Evaluating the Effectiveness and Adoptability of Mulching Technology to Control Soil Erosion: Case Study of the Nyabugogo Catchment in Rwanda
Résumé fourni par la source
This research examines mulching as an effective soil erosion control measure in the Nyabugogo catchment of Rwanda. To assess soil erosion causes, effects, and control, this study made use of literature reviews, interviews, and on-site visits. Findings based on the responses of 96 farmers revealed that intense rainfall (32.4%), soil type (31.7%), and steep slopes (30.7%) are the major contributors to soil erosion, while other factors were found to have a minimal influence of 5.2%. Mulching materials are sourced from crop and vegetative residues and differ in various geographical locations. By using the Universal Soil Erosion Equation (USLE) model to simulate the suggested Soil Erosion Control Measures (SECM), the study observed a significant reduction in soil loss from 35.86 t/ha/y to 17.84 t/ha/y. The use of mulching technology further decreased soil erosion rates to permissible levels, reducing the rate from 17.84 t/ha/y to 9.83 t/ha/y. Based on the results, the study recommends the implementation of the site-specific SECM combined with mulching, drainage channels, and stabilizing grasses on the same farmland to effectively reduce soil erosion to acceptable levels within the Nyabugogo drainage area. The study advocates soil erosion control measures as the optimal choice for enhancing soil productivity while minimizing sedimentation in downstream rivers and lakes
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Evaluating the Effectiveness and Adoptability of Mulching Technology to Control Soil Erosion: Case Study of the Nyabugogo Catchment in Rwanda
- Date Crossref
- 10/06/2024
- Éditeur
- African Journals Online (AJOL)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.