IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i20p13372-d944827.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing Wind Erosion through Agroforestry: A Case Study Using Large Eddy Simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Justus G. V. van Ramshorst

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Lukas Siebicke

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Moritz Baumeister

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Fernando E. Moyano

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
    Institute of Geography, University of Augsburg, Alter Postweg 118, Building B, 86159 Augsburg, Germany)

  • Alexander Knohl

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
    Centre of Biodiversity and Sustainable Land Use (CBL), University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 1, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Christian Markwitz

    (Bioclimatology, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Büsgenweg 2, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

Abstract

Wind erosion is seen as one of the main risks for modern agriculture in dry and sandy regions. Shelterbelts and agroforestry systems are known for their ability to reduce wind speed and, consequently, wind erosion. The current study considers temperate alley cropping agroforestry systems, where multiple tree strips (shelterbelts) are interleaved with either annual rotating crops or perennial grassland. The aim was to quantify the potential wind erosion reduction by alley cropping agroforestry systems and the effect of design decisions for a case study in Germany. By combining wind measurements and Large Eddy Simulations, the wind speed and potential wind erosion inside an agroforestry system were estimated. Our model simulations result in an average reduction in wind speed between 17% and 67%, and a reduction of average potential wind erosion between 24% and 97%. The most optimal reduction of the average potential wind erosion was larger than 92% for tree strips orientated perpendicular to the main wind direction, whereas for a diagonal orientation of the tree strips to the main wind direction we found an average reduction of 86%. Parallel orientated tree strips reduce wind erosion on average by less than 35%. Tree strips planted with ≤48 m distance provide a strong and constant reduction of wind erosion, even for tree strips of 2 m height the average reduction was 86%, when the tree strips were orientated optimal to the dominant wind direction. Our model simulations showed that alley cropping agroforestry systems in a temperate climate have a large potential to reduce wind erosion by more than 80% when the system is well-designed and managed.

Suggested Citation

  • Justus G. V. van Ramshorst & Lukas Siebicke & Moritz Baumeister & Fernando E. Moyano & Alexander Knohl & Christian Markwitz, 2022. "Reducing Wind Erosion through Agroforestry: A Case Study Using Large Eddy Simulations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-24, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13372-:d:944827
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13372/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13372/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Jeffrey J. & Phillips, Donald L. & Dodson, Rusty F., 1996. "Sensitivity of the US corn belt to climate change and elevated CO2: II. Soil erosion and organic carbon," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 503-521, December.
    2. Jerome R. Mayaud & Nicholas P. Webb, 2017. "Vegetation in Drylands: Effects on Wind Flow and Aeolian Sediment Transport," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-24, September.
    3. Matthew Heron Wilson & Sarah Taylor Lovell, 2016. "Agroforestry—The Next Step in Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Johannes Litschel & Ferréol Berendt & Hanna Wagner & Simon Heidenreich & David Bauer & Martin Welp & Tobias Cremer, 2023. "Key Actors’ Perspectives on Agroforestry’s Potential in North Eastern Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sri Astutik & Jürgen Pretzsch & Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi, 2019. "Asian Medicinal Plants’ Production and Utilization Potentials: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-33, October.
    2. Shah Fahad & Sangram Bhanudas Chavan & Akash Ravindra Chichaghare & Appanderanda Ramani Uthappa & Manish Kumar & Vijaysinha Kakade & Aliza Pradhan & Dinesh Jinger & Gauri Rawale & Dinesh Kumar Yadav &, 2022. "Agroforestry Systems for Soil Health Improvement and Maintenance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-25, November.
    3. Theodrose Sisay & Kindie Tesfaye & Mengistu Ketema & Nigussie Dechassa & Mezegebu Getnet, 2023. "Climate-Smart Agriculture Technologies and Determinants of Farmers’ Adoption Decisions in the Great Rift Valley of Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Ana Lúcia Hanisch & Raquel R. B. Negrelle & Rafael Araújo Bonatto & Evelyn Roberta Nimmo & André Eduardo Biscaia Lacerda, 2019. "Evaluating Sustainability in Traditional Silvopastoral Systems (caívas): Looking Beyond the Impact of Animals on Biodiversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Lihui Tian & Wangyang Wu & Dengshan Zhang & Yang Yu, 2020. "Airflow Field Around Hippophae rhamnoides in Alpine Semi-Arid Desert," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, May.
    6. Stephen B. Stewart & Anthony P. O’Grady & Daniel S. Mendham & Greg S. Smith & Philip J. Smethurst, 2022. "Digital Tools for Quantifying the Natural Capital Benefits of Agroforestry: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-32, September.
    7. Wang, Zhiqiang & Ye, Li & Jiang, Jingyi & Fan, Yida & Zhang, Xiaoran, 2022. "Review of application of EPIC crop growth model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 467(C).
    8. Christian Dupraz & Kevin J. Wolz & Isabelle Lecomte & Grégoire Talbot & Grégoire Vincent & Rachmat Mulia & François Bussière & Harry Ozier-Lafontaine & Sitraka Andrianarisoa & Nick Jackson & Gerry Law, 2019. "Hi-sAFe: A 3D Agroforestry Model for Integrating Dynamic Tree–Crop Interactions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, April.
    9. Maharaj, Shobha S. & Asmath, Hamish & Ali, Safraz & Agard, John & Harris, Stephen A. & New, Mark, 2019. "Assessing protected area effectiveness within the Caribbean under changing climate conditions: A case study of the small island, Trinidad," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 185-193.
    10. Rita Biasi & Roberta Farina & Elena Brunori, 2021. "Family Farming Plays an Essential Role in Preserving Soil Functionality: A Study on Active Managed and Abandoned Traditional Tree Crop-Based Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Craig R. Elevitch & D. Niki Mazaroli & Diane Ragone, 2018. "Agroforestry Standards for Regenerative Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    12. Schläpfer, Felix & Erickson, Jon D., 2001. "A Biotic Control Perspective on Nitrate Contamination of Groundwater from Agricultural Production," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 113-126, October.
    13. Raúl Córdova & Nicholas J. Hogarth & Markku Kanninen, 2019. "Mountain Farming Systems’ Exposure and Sensitivity to Climate Change and Variability: Agroforestry and Conventional Agriculture Systems Compared in Ecuador’s Indigenous Territory of Kayambi People," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-30, May.
    14. Akito Kono & Toshiya Okuro, 2021. "Spatial Distribution of Shrubs Impacts Relationships among Saltation, Roughness, and Vegetation Structure in an East Asian Rangeland," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    15. Kou, Nannan & Zhao, Fu, 2011. "Techno-economical analysis of a thermo-chemical biofuel plant with feedstock and product flexibility under external disturbances," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 6745-6752.
    16. M. Anowarul Islam & Dennis S. Ashilenje, 2018. "Diversified Forage Cropping Systems and Their Implications on Resilience and Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Keefe O. Keeley & Kevin J. Wolz & Kaitie I. Adams & Jeannine H. Richards & Erin Hannum & Severine von Tscharner Fleming & Stephen J. Ventura, 2019. "Multi-Party Agroforestry: Emergent Approaches to Trees and Tenure on Farms in the Midwest USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-22, April.
    18. Islam, Adlul & Ahuja, Lajpat R. & Garcia, Luis A. & Ma, Liwang & Saseendran, Anapalli S. & Trout, Thomas J., 2012. "Modeling the impacts of climate change on irrigated corn production in the Central Great Plains," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 94-108.
    19. Phillips, Donald L. & Lee, Jeffrey J. & Dodson, Rusty F., 1996. "Sensitivity of the US corn belt to climate change and elevated CO2: I. Corn and soybean yields," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 481-502, December.
    20. Bolier Torres & Cristian Vasco & Sven Günter & Thomas Knoke, 2018. "Determinants of Agricultural Diversification in a Hotspot Area: Evidence from Colonist and Indigenous Communities in the Sumaco Biosphere Reserve, Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13372-:d:944827. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.