soil water repellency - weeblyantoniojordan.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/2/8/22283836/swr_uwa.pdfsoil...

Soil Water RepellencyWhat happens when water does no infiltrate in soils?

Antonio JordánMED_Soil Research Group, University of Seville

http://personal.us.es/ajordan

https://www.facebook.com/antonio.jordan.lopez

https://plus.google.com/+antoniojordan_us

http://gsoil.wordpress.com

https://twitter.com/EGU_Soil

Correlation between soil properties and hydrological response in El Algibe range, SW Spain

Zavala and Jordán (2008)

Tp Tr Pr Runoff rate Runoff coef. Infiltration rate SSIR Tr-TpLitter -0.48 - - - - - - -Plant cover -0.48 -0.45 -0.47 - - - - -Soil depth 0.56 0.35 0.36 - - - - -Organic C -0.44 - - - - - - -Coarse elements -0.54 -0.38 -0.39 - - - - -Sand - 0.73 0.74 -0.77 -0.77 0.77 0.78 0.84Clay - - - 0.40 0.40 -0.40 -0.43 -0.54Bulk density 0.50 0.68 0.68 -0.63 -0.63 0.63 0.67 0.54

Correlation between soil properties and hydrological response in El Algibe range, SW Spain


Tp Tr Pr Runoff rate Runoff coef. Infiltration rate SSIR Tr-TpLitter -0.48 - - - - - - -Plant cover -0.48 -0.45 -0.47 - - - - -Soil depth 0.56 0.35 0.36 - - - - -Organic C -0.44 - - - - - - -Coarse elements -0.54 -0.38 -0.39 - - - - -Sand - 0.73 0.74 -0.77 -0.77 0.77 0.78 0.84Clay - - - 0.40 0.40 -0.40 -0.43 -0.54Bulk density 0.50 0.68 0.68 -0.63 -0.63 0.63 0.67 0.54

WDPT -0.43 -0.79 -0.78 0.70 0.70 -0.70 -0.73 -0.73

Picture: N. Jiménez-Morillo (Imaggeo)

Wettable soil: infiltration rate

decreases during wetting due to

the saturation of the upper layer

Water-repellent soil

Infiltration

rate

Time

INCREASING INTEREST: FIRST STEPSAuthor/s ReviewMolliard, M. 1910. De l’action du Marasmius oreades Fr. sur la vegetation. Bulletin of the Society of Botany t.57

s.4, t.1 (1): 62-69. Bayliss, J.S. 1911. Observations on Marasmius oreades and Clitocybe gigantea as parasitic fungi causing fairy

rings. Journal of Economic Biology 6:111-132.Shantz, H.L., Piemeisel, R.L.

1917. Fungus fairy rings in eastern Colorado and their effect on vegetation. Journal of Agricultural Research 11:191-245

Jamison, V.C. 1943. The slow reversible drying of sandy surface soils beneath citrus trees in central Florida. Soil Science Society of America Journal 7:36-41.

Jamison, V.C. 1946. Resistance to wetting in the surface of sandy soils under citrus trees in Central Florida and its effect upon penetration and the efficiency of irrigation. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 11:103-109.

Jamison, V.C. 1946. The penetration of irrigation and rain water into sandy soils of central Florida. Soil ScienceSociety of America Journal 10:25-29.

Wander, I.W. 1949. An interpretation of the cause of resistance to wetting in Florida soils. Science-New Series 110. Pp: 299-300.

Van’t Woudt, B.D., 1959. Particle coatings affecting the wettability of soils. Journal of Geophysical Research 64:263-267.Adam, N.K. 1963. Principles of water-repellency. In: Moillet, J.L. (ed.). Water Proofing and Water-Repellency.

Elsevier. London.Bond, R.D., Harris, J.R. 1964. The influence of the microflora on physical properties of soils. I. Effects associated with

filamentous algae and fungi. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 2:111-122.DeBano, L.F., 1966. Formation of non-wettable soils involves heat transfer mechanism. Research Notes PSW-132.

Pacific Southwest Station.Adams, S., Strain, B.R., Adams, M.S.

1969. Water-repellent soils and annual plant cover in a desert scrub community of southeastern California. Symposium on Water-repellent Soils, Proceedings. University of California. Riverside, CA. Pp: 289-295.

INCREASING INTEREST: REVIEWS

Author/s ReviewMüller, K., Deurer, M. 2011. Review of the remediation strategies for soil water repellency.

Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 144 (1), pp. 208-221. Blanco-Canqui, H. 2011. Does no-till farming induce water repellency to soils? Soil Use and

Management, 27 (1), pp. 2-9. Rillig, M.C. 2005. A connection between fungal hydrophobins and soil water

repellency? Pedobiologia, 49 (5), pp. 395-399. Dekker, L.W., Oostindie, K., Ritsema, C.J.

2005. Exponential increase of publications related to soil water repellencY.Australian Journal of Soil Research, 43 (3), pp. 403-441.

DeBano, L.F. 2000. Water repellency in soils: A historical overview. Journal of Hydrology, 231-232, pp. 4-32.

Doerr, S.H., Shakesby, R.A., Walsh, R.P.D.

2000. Soil water repellency: Its causes, characteristics and hydro-geomorphological significance. Earth Science Reviews, 51 (1-4), pp. 33-65.

Terry, J.P. 1992. The effects of water repellency in soils on erosion processes.Swansea Geographer, 29, pp. 89-97.

INCREASING INTEREST: PUBLICATIONS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

19

70

19

72

19

74

19

76

19

78

19

80

19

82

19

84

19

86

19

88

19

90

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

20

10

20

12

Pu

blic

atio

ns

(so

urc

e: S

cop

us)

Articles Other documents

Ritsema and Dekker (Eds.), Special issue, Journal of Hydrology 231-232 (2000)

Review by Doerr, Shakesby and Walsh, Earth-ScienceReviews 51 (2000)

Jordán, Zavala, Mataix-Solera and Doerr (Eds.), Special issue, Catena 108 (2013)

WHAT IS

SOIL WATER

REPELLENCY?

WHAT IS SOIL WATER REPELLENCY?

Water-repellent sand Wettable sand

Water-repellent soils do not wet readily when in contact with water.

Thus, a water-repellent soil layer may offer strong resistance to theinfiltration of water accumulated on the soil surface or in the upperwettable soil layer during periods of time that may range from a fewseconds to hours, days or weeks

CONSEQUENCES OF SOIL WATER REPELLENCY

Geomor-phology

Plantnutrition

Hydrology

• Decreased infiltration rate

• Enhanced surface flow

• Preferential flow paths

• Increased erosion risk

• Leaching of nutrients

• Competition strategies

Other conse-quences

• Increased aggregate stability

• Increased carbon sequestration

W H A T I S

THE ORIGIN

OF SOIL WATER

R E P E L L E N C Y ?

H

H

O105 o

+

+

-

= 0

< 0

Most liquids have a surface tension between 20 and 40 10-3 N m-1 at 20 oC.

But the surface tension of water is exceptionally high: 72.75 10-3 N m-1.

What is soil water repellency?

Mineral particle

Water molecules adhere to most natural surfaces, because these surfaces are positive or negativevely charged and attract the opposite poles of water molecules.

Most of mineral sufaces are wettable…

WHAT IS SOIL WATER REPELLENCY?

Amphiphilic molecules havehydrophilic and hydrophobic ends. A ped covered by an

organic matter layer

… but organic may not

Hydrophilic end Hydrophobic end

Amphiphilic molecule

The surface of aggregates is

hydrophobic due tothe orientation of

the organic moleculecover

Organic moleculesflip due to the

interaction withwater

The surface becomeshydrophilic and

water can spread over it

Modified from Doerr, Shakesby and Walsh (2000)

W H E R E D O

HYDROPHOBIC

S U B S T A N C E S

C O M E F R O M ?

ORIGIN OF HYDROPHOBIC SUBSTANCES

García-Moreno (2014)

Deciduous trees

Evergreen trees

Organic substances

transformed and/or

concentrated by fire

Organic compounds

released during decomposition

Exudates of roots

Resins and waxes from plant leaves

Substances released by fungi and bacteria

WHERE HAS

SOIL WATER

REPELLENCY

BEEN OBSERVED?

WHERE HAS SOIL WATER REPELLENCY BEEN OBSERVED?

A few decades ago, inhibition of water infiltration was considered exceptional by most soil scientists.

But currently, SWR has been observed in different soils under different climates and vegetation types worldwide.

ONLY IN GOLF

COURSES?

Despicable me 2 minions by Design Bolt

Source: Scopus

W H A T

F A C T O R S

C O N D I T I O N

S O I L W A T E R

REPELLENCY?

ABIOTIC FACTORS

SWR

CLIMATE

SOIL TEXTURE

SOIL MINERA-

LOGY

SOIL MANAGE-

MENT

WILDFIRES

CLIMATE: MOISTURE AND TEMPERATURE

Modified from Dekker et al. (2000)

Volumetric water content

Soil depth

Wettable

Water-repellent

We know that soil moisturecontent is highly relatedwith SWR


González-Peñaloza, Zavala, Jordán, Bellinfante, Bárcenas-Moreno, Mataix-Solera, Granged, Granja-Martins and Neto-Paixão (2013)

OVEN-DRYING DAYS (120 oC)

WDPT (s)


0

5

10

15

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Nu

mb

er o

f sa

mp

les

Intensity of soil water repellency (EPT class)

Pines

Winter Summer

Zavala, González and Jordán (2009)


0

2

4

6

8

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Nu

mb

er o

f sa

mp

les


Cork oaks

Winter Summer



0

5

10

15

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Nu

mb

er o

f sa

mp

les


Eucalypts

Winter Summer


S O I L W A T E R

R E P E L L E N C Y

AS A CONSEQUENCE OF

F O R E S T

F I R E S

Atmosphere

Smoke:

• Water and other gases

• Solid particles

85-90% of thermal energy is

lost upwards with smoke

10-15% of thermal

energy is transmitted

following a hot-to-cold

gradient in depth

Soil

Volatile organic

substances

condense coating

the surface of

“cold” soil

particles

WHAT HAPPENS DURING BURNING?

Modified from DeBano (1981)

FIRE-INDUCED SOIL WATER REPELLENCY

Litter

Ash layer

Water-repellent layer

Wettable layer

Water-repellent

soil

Lowseverity

High severity

Very highseverity

Very high severity

Lowseverity

Wettable soil

High severity

Water drops resting on a sub-surface water-repellent layer after fire. Antonio Jordán (Imaggeo)

Picture: Artemi Cerdà

Upper soil layer with ash and charred litter

Water-repellent soil layer

Water drops

E F F E C T O F

B U R N I N G

TEMPERATURE

O N S O I L W A T E R

R E P E L L E N C Y

EFFECT OF BURNING TEMPERATURE ON SWR

(*) Temperature treatments during different time intervals

Temperature (*) Process Reference

100 – 150 oC No changes Zavala et al. (2010)

<175 oC No changes Doerr et al. (2000)

175 – 200 oC Induction of SWR Doerr et al. (2000)

200 oC Induction of SWR DeBano and Krammes (1966)

200 – 300 oC Induction of SWR DeBano et al. (1979); Robichaud and Hungerford (2000)García-Corona et al., (2004)Mataix-Solera and Guerrero (2007)

250 – 300 oC Attenuation of SWR Zavala et al. (2010)

270 – 400 oC Destruction of SWR Robichaud and Hungerford (200)Zavala et al. (2010)

400 – 450 oC Destruction of SWR Zavala et al. (2010)

480 – 540 oC Destruction of SWR DeBano and Krammes (1966)

600 oC Extreme SWR DeBano and Krammes (1966)

800 oC Attenuation of SWR DeBano and Krammes (1966)

900 oC Destruction of SWR DeBano and Krammes (1966)


The effects of burning on SWR can be highly variable, as fires caninduce orenhance it after moderately severe burning andreduce pre-existing hydrophobicity after highly

severe burning.

The intensity of fire-induced SWR depends mostly on the amount and type of burnt organic matter, temperatures reached and duration of heating and the amount of oxygen available during burning.


Zavala, Granged, Jordán and Bárcenas-Moreno (2010)

Soil samples of eucalypt forests from Spain, Mexico and Australia heated at different temperatures during 40 minutes

100-150 oC 250-300 oC 400-450 oC

Temperature (oC)

Depth (mm)

Water content 5-10%

Water content 20-25%


Zavala, Granged, Jordán and Bárcenas-Moreno (2010)

Soil samples of eucalypt forests from Spain, Mexico and Australia heated at different temperatures during 40 minutes

100-150 oC 250-300 oC 400-450 oC

WDPT (s)

Depth (mm)

Water content 5-10%

Water content 20-25%

EFFECT OF BURNING TEMPERATURE ON SOIL WATER REPELLENCY

Jordán, Zavala, Mataix, Nava and Alanís (2011)

Water repellency in soils from Mexican fir forests after different burning intensity and durations

WDPT classes:

RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF ORIGINAL SOIL WATER REPELLENCY IN THE POSTFIRE: IN MONTHS

Zavala, Jordán, Gil, Bellinfane and Pain (2009)

RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF ORIGINAL SOIL WATER REPELLENCY IN THE POSTFIRE: IN YEARS

Granged, Zavala, Jordán and Bárcenas-Moreno (2011)

Soil WR may be re-stablished after burning, althoughorganic matter content stayed below initial value.

E F F E C T O F

ORGANIC

M A T T E R

O N S O I L

W A T E R

REPELLENCY

HOW MUCH ORGANIC MATTER IS IMPORTANT

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Log

WD

PT

Organic matter (%)

Erica arborea


Positive correlationsScholl (1975)Singer and Ugolini (1976)Rodríguez-Alleres et al. (2007)Zavala and Jordán (2009)

SURE?

Contradictory results depending on the type of vegetation or land useJordán et al. (2009)Schnabel et al. (2013)Zavala and Jordán (2009) Zavala et al. (2014)

Negative, low or non significant correlationsDeBano (1981)Jungerius and de Jong (1989)Wallis et al. (1990)Ritsema and Dekker (1994)Scott (2000)

Purple monsters by Jojo Mendoza

HOW MUCH OR HOW PRETTY?


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 5 10 15 20

Log

WD

PT

Organic matter (%)

Cork oak Eucalypt Pine

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 5 10 15 20

Log

WD

PT

Organic matter (%)

Heath Olive tree

DIFFERENT PLANT RESIDUES INDUCE DIFFERENT SEVERITIES OF SOIL WATER REPELLENCY


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Erica australis Erica arborea Quercuscoccifera

Genistatridentata

Rhododendrumponticum

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f o

bse

rvat

ion

s

Wettable Slight water repellency Strong water repellency

Severe water repellency Extreme water repellency

I N F L U E N C E O F

VEGETATION


R E P E L L E N C Y

Species Water-repellent samples Reference

Mediterranean heathland 96% (a) Jordán et al. (2010)

Mediterranean heathland 98% (b) Jordán et al. (2010)

Calluna vulgaris 80% Martínez-Zavala & Jordán-López (2009)

Erica arborea 87% Martínez-Zavala & Jordán-López (2009)

Erica australis 87% Martínez-Zavala & Jordán-López (2009)

Erica australis 100% (c), 100% (d) Zavala et al. (2009b)

Eucalyptus globulus 100% (c), 100% (v) Zavala et al. (2009b)

Juniperus oxycedrus 5% Mataix-Solera et al. (2007)

Olea europea 43% (c), 60% (d) Zavala et al. (2009b)

Pinus halepensis 30% Mataix-Solera et al. (2007)

Pinus halepensis 74% Arcenegui et al. (2008)

Pinus pinaster 97% (c), 100% (d) Zavala et al. (2009b)

Quercus coccifera 40% Mataix-Solera et al. (2007)

Quercus coccifera 88% Gimeno-García et al. (2011)

Quercus ilex 95% (e) Cerdà et al. (1998)

Quercus lusitanica 40% Martínez-Zavala & Jordán-López (2009)

Quercus suber 77% (c), 77% (d) Zavala et al. (2009b)

Rhododendron ponticum 73% Martínez-Zavala & Jordán-López (2009)

Rosmarinus officinalis 0% Gimeno-García et al. (2011)

Rosmarinus officinalis 5% Mataix-Solera et al. (2007)

Proportion of water-repellent samples (WDPT > 5 s) under different species from unburned areas reported by different authors in Spain. (a) 0-2 cm depth, field conditions; (b) 0-2 cm depth, laboratory conditions; (c) winter; (d) summer; (e) WDPT > 60 s.

INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION IN UNBURNED SOILS

INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION IN BURNED SOILS

Species Water-repellent samples Reference

Mediterranean heathland 43% (a) Jordán et al. (2010)

Mediterranean heathland 98% (b) Jordán et al. (2010)

Herbaceous vegetation 5% Zavala et al. (2009a)

Pinus halepensis 21% Bodí et al. (2013)

Pinus pinea 100% Zavala et al. (2009a)

Pinus halepensis 33% Arcenegui et al. (2008)

Quercus coccifera 0% Gimeno-García et al. (2011)

Rosmarinus officinalis 100% Gimeno-García et al. (2011)

Shrubland 80% Zavala et al. (2009a)

Proportion of water-repellent samples (WDPT > 5 s) under different species from burned areas reported by different authors in Spain. (a) 0-2 cm depth, field conditions; (b) 0-2 cm depth, laboratory conditions; (c) winter; (d) summer; (e) WDPT > 60 s.

SWR (unburned soils)

Pines, eucalypts, holmoaks, heaths

Olives, cork oaks, Galloaks, Kermes oaks

Cedars, rosemary, grasslands

SWR (burned soils)

Pinus pinea, rosemary, heaths

Shrubland, Pinushalepensis

Kermes oaks, grasslands

INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION IN SOIL WATER REPELLENCY

Vegetation type pH Organic

carbon

(%)

Sand

(%)

Persistence of WR

(LogWDPT)

Intensity of WR

(contact angle, o)

Shrubland 4.9 ± 0.5 a 1.3 ± 0.3 b 88.1 ± 4.5 c 1.3 ± 0.5 b 102.5 ± 22.8 b

Sparse herbs 4.9 ± 0.5 a 0.3 ± 0.1 a 81.9 ± 5.0 b 0.4 ± 0.3 a 68.7 ± 17.7 a

Pine forest 6.1 ± 0.5 b 3.9 ± 0.6 c 61.4 ± 6.9 a 2.2 ± 0.6 c 131.4 ± 32.9 c

0-3 cm depth samples from burned soils under different vegetation types.Within a column values followed by the same letter do not present significant differences (p<0.05).


Pattern of vegetation types in Doñana National Park, SW Spain


Jordán, Álvarez-Romero, González-Pérez, Zavala, González-Vila. Coppola (2012)

Different species caused different WR severitiesin the first centimetres of soil

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

De

pth

(cm

)

Log WDPT

Ischia (Castanea, Acacia) Cervinara-1 (Castanea)

Cervinara-2 (Castanea) Lago Laceno-1 (Fagus)

Lago Laceno-2 (Pinus) Roccamonfina (Pinus)

Roccamonfina (Castanea)

INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION IN POST-FIRE SWR

WDPT Etanol (%)WDPT afterextraction

of lipids

Ethanol (%) 0.685p > 0.05

p > 0.05

pH -0.593 p > 0.05 p > 0.05

EC p > 0.05 p > 0.05 0.987

Extractable organic C 0.361 0.514 p > 0.05

Humic acids p > 0.05 0.500 0.811

Fulvic acids p > 0.05 0.515 p > 0.05

Lipids p > 0.05 0.425

N-Kjeldahl p > 0.05 0.414 p > 0.05

Jordán, Álvarez-Romero, González-Pérez, Zavala, González-Vila. Coppola (2012)

Positive correlation betweenWDPT and organic C%, but

not organic matterconstituents

Positive correlationbetween intensity of WR

and organic C, lipids, humicand fulvic acids

Good correlation only afterextraction of lipids: lipidsare more important than

humic acids


Quercus suber Pteridium aquilinum Pinus pineaSieve fraction (mm) 1-2 0.25-1 0.05-0.25 <0.05 1-2 0.05-0.25 <0.05 1-2 0.05-0.25 <0.05

WR Severe Severe Severe Severe Strong Strong Severe Strong Slight StrongOrganic matter (%) 35.0 26.8 37.2 46.9 6.2 17.0 27.4 2.9 7.3 21.0

C11 XC12 (lauric acid) X X X

C13 X XC14 (myristic acid) X X X

C15 X XC16 (palmitic acid) X X X X X X X X X X

C17C18 (stearic acid) X

WR linked to C2n long-chained lipids.Hydrophobic organic substances may be inherited soil material.

Jiménez-Morillo, González-Pérez, Jordán, Zavala, de la Rosa, Jiménez-González and González-Vila (2014)

Water-repellent dry soil

Ponded waterHydrostatic pressure breaks SWR

Lateral / hortonian flow

Wet soil

DEVELOPMENT OF UNEVEN WETTING FRONTS IN WATER-REPELLENT SOILS

Dry soil pockets below a water-repellent soil surface after months of heavy rain in NW Spain

INFLUENCE OF VEGETATION ON SOIL WATER REPELLENCY


Thin surface wettable layer

Deep wettable layer

Hydrophobic layer

Banksia attenuata

Banksia woodlands on sand dunes

WHY DO PLANTS INDUCE SOIL WATER REPELLLENCY? AN HYPOTHESIS

WHY DO PLANTS INDUCE SOIL WATER REPELLLENCY? AN HYPOTHESIS

Rainfall

Water infiltrates through macropores (dead root channels,

cracks, …)

INFLUENCE OF SOIL

MINERALOGY


R E P E L L E N C Y

INFLUENCE OF SOIL MINERALOGY ON SOIL WATER REPELLENCY

Soil type Lithology Reference

Acid soils Schists, slates Granged et al. (2011a)

Acid sandstone Granged et al. (2011b)

Jordán et al. (2008)

Zavala et al. (2009b)

Zavala et al. (2009c)

Sand dunes Zavala et al. (2009a)

Calcareous soils Limestone Arcenegui et al. (2007)

Arcenegui et al. (2008)

Bodí et al. (2013)

Cerdà and Doerr (2007)

Mataix-Solera and Doerr (2004)

Mataix-Solera et al. (2007)

Calcareous sandstone Arcenegui et al. (2008)

Marly limestone and marls Arcenegui et al. (2008)

Bodí et al. (2013)

Badía et al. (2013)

Gordillo-Rivero et al. (2013)

Calcareous clay Jordán et al. (2008)

Calcareous colluvium Badía et al. (2013)


Dlapa et al. (2004)

Montmorillonite has limited effects or increases soil WR

Kaolinite reduces soil WR


Modified from Mataix-Solera et al. (2013)

M A T T E R S

STRUCTURE AND TEXTURE

Fine texture

Medium texture

Coarsetexture

Leonard F. DeBano (US Forest Service): “Coarsely-textured soils are more prone to develop soil water repellency”

STRUCTURE AND TEXTURE

Fine texture

Medium texture

Coarsetexture

?Is this true or the first studies

were biased?

Leonard F. DeBano (US Forest Service): “Coarsely-textured soils are more prone to develop soil water repellency”

Mataix-Solera, Arcenegui, Zavala, Pérez-Bejarano, Jordán, Morugán-Coronado, Bárcenas-Moreno, Jiménez-Pinilla, Lozano, Granged and Gil (2014)

SUPERHYDROPHOBICITY

Air is superhydrophobic!

SIZE MATTERS

Soil WR of sand sieve fractions during a 10-days period of air-drying for different proportions of hydrophobic organic matter (stearic acid)

González-Peñaloza, Zavala, Jordán, Bellinfante, Bárcenas-Moreno, Mataix-Solera, Granged, Granja-Martins, Neto-Paixão (2013)

BUT IN SOILS WITH SIMILAR TEXTURE, PARTICLE SIZE IS NOT THE ONLY IMPORTANT THING

Zavala, González-Peñaloza and Jordán (2009a)

BUT IN SOILS WITH SIMILAR TEXTURE, PARTICLE SIZE IS NOT THE ONLY IMPORTANT THING

Persistence of WR(WDPT test)

Intensity of WR(ethanol test)

Species Winter Summer Winter Summer

Pine ** *** ** ***

Cork oak * * * *

Eucalyptus *** *** ** ***

Heath * * * *

Olive tree * ** * **

All species ** *** ** ***

Mann-Whitney U test p-values (F/C): * (p>0.001), **(p≤0.001), ***(p≤0.0001).

Zavala, González-Peñaloza and Jordán (2009b)

There are other important factors like climate or vegetation type

THE RELATION BETWEEN TEXTURE AND WATER REPELLENCY MAY VARY WITH SCALE OF WORK

Zone B SD p-value R2

All zones (4) Interception -0.343 1.150 NS 0.254

Clay (%) 0.805 0.233 *

Soils below fir forest in the Tancitaro Volcano Interception -80.970 14.524 ** 0.793

Sand (%) 1.277 0.218 **

p-values: * (p≤0.01), ** (p≤0.001).

Jordán, Zavala, Nava and Alanís (2009)

I N F L U E N C E O F

TEXTURE AND

STRUCTURE


R E P E L L E N C Y

WATER REPELLENCY MAY VARY BETWEEN AGGREGATES

Low severily burned Mexican volcanic soils

Jordán, Zavala, Mataix, Nava and Alanís (2011)

WATER REPELLENCY MAY VARY BETWEEN AGGREGATES

We

tta

ble

sa

mp

les (

%)

0.2

5-0

.5 m

m

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0.5

-1.0

mm

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

CF-B mm

1.0

-2.0

mm

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

CF-U mm

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

JF-B mm

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

JF-U mm

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

LB-B

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

LB-U

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

T1-B2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

T1-U

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

T2-B

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

T2-U

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Fire-induced SWR in sieve fractions. Codes: CF (Cortes de la Frontera), JF (Jimena de la Frontera), LB (Los Barrios), T1 (Tarifa), T2 (Tarifa); U (burnt), B (unburnt).

Jordán, Gordillo-Rivero, García-Moreno, Zavala, Granged, Gil, Neto-Paixão (2014)

ASHW A T E R

R E P E L L E N C Y

Very thin dark ash layer after a wildfire in a pine woodland, Huelva, Spain (2004). Photo: Lorena M. Zavala

Depending on fireseverity, vegetationtype and density orsoil litter, different

types and amounts of ash may be produced.

After a wilfire in Eastern Spain, 2011.A. Jordán (Imaggeo)

Restoration of fire-affected soils. Photo: A. Jordán (Imaggeo)

Moderately thick ash and litter alter after a wildfire in a cork oak forest, Huelva, Spain (2004)Photo: Lorena M. Zavala

Very thick ash layer after a wildfire in a pine forest in Gorga, Alicante, Spain (2011)Photo: Antonio Jordán

Thick layer of white and black ash after a prescribed fire in a shrubland, Almadén de la Plata, Spain (2012)

WATER-REPELLENT DARK ASH

WETTABLE WHITE ASH

ASH EFFECTS ARE IMPORTANT IN THE SHORT TERM

Ash may represent a protection for soils versus erosion risk and runoff generation, although ash layers are highly unstable and may be rapidly removed by wind or runoff

AND IN THE LONG TERM

ASH WATER REPELLENCY

WDPT Ash and needlecovered ground

Ash cover only(needles removed by hand)

Bare ground(needles removed by hand and ashbrushed away)

Ash Soil Ash Soil Ash Soil

Mean 0.37 4.67 0.41 4.77 0.39 4.53

SD 0.23 1.53 0.26 1.49 0.29 1.34

WDPT (s) values for the top of the ash layer and on the mineral soil surface after removal of ash

Wettability of ash may be very different of soil wettability

modified from Cerdà and Doerr (2006)

ASH REPELLENCY VARIES WITH SPECIES AND BURNING TEMPERATURE

Different degrees of WR may be found after a wildfire

Bodí, Mataix-Solera, Doerr and Cerdà (2011)

ASH REPELLENCY VARIES WITH SPECIES AND BURNING TEMPERATURE

Water repellency (WDPT; s) of ash produced by the combustion of differentplant species after heating at different temperatures.


ASH COLOUR IS A GOOD PREDICTOR OF WETTABILITY AT LOCAL SCALE

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Black ash Dark grey ash Light grey ash White ash

Ash

thic

kne

ss(m

m)

1-day

15 days

Modified from Pereira, Cerdà, Úbeda, Mataix-Solera, Arcenegui and Zavala (2013)

Depending on fire severity, arange of ash colors betweenblack and white can beobserved after a wildfire

THE DARKER ASH, THE MORE HYDROPHOBIC CONDITION


Relationship between colour (Munsell value) and water repellency (log WDPT) for different ash samples.

ASH REPELLENCY VARIES WITH ASH COMPOSITION

Relationship between ash water repellency (log WDPT) and the peak area ratio of absorbance bands assigned to aliphatic hydrocarbons (A3000–2800) and to calcite (A875).

Relationship between ash water repellency (log WDPT) and the peak area ratio of absorbance bands assigned to organic matter (carboxylic and aromatic groups, A1800–1200) and to calcite(A875).

Dlapa, Bodí, Mataix-Solera, Cerdà and Doerr (2013)

A WETTABLE ASH LAYER INCREASES TIME TO PONDING

Zavala, Jordán, Gil, Bellinfante and Pain (2009)

A WETTABLE ASH LAYER INCREASES TIME TO RUNOFF


A WETTABLE ASH LAYER REDUCES THE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT


A WETTABLE ASH LAYER REDUCES SOIL LOSS


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0 20 40 60 80 100

Soil

loss

(g

m-2

)

Runoff rate (%)

LITTER+ASH

ASH

BARE SOIL

ASH WATER REPELLENCY CONDITIONS SPLASH EROSION

WATER-REPELLENT ASH LAYERWETTABLE ASH LAYER

RAINDROP

DETACHED

PARTICLES

RUNOFF

Jordán et al. (Published online)

STONES

AND FIRE - INDUCED

WATER REPELLENCY

Stones restingon the soil

surface

Picture: A. Jordán (Imaggeo)

High intensity burn Low intensity burn

Stones increase the heating of subsurface soil layer

Lengthened residence of temperature peaks is alsoobserved

High degree of SWR

• Rock fragments protectsoil from heating

• Low or unaffected SWR isobserved

Heated soil

Cold soil

High intensity burn

Heating and smoulderingbetween neighbour stones may

occur in areas with high rock fragment cover

Uncontinuous gradient of heating is observed in areas

with low stone cover

F U T U R E

INSIGHTS

FUTURE INSIGHTS

Background data

Implementation in regular soil analyses

Dynamics in the short- and long-term

Impacts at different scales Landscape Soil Intra-aggregate Molecular

Impact on connectivity of water and sediments

Geochemical markers

Ecological implications

Impacts on agricultural soils

Restoration and amelioration

http://grupo.us.es/medsoil

Projects and networks

T H A N K S !

¡GRACIAS!

soil water repellency - weeblyantoniojordan.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/2/8/22283836/swr_uwa.pdfsoil...

Documents