Quantifying soil conservation service is critical for sustainable land management. However, the traditional algo-rithm includes a gap between barren land and real soil erosion (BSERef), and its paradox is that a mass ...Quantifying soil conservation service is critical for sustainable land management. However, the traditional algo-rithm includes a gap between barren land and real soil erosion (BSERef), and its paradox is that a mass of barrenland rarely exists in ecologically adaptable areas with fertile soils, which might overestimate soil conservationservice. This study suggests a practical algorithm to effectively evaluate soil conservation service of differentecosystems. We propose a new algorithm based on the difference between cropland without control practicesand real soil erosion (CSERef), which is compared with the BSERef algorithm. Our results show that: (1) a nearlyfive times smaller mean soil conservation amount of cropland occurred in the CSERef algorithm (3.76×106 t·yr–1)than in the BSERef algorithm (20.04×106 t·yr–1);(2) land use has higher explanatory power for the spatial dif-ferentiation of soil conservation rate in the CSERef algorithm (15.93% – 46.34%) than in the BSERef algorithm(5.95% – 44.49%). Our results demonstrate that the BSERef algorithm overestimates the soil conservation serviceof cropland in ecologically adaptable areas, whereas the CSERef algorithm can effectively assess the influence ofland use change induced by anthropogenic activities on soil conservation service. Furthermore, we develop anassessment framework in terms of land use classification system following the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Theframework considers that for water bodies, there is no soil conservation service;for non-ecologically adaptable ar-eas (unused land) with vast barren lands and vegetation cover below 5%, the BSERef algorithm is recommended;the CSERef algorithm is suggested to use in ecologically adaptable areas (including woodland, grassland, crop-land and construction land). This assessment framework can provide scientific assistance for decision-makers toformulate strategies for sustainable land management.展开更多
文摘Quantifying soil conservation service is critical for sustainable land management. However, the traditional algo-rithm includes a gap between barren land and real soil erosion (BSERef), and its paradox is that a mass of barrenland rarely exists in ecologically adaptable areas with fertile soils, which might overestimate soil conservationservice. This study suggests a practical algorithm to effectively evaluate soil conservation service of differentecosystems. We propose a new algorithm based on the difference between cropland without control practicesand real soil erosion (CSERef), which is compared with the BSERef algorithm. Our results show that: (1) a nearlyfive times smaller mean soil conservation amount of cropland occurred in the CSERef algorithm (3.76×106 t·yr–1)than in the BSERef algorithm (20.04×106 t·yr–1);(2) land use has higher explanatory power for the spatial dif-ferentiation of soil conservation rate in the CSERef algorithm (15.93% – 46.34%) than in the BSERef algorithm(5.95% – 44.49%). Our results demonstrate that the BSERef algorithm overestimates the soil conservation serviceof cropland in ecologically adaptable areas, whereas the CSERef algorithm can effectively assess the influence ofland use change induced by anthropogenic activities on soil conservation service. Furthermore, we develop anassessment framework in terms of land use classification system following the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Theframework considers that for water bodies, there is no soil conservation service;for non-ecologically adaptable ar-eas (unused land) with vast barren lands and vegetation cover below 5%, the BSERef algorithm is recommended;the CSERef algorithm is suggested to use in ecologically adaptable areas (including woodland, grassland, crop-land and construction land). This assessment framework can provide scientific assistance for decision-makers toformulate strategies for sustainable land management.
