Dept.
of Soil and Water Conservation Engineering
Agricultural Engineering College & Research Institute
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore
ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON SOIL EROSION USING GEOSPATIAL
TECHNIQUES
Lad Shivtej Udaykumar
II M.Tech
202254500
Department of Soil and Water Conservation Engineering
AEC & RI, TNAU, Coimbatore
CONTENTS
1.Introduction
2.Materials and Methods
3.Result and Discussion
4.Conclusion
5.Copyright
INTRODUCTION
• Soil erosion is a natural process but accelerated by human activities, leading to land degradation,
reduced agricultural productivity, and sedimentation in water bodies (Pimentel and Burgess,
2013).
• Water-induced erosion is the most widespread, especially in areas with excessive rainfall, steep
slopes, and poor land management.
. Global Impact of Soil Erosion
• Deforestation, agricultural expansion, and urbanization have increased soil erosion, leading
to environmental and socio-economic consequences.
• Soil erosion causes decreased agricultural productivity, making lands more dependent on
chemical fertilizers and irrigation, further degrading soil health.
. PAP River Basin
• PAP River Basin in Tamil Nadu faces soil erosion due to agricultural expansion, deforestation,
and urbanization.
• Aliyar Dam is affected by silt deposition, reducing its storage capacity and impacting water
supply.
. Soil Erosion Assessment Methods
• Traditional methods (soil samples, erosion plots) are labor-intensive and geographically limited.
• Remote Sensing (RS) and GIS enable large-scale, efficient monitoring and analysis of soil
erosion (Gorelick et al., 2017)
OBJECTIVES
1.To assess the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) and Revised Universal Soil
Loss Equation (RUSLE) to determine the soil loss.
2. To anticipate the amount soil loss from the Aliyar River Basin by utilising ArcGIS and
Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation.
3.To Prepare Six Factor Layer Rusle in ArcGIS and To promote land management and
conservation planning
MATERIALS AND METHODS
STUDY AREA
• Latitudes 10° 10’ 00” to 10°57’20”
• Longitudes - 76°43’00” to 77° 1 2’30”
• Areal extend - 2388.72 square kilometres
Revised Universal Soil loss Equation
The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (Renard, 1997) is improved from of USLE (Wischmeier and Smith 1965,
1978), used to estimate average annual soil erosion potential,
A=R×K×L×S×C×P (1)
Where:
A = Computed average annual soil loss (ton/ha/year)
R = Rainfall erosivity factor ( mm/ha·hr·year)
K = Soil erodibility factor (t·ha·hr/ha·MJ·mm)
L S = Slope length factor (dimensionless)
C = Cover management factor (dimensionless)
P = Conservation practice factor (dimensionless)
Data
Sr.No Data Type Dataset Used Source Purpose in ArcGIS
1 Landsat 8, LULC classification,
Satellite Data USGS, ESA
Sentinel-2 NDVI analysis
2 SRTM 30m Slope, LS-factor
DEM Data USGS
DEM calculation
3 Indian
IMD Rain R-factor computation
Rainfall Data Meteorological
Gauge Data using IDW/Kriging
Department
4 NBSSLUP Soil
Soil Data ICAR-NBSSLUP K-factor computation
Database
5 LULC from
Land Use Data USGS P-factor assignment
Landsat 8
6 Watershed
Survey of India
Base Maps Survey of India delineation,
Toposheets
digitization
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Spatial distribution of R Factor
Spatial Patterns of Rainfall Erosivity
High-Risk Areas: The Sholayar and Aliyar sub-basins consistently exhibit high R-Factor values, indicating significant
vulnerability to soil erosion and land degradation due to intense rainfall and steep slopes.
Spatial Distribution: R-Factor values are higher in Sholayar and Aliyar sub-basins compared to Palar and Valayar sub-
basins, primarily due to topography and rainfall patterns.
Temporal Trends:
1. 2016–2018: Increasing R-Factor values, peaking in 2018 due to extreme rainfall, resulting in increased runoff
and sediment loss.
2. 2019–2021: A decrease in R-Factor values, particularly in central and northern regions, due to reduced
precipitation intensity
3. 2022–2024: Relatively stable R-Factor values, indicating the potential positive
Climate Variability & Erosion: Fluctuations in R-Factor align with climate variability, such as record-breaking
monsoons in 2018 and weaker monsoons in 2019 and 2020. Rising R-Factor values from 2021–2023 suggest
potential climate change effects enhancing rainfall intensity.
Erosion Risks and Conservation Needs:
1. High-R-factor zones, particularly in Sholayar and Aliyar sub-basins, require targeted soil conservation
strategies like contour bunding, terracing, agroforestry, and afforestation.
2. Implement check dams, sediment traps, and real-time rainfall monitoring in high-risk zones to control
soil loss and prevent downstream sedimentation.
Key Strategies for Soil Conservation:
3. Sholayar and Aliyar sub-basins: Focus on terracing, agroforestry, and check dams to reduce soil
erosion.
4. Palar and Valayar sub-basins: Use cover cropping, riparian buffers, and controlled grazing to
improve soil stability.
Future Research and Adaptation:
5. Integrating climate change projections (CMIP6) with R-factor analysis is crucial for developing
resilient erosion control measures.
6. Emphasize the role of vegetation restoration and conservation tillage in stabilizing soil in high R-
Factor zones.
Long-Term Outlook: The increasing R-Factor trend suggests growing rainfall erosivity, emphasizing the need
emphasizing the need for adaptive soil conservation measures to mitigate future erosion risks and ensure
sustainable watershed management.
Spatial distribution of K Factor
Spatial Patterns of Soil Erodibility
•Importance of K-Factor: The K-Factor quantifies soil erodibility, reflecting the vulnerability of soil to erosion based on
soil type, vegetation cover, land use changes, and topography.
•High-Risk Areas (Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins):
•These areas exhibit the highest K-Factor values (>0.140), indicating higher soil erodibility.
•Contributing factors include sandy and loamy soils, intensive agriculture, deforestation, and infrastructure development,
all weakening soil structure and increasing vulnerability to erosion.
•Low-Risk Areas (Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins):
•These sub-basins exhibit lower K-Factor values (<0.114) due to clay-rich soils, which are more resistant to erosion.
•Clay-rich soils have higher cohesion and aggregation potential, enhancing their resistance to erosive forces and improving
soil stability.
Impact of Vegetation:
•Forested regions with healthy vegetation have lower K-Factor values due to the stabilizing effect of root systems that bind
the soil, reducing erosion.
•Deforestation and land conversion to cropland increase soil erodibility, reinforcing the need for maintaining vegetation
cover.
Agricultural Practices:
•Moderate fluctuations in K-Factor values due to seasonal agricultural practices like plowing, tillage, and intensive
cropping cycles, which destabilize soil temporarily.
•Areas practicing conservation agriculture (e.g., no-tillage farming and cover cropping) showed more stable or improved
K-Factor values.
•Role of Conservation: Long-term conservation practices (afforestation, terracing, and soil restoration) contributed to soil
stabilization, but areas with continued deforestation or agricultural expansion remain vulnerable to erosion.
Future Needs: Ongoing monitoring and conservation efforts are crucial to address high erodibility in certain regions and to
mitigate soil erosion in the long term.
Role of Conservation: Long-term conservation practices (afforestation, terracing, and soil restoration)
contributed to soil stabilization, but areas with continued deforestation or agricultural expansion remain
vulnerable to erosion.
Future Needs: Ongoing monitoring and conservation efforts are crucial to address high erodibility in certain
regions and to mitigate soil erosion in the long term.
Soil type Snum NBSSLUP Area sqkm Percentage
Loam 3782 Lc762b 401.461862 16.34
Sandy clay
Loam 3818 Nd492bc 21.357856 2.30
Clay loam 3814 Nd22b 714.436273 29.07
Clay 3867 Vp423a 262.894273 10.70
Silt loam 3656 Ap212b 82.54756 3.20
Sandy loam 3638 Ah112c 932.317822 38.40
Spatial distribution of LS Factor
Spatial Pattern In LS Factor
•The LS Factor quantifies the impact of slope gradient and slope length on soil erosion. Higher values indicate greater
erosion susceptibility due to steep terrain and long slopes.
•High-Risk Areas (Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins):
•These sub-basins exhibit the highest LS values (up to 127) due to steep slopes, which increase runoff velocity, soil
detachment, and sediment transport.
•Steep terrain significantly amplifies erosion risks, aligning with findings by Desmet, who noted that steeper slopes
enhance erosion due to concentrated flow paths.
•Low-Risk Areas (Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins):
•These sub-basins show lower LS values (~2–10), reflecting gentle slopes with reduced erosive potential.
•Flatter landscapes experience minimal soil displacement due to lower runoff velocity and water infiltration.
•Temporal Trends in LS Factor (2016–2024):
•2016–2018: Consistent LS Factor distribution with high erosion risks in Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins, though forest
clearance and agricultural expansion contributed to localized increases in LS values.
•2019–2021: Increased LS values in mid-elevation zones of Sholayar sub-basin, likely due to land-use changes like
infrastructure expansion and deforestation.
•2022–2024: Stabilization of LS values in conservation areas, but some high-risk zones in Aliyar and Valayar sub-
basins still show high LS values due to ongoing land degradation.
•Erosion Risks and Slope Characteristics:
•The LS Factor analysis reveals a strong correlation between steep slopes and increased erosion potential, especially in
the Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins.
•Areas with gentle slopes, like Sholayar and Palar, exhibit lower erosion potential due to reduced runoff and soil
displacement.
•Conclusion:
•The LS Factor highlights significant spatial variability in erosion risks across the Parambikulam-Aliyar Basin, driven
by topographic features such as slope gradient and length.
•The temporal analysis shows that while LS values are relatively stable, human activities such as deforestation and
land-use changes have contributed to localized increases in erosion risks.
Spatial distribution of C Factor
Spatial Pattern In C Factor
•The C-Factor quantifies the impact of vegetation cover, land use, and conservation practices on soil erosion
susceptibility.
•High-Risk Areas (Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins):
•High C-Factor values (≥ 0.8 – 1.0) observed in deforested areas, croplands, and barren lands.
•Agricultural expansion and land clearing exposed soils to rainfall impact and increased erosion susceptibility.
•Agricultural lands and barren soils exhibit the highest C-Factor values due to limited ground cover protection.
•Low-Risk Areas (Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins):
•Lower C-Factor values (≤ 0.2 – 0.3) observed in regions with dense forest cover, where vegetation stabilizes soil,
reduces erosion susceptibility, and improves water retention.
•Temporal Trends in C-Factor (2016–2024):
•2016–2018: High C-Factor values (~0.7 – 1.0) due to land-use intensification and deforestation in Aliyar and Valayar sub-
basins, increasing erosion risks.
•2019–2021: Moderate decline in C-Factor values (~0.4 – 0.7) due to afforestation, agroforestry, and conservation farming in
areas like Sholayar sub-basin, improving soil resilience.
•2022–2024: Stabilization trends with low C-Factor values (~0.1 – 0.3) in forested areas, indicating long-term conservation
success. However, croplands and barren regions in Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins still showed moderate to high C-Factor values
(~0.5 – 0.9) due to continued agricultural expansion and inadequate conservation practices.
•Conservation Measures:
•Afforestation and agroforestry in high C-Factor areas (Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins) to improve vegetative cover and soil
organic matter retention.
•Cover cropping, conservation agriculture, terracing, and check dams to protect exposed soils and control surface runoff.
•Forest protection and expansion in low C-Factor areas (Sholayar and Palar sub-basins) to maintain low erosion susceptibility.
•Conclusion:
•The C-Factor analysis emphasizes the significant role of vegetation cover and conservation practices in reducing soil erosion
risks. Areas with high C-Factor values require urgent conservation intervention to mitigate soil degradation, while regions with
effective conservation measures continue to demonstrate stabilization trends.
Spatial distribution of NDVI Factor
Spatial Pattern In NDVI
•NDVI Overview:
•The NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) measures vegetation health, density, and land cover changes.
•Values range from -1 to +1, where higher values indicate healthy, dense vegetation and lower values suggest barren or
urbanized areas.
•High-Risk Areas (Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins):
•Lower NDVI values (≤0.1) indicate barren land, urbanized areas, and croplands with minimal vegetation cover.
•These areas are vulnerable to soil erosion and surface runoff due to limited vegetation, exacerbating land degradation.
•Low-Risk Areas (Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins):
•Higher NDVI values (≥0.4) are observed in forested areas and agricultural lands with significant vegetative growth.
•These areas promote soil stabilization, carbon sequestration, and ecosystem resilience, reducing soil erosion and enhancing
soil health.
•Temporal Trends in NDVI (2016–2024):
•2016–2018: Stable NDVI values in Sholayar and Palar sub-basins (~0.4–0.6) with minimal deforestation.
•2019–2021: Decline in NDVI values (~0.2–0.4) in Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins due to deforestation and land-use
changes.
•2022–2024: Recovery in NDVI values (~0.3–0.5) in some areas due to afforestation and sustainable agricultural practices.
•Conservation Needs:
•Aliyar and Valayar Sub-basins: High land degradation and agricultural expansion require afforestation, agroforestry,
and soil and water conservation structures (e.g., terracing, check dams) to improve vegetation cover and soil stability.
•Sholayar and Palar Sub-basins: Well-protected areas with high NDVI require sustained forest protection, greenbelt
expansion, and sustainable urban expansion to maintain vegetation cover and prevent deforestation.
•Conclusion:
•NDVI trends highlight the importance of vegetation cover in reducing soil erosion and enhancing ecological resilience.
•Targeted conservation efforts are essential in areas with low NDVI values to restore vegetation cover and stabilize soil,
while maintaining sustainable land management practices in regions with high NDVI values.
Spatial distribution of P Factor
Spatial Pattern in P factor
•P-Factor Overview:
•The P-Factor measures the effectiveness of conservation practices in reducing soil erosion.
•Values range from 0 to 1, with lower values indicating effective conservation measures like terracing, and higher
values (closer to 1) indicating a lack of such practices.
•High-Risk Areas (Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins):
•Higher P-Factor values (1.0) due to conventional farming and minimal conservation practices, making these areas
more vulnerable to soil erosion.
•Low-Risk Areas (Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins):
•Lower P-Factor values (~0.5) due to effective conservation practices like terracing, contour plowing, and
agroforestry, reducing soil erosion.
•Temporal Trends in P-Factor (2016–2024):
•2016–2018: High P-Factor values (~1.0) due to minimal conservation efforts, particularly in Aliyar and Valayar sub-
basins.
•2019–2021: Gradual reduction in P-Factor due to increased adoption of conservation measures like
conservation tillage, agroforestry, and check dams.
•2022–2024: Significant reduction in P-Factor values, reflecting expanded conservation efforts, though
some regions in Aliyar and Valayar still show high P-Factor values.
•Targeted Conservation Strategies:
•Aliyar and Valayar Sub-basins: Implement expanded terracing, agroforestry, and check dams to
reduce erosion risks.
•Sholayar and Palar Sub-basins: Sustain conservation farming techniques and integrate climate-
resilient policies to ensure long-term soil stability.
•Conclusion:
•The P-Factor analysis highlights the need for continued and expanded conservation efforts, especially in
high-risk zones, to reduce soil erosion and enhance land stability.
LULC Pap River Basin
Spatial Pattern in LULC
•The analysis of LULC changes from 2016 to 2024 provides insights into the transformation of the Parambikulam-Aliyar
Basin and its impact on soil erosion, hydrology, and ecosystem stability.
•Vegetation Cover Changes:
•2018: Minor deforestation, leading to increased cropland.
•2020: Significant vegetation loss due to agricultural expansion and urban development.
•2022: Vegetation recovery in some areas due to afforestation.
•2024: Partial recovery of tree cover, especially in degraded areas.
•Impact of Vegetation Loss:
•Loss of tree cover increased surface runoff, raising R-Factor values and exacerbating soil erosion, particularly in Aliyar
and Valayar sub-basins.
•Cropland Expansion:
•2016–2018: Limited cropland, mostly in lowland areas.
•2020–2022: Rapid cropland expansion, increasing soil exposure and erosion risk.
•2024: Stabilization due to conservation agriculture and improved soil management.
•Cropland Expansion:
•2016–2018: Limited cropland, mostly in lowland areas.
•2020–2022: Rapid cropland expansion, increasing soil exposure and erosion risk.
•2024: Stabilization due to conservation agriculture and improved soil management.
•Impact of Cropland Expansion:
•Increased susceptibility to erosion due to exposed soil, particularly in cropland-dominated Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins.
•Urbanization Trends:
•2016–2022: Steady increase in urban areas, leading to a reduction in tree cover and an increase in impervious surfaces.
•2024: Urban growth became more regulated, with a slight decrease in expansion.
•Impact of Urbanization:
•Urbanization increased impervious surfaces, leading to higher surface runoff, flash flooding, and soil erosion, especially in
adjacent agricultural lands.
Bare Ground and Rangeland Transition:
1. 2016–2022: High bare ground cover indicating land degradation.
2. 2024: Decrease in bare ground due to afforestation and conservation efforts.
Impact of Bare Ground: Bare ground areas are highly prone to erosion, especially in steep slopes, leading to high
soil loss rates in southern agricultural lands.
Correlation Between LULC Changes and Soil Erosion:
Deforestation, agricultural expansion, urbanization, rainfall erosivity (R-Factor), and slope steepness all
contribute to increased soil erosion.
Soil Conservation Strategies:
• Afforestation & Agroforestry: Plant native trees and promote agroforestry in cropland.
• Sustainable Agricultural Practices: Implement contour farming, cover cropping, and conservation tillage.
• Urban Greenbelt & Planning: Establish green buffers and implement rainwater harvesting.
• Soil & Water Conservation Structures: Build check dams, terraces, and vegetative filter strips.
• Watershed Management & Policies: Strengthen soil conservation policies and promote community-based
LULC Changes In Study Area
Class Name 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
Water 13.61 16.66 21.60 22.98 27.73
Trees 1172.63 1188.27 1353.56 1398.01 1462.38
Flooded
vegetation 0.00 0.19 0.01 0.01 0.07
Crops 704.85 727.59 530.50 534.23 453.10
Built Area 197.98 192.37 214.66 231.93 236.65
Bare ground 1.32 0.71 0.83 0.53 0.21
Clouds 0.45 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03
Rangeland 324.47 289.52 294.13 227.60 235.15
Spatial distribution of Soil Loss
Spatial Pattern In Soil Erosion
Soil Erosion Overview
• Soil Erosion is a major concern in the Parambikulam-Aliyar Basin, impacting agriculture, hydrology, and
ecosystem balance.
• RUSLE Assessment (2016-2024): Provides spatial and temporal insights on erosion patterns, highlighting
vulnerable areas.
• Erosion Classification:
• Slight (<10 t/ha/yr)
• Moderate (10–20 t/ha/yr)
• High (20–30 t/ha/yr)
• Very High (30–40 t/ha/yr)
• Severe (>40 t/ha/yr)
.
• Highest Erosion (>40 t/ha/yr):
• Parambikulam and Thunakadavu sub-basins.
• Caused by steep slopes, sandy/loamy soils, sparse vegetation, and high rainfall intensity.
• Lower Erosion (10–20 t/ha/yr):
• Sholayar and Palar sub-basins.
• Caused by dense forest cover, clayey soils, and sustainable agricultural practices.
3. Temporal Trends in Soil Erosion (2016–2024)
• 2016–2018:
• Increasing erosion due to agricultural expansion and deforestation.
• Parambikulam and Thunakadavu sub-basins saw the highest erosion rates.
• 2019–2021:
• Peak erosion due to deforestation, extreme rainfall, and unregulated farming.
• Erosion rate in Aliyar and Valayar sub-basins peaked during this period.
• 2022–2024:
• Stabilization and recovery due to afforestation, check dams, and sustainable farming.
• Slight decrease in erosion in some areas.
Key Influencing Factors
• Topography:
• Steep slopes increase runoff velocity, leading to higher erosion in areas like Parambikulam.
• Land Use & Vegetation:
• Deforestation increases erosion, while forested areas reduce soil loss.
• Rainfall Intensity:
• Extreme monsoonal rainfall (e.g., 2018, 2021) exacerbates soil erosion.
• Conservation Practices:
• Effective conservation measures like terracing, check dams, and agroforestry significantly reduce erosion.
5. Future Soil Conservation Strategies
• Parambikulam & Thunakadavu Sub-basins (High Erosion):
• Large-scale afforestation and reforestation.
• Implement sustainable agriculture (e.g., contour farming, cover cropping).
• Strengthen soil conservation structures (e.g., check dams, vegetative buffers).
• Aliyar & Valayar Sub-basins (Moderate Erosion):
• Encourage rotational cropping and develop sediment retention structures.
• Enhance support for conservation practices through subsidies.
• Sholayar & Palar Sub-basins (Low Erosion):
• Monitor deforestation and urban expansion to maintain low erosion risk.
• Promote climate-adaptive conservation measures.
Research Directions
• Remote Sensing & AI-based Monitoring: Enhance real-time erosion tracking.
• Climate Change Impact Assessment: Develop adaptive conservation strategies for erosion control.
• Community-Based Soil Conservation: Strengthen programs for sustainable land management.
Conclusion
• Soil erosion in the Parambikulam-Aliyar Basin has been influenced by a mix of natural and human-induced factors.
• Proactive soil conservation efforts, supported by effective policies and community involvement, are crucial to mitigating
future erosion risks and ensuring long-term watershed sustainability.
Question By External
i. What are the basic differences between USLE, MUSLE, and RUSLE?
1. USLE (Universal Soil Loss Equation):
1. Developed by Wischmeier & Smith in 1965.
2. Used to predict annual average soil loss due to rainfall and runoff.
3. Considers factors such as rainfall intensity, soil type, slope, and vegetation.
2. MUSLE (Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation):
1. An extension of USLE, developed by Williams in 1975.
2. Designed to estimate soil loss for individual storm events, not just the annual average.
3. Considers the effect of storm rainfall intensity and runoff.
3. RUSLE (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation):
1. An updated version of USLE, developed in the 1990s.
2. Incorporates advances in land use and vegetation cover, improving accuracy.
3. Adds factors for conservation practices and management measures, helping to predict soil erosion at regional scales.
ii. Why have you chosen RUSLE for your research work?
• RUSLE is chosen because:
• It provides accurate predictions of soil erosion, incorporating multiple factors like rainfall, topography, soil properties, and land
management.
• Suitable for large-scale assessments (e.g., basin-level analysis).
• It integrates well with GIS and Remote Sensing for spatial analysis.
• It allows for the incorporation of conservation measures, making it ideal for evaluating soil erosion in regions with varying land use and
management practices.
iii. USLE used to quantify/estimate what type of soil erosion losses? (Total/partial/splash/rill/gully)
• USLE primarily estimates total soil loss, which includes both sheet erosion (spread over the surface) and rill
erosion (localized channels).
iv. What are the field methods of estimation of soil losses?
1. Erosion Plots:
1. Small, controlled plots of land used to measure soil loss under natural or simulated rainfall conditions.
2. Sediment Yield:
1. Collecting sediment from rivers or streams to estimate the soil loss from upstream catchments.
3. Runoff and Sediment Discharge Measurement:
1. Measuring runoff and sediment in water flow to estimate erosion rates from different land types.
4. Soil Sampling:
Collecting soil samples before and after rainfall events to measure the loss of soil from specific areas.
v. Which part of India is more prone to soil erosion?
5. Wind Erosion:
1. Rajasthan, Gujarat, Punjab, and parts of Haryana are more prone to wind erosion due to arid and semi-arid
climates.
6. Water Erosion:
1. Hilly regions like the Himalayas, Western Ghats, and Eastern Ghats face significant water erosion due to
steep slopes and heavy rainfall, including states like Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu.
vi. The average annual rainfall value of Tamil Nadu, its trend, and temporal-spatial distribution?
• Average Annual Rainfall:
• Tamil Nadu receives an average of 940 mm of rainfall annually.
• Trend:
• Rainfall distribution is uneven, with the northeastern parts receiving more rainfall due to the
Northeast monsoon.
• Temporal-Spatial Distribution:
• Coastal areas and the western hills receive higher rainfall, while interior regions like
Madurai and Dindigul are drier.
vii. The major soil type found in Tamil Nadu?
• Red Soils: Found extensively in Tamil Nadu, especially in the Kaveri Basin.
• Black Soils: Predominant in the western and southern regions, suitable for cotton cultivation.
• Laterite Soils: Found in hilly areas like the Western Ghats.
viii. The average annual soil loss value in Tamil Nadu?
• Average Annual Soil Loss:
• Tamil Nadu experiences moderate to high soil erosion rates, with soil loss estimates ranging between 10–
20 tons per hectare per year, especially in hilly and deforested areas.
ix. Which type of crops lead to more soil erosion?
• Crops leading to more soil erosion include:
• Rice, Sugarcane, and Cotton, due to intensive irrigation and tillage practices.
• Monoculture crops in sloped areas without proper soil conservation practices are more prone to erosion.
x. On a sloppy terrain, cropping should be practiced in which direction?
• Cropping should be practiced along the contour lines (i.e., contour farming) on sloping terrain to:
• Reduce soil erosion by slowing down water runoff.
• Increase water infiltration and reduce the risk of water-induced erosion on slopes.
Copyright
PUBLICATION
• Title- An Assessment of Climate Change on Soil Erosion Using Geospatial Techniques:
Review (Ref.: 3127c218-3dbc-4df2-a6a6-af5c28e61b2b)
• Journal-Discover Geoscience
• NAAS rating- 7.7
• Impact Factor- 1.9
• Status- Revised manuscript submitted
Waiting for acceptance
THANK YOU
