Hermelin, M., Poupeau, G., 2001. Depositos de los ultimos 40,000 A B.P en el Departamento de Risaralda, Colombia. UTP Universidad Tecnologica de Pereira and GTZ Cooperacion Alemana al Desarrollo, Suelos del eje cafetero. Fondo Editorial, Pereira, Colombia, pp. 26 31. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1999. Soil quality test kit guide. Web Site: http:// soils.usda.gov/sqi/soil_quality/assessment/kit2.html. Accessed in March 2002. Veloz, R.A., Logan, T.J., 1988. Steepland erosion research in the Dominican Republic. In: Rimwanich, S. (Ed.), Land Conservation for Future Generations Proceedings of the 5th International Soil Conservation Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 991 1000.

108

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1965. Predicting rainfall-erosion losses from cropland east of the Rocky Mountainsguide for selection of practices for soil and water conservation. USDA Handbook, vol. 282. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. USDA Handbook, vol. 537. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Yu, B., 1998. Rainfall erosivity and its estimation for Australias tropics. Australian Journal of Soil Research 36, 143 165.