PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2026Ecohydrology0 citationsOpen Access

Vegetation Components as Nature‐Based Solutions to Reduce Runoff and Soil Loss in a Brazilian Semi‐Arid Ecosystem

View Full Paper
VPVictor Casimiro PiscoyaJCJosé Ramon Barros CANTALICEVSVijay P. Singh

Key Points

  • This study aims to understand how different vegetation components influence runoff and soil loss in a semi-arid ecosystem.
  • Conducted sixteen rainfall simulations on 1 × 2 m plots in the Jacu River watershed, Brazil, comparing four cover treatments (shrub, litter, canopy only, bare soil).
  • Measured runoff coefficients, effective infiltration, and soil loss during each simulation to assess vegetation impact.
  • Analyzed hydraulic roughness (log f ) as an indicator of vegetation's effect on overland flow.
  • Runoff coefficients reduced from 0.700 (bare soil) to 0.430 (shrub) and 0.380 (litter).
  • Effective infiltration increased significantly from 20 mm h −1 to 42–44 mm h −1 with shrub and litter covers.
  • Soil loss decreased from 0.440 t ha −1 (bare soil) to 0.120–0.170 t ha −1 with shrub and litter, highlighting the effectiveness of vegetation.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Hydraulic roughness (log f ) is invoked as an integrator of vegetation effects on overland flow in semi‐arid catchments, yet the quantitative contribution of individual cover components remains poorly resolved. This study aimed to elucidate the mechanisms by which shrub vegetation, surface litter and tree canopy modulate runoff generation, effective infiltration and interrill detachment on Inceptisols of the Brazilian Caatinga and to establish hydraulic roughness (log f ) as a process‐anchored indicator of vegetation–overland flow coupling. Sixteen single‐event rainfall simulations (88 mm h −1 , 30 min) were applied on 1 × 2 m plots in the Jacu River watershed (north‐eastern Brazil), comparing four cover treatments ( n = 4 each), namely, shrub (T1), litter (T2), canopy only (T3) and bare soil (T4). Runoff coefficients fell from 0.700 in T4 to 0.430 in T1 and 0.380 in T2, whereas effective infiltration rose from about 20 to 42–44 mm h −1 and soil loss declined from 0.440 to 0.120–0.170 t ha −1 . Hydraulic roughness reached log f = 1.410 in T2 and 1.340 in T1 against 0.660 in T4 and was inversely associated with the runoff coefficient and soil loss and positively associated with infiltration. Canopy alone (T3) recovered only about half of the infiltration gain delivered by shrub and litter covers, indicating that surface‐contact elements rather than overhead protection govern flow attenuation. The treatment ranking was preserved under perturbations of the velocity‐correction factor and the infiltration estimate. The results support log f as a transferable, mechanism‐anchored indicator of vegetation effects on overland flow and erosion in semi‐arid drylands, conditional on the rainfall intensity and textural class tested.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Piscoya et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095c3f7880e6d24efe25b7https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.70218
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Caatinga Overland Flow Hydraulics: How Shrubs in the Brazilian Semi-Arid Environment Interact with Overland Flow2026
  2. 2Investigation of Different Roughness Approaches and Vegetation Height Effects on rain-induced overland flow2024
  3. 3Evaluating different roughness approaches and infiltration parameters for vegetation-influenced overland flow in hydrological model2026
  4. 4Evaluating Vegetation-Influenced Roughness Estimation Methods to Improve Hydrological Modelling2024
  5. 5Characteristics of Hydrodynamic Parameters of Different Understory Vegetation Patterns2025