1
،*
! 2
3
1 -
!
2 -
# $%
&
&
2 - ' () #
!
[email protected]:/ 0+ + '# '- *+,
# $%
, / 1 2 3&' 4 ' 5 6 $ 7 / 1 8 9 : ; < =>
. : @#A8! B
6 )1 C+ A D : 4 E .*< 3 2 *< ; 1 9 : #F# ' G - #:
4 ' @H
C# ! & => -
# I: C: 9 I:
35
× 35
× 3 9
7 / F 4 M, . C
) ' G - #: 9 F#!
12 OP 3 Q ) #F# F# , ( 4
OP Q 3 '! C F#! : ( (#
9
94 : T ! : : C+ A F#! C1 U . 9 #
F#!
- #: 9 ' G
#F#
:
B #
4 F1 V : ) #F# 6 6 )1 B B#: C+ A .* *<
10
! (
#X 9 #:
; 1 4 F1 V :) ' G - #: C: *=+ *<
50 .* ( 6 $ 7 9 : 1 H C:
: & 5
. Y E : (# P#8 *+ 4 T + 6 )1 9 Z X *#Q#1
#&
: () 3 T# , ' G - #:
: T !
=>
Evaluation and comparison of soil loss for two biological and chemical mulches
Davood Namdar Khojasteh1*, Masoud Bazgir2, Seyed Abdollah Hashemi Babaheidari3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Soil Science, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran 2 Associate Professor, Department of Water and Soil Engineering, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Plant Protection, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]
Abstract
One of the most difficult aspects of addressing the issue of dust and wind erosion is selecting which approach to use. The aim of this study was to examine two biological and chemical mulches to see which one would perform best for reducing soil loss. The soil sampling carried out from one of Ilam province's dust-producing regions and placed inside trays with dimensions of 35 × 35 ×3cm. The amount of soil loss was measured with a wind tunnel simulation after applying biological treatments (12 different levels) and chemical polymer (4 different levels) with control treatment in three replications. In comparison to the biological and chemical treatments, the control treatment displayed the most soil loss. In a comparison of these two mulches, the chemical method (with an average of 10 grams) reduced soil loss more effectively than the biological method (with an average 50 grams). In
general, in addition to the quality and effectiveness of the mulch, environmental considerations must be addressed while selecting the best approach.
Keywords: Biological; polyvinyl acetate; wind tunnel; dust
* 3 [ !&' \ : C]# TF^ C 2 < ! =>
B#: OP F-
) C +]
'F 1396 : CI a 9 : P#8 *+ 4 9 b Y : + X% 9 , B .(
.*
% -
# / c => 4 9 *I 3 ; (< 3 2 : > $ a : > 9
CF , B B# dF .* C 8: 9 =a 3 + C-
a 3 +# ! e ( C: 9 Z,
TF^
#> +Q ! 3&' 4 : \ : -% : F TA 7#1 9 ' -)
9 + 1387 .(
6 +
BF] Ca ! 5= 1 c B < Y #X ! *8! , B
*+ 4 F 9 B C: # ^ ' (, P#8
, : 7 X% B# c $ + ^ : .*
; h, 4 Q : 9 : 1 i a 9
6 '# ' + 4 9
1 9 : =#1 ! 4j , B /
C: C1 3 I- P . : #- ! 4 9 # a 9 : *#=k! E
=>
F F 6 4 !
C: F Q '# ' 9 a * ; (< 9 a C ( ; 1 h
6 4 A#Q ! : C * - *#=k!
9 l '# ' + 4 9 / . :
G - #: 9 < # 9 '
'F 1 1 ' ) * CI ! 94 + : 6 m C: *+ 4 V#8 : 4 (=
1395 6 .(
*8! + 4 C (# : '# CP 94 + : : '# #+ F# #E 9
n&2 9 : 6 B .
': 9 Z,[ Q 7 * A '# ' o
! (#- # : 6 B . / V
9
(#- ! 1 C: p- 4% q ( % 1 : #- ! # % 3 : 1 9
'F r ) 1392
# s
2 F8 'F Y
1395 ( . $ T#' ! 5a q#+ 1 i= m t^ % C: #- ! 3 : 1 9
q#+ 1 3 : 1 9 1 : < l ! , #- ! T#- C: 6 B B# dF
: 1 (#- # 9 9
Q 6 B )
Whiffin et al. 2007 (
.
6
#F# 6 )u1 4 Q C1 *
6 B 3 T# , 9 F# , 4 2 b7
, T'- T#
9 : C 1 Q 94 'F ^ )
1392 ( . 9 , *#F C: Ca ! : B : : C 1
/ 1
3 [ PY ;u (< ; < ; <
C u1 OP % 9
4 ' ! 9
; u < / u 1
: % a C: a 6 )1 1 C- A B .
' G - #:
9 1 :) Bacillus sphaericus #F# (
@H 4 ' *< ; 1 9 : (3 T# ,) =>
: &
.*
+
& ( :% B+8 * ) ' ( CI- P CAP . $ 7
C: / F 4 C#^ B
4 ' C: v C: $ a &
v 1 C: $ >
4 9
: 3 b: 94 1 *#- I< C . :
9 1 : Bacillus sphaericus PTCC1 1487 (CIP S25 001)
4 ; h, B ] * a Q
; h, 4 I 2 F 9
) IROST 2 C: (
C# ! p- * 1 3
. 9 1 : I! 6 F C:
4 6
# 9 q1 !
19
! < ') 4 Q : T' ) ]
1 .(
B
CI- P ' G - #: 6 )1 9 F#!
9 1 : C a 1 < C : < b! w& 1 n H 5- Y T 1 < ; 4% 3 b:
1 Optical Density
:) 9Zx A (9 1 : C a a a ) OP
0 5 / 0 ) / 8 q]^ ( j 123
264 369
# . ] '! C : ( #- 9Zx C# ! 9 :
5 / 0 4 j Nutrient broth
) 3 # % 1 ( #-
) 10 ) q 3 : 1 #: ( #- 12
/ 2 ) Q ( #- Zomorodian et al. 2019
.(
F#!
6 )1 9
#F#
) 3 T# , F# , (
: c OP 1 ) C1
5 ( 1/ ) C2
2 ( ) C3
( 5 / 2 ) C4
2 ( )
C0
( Q
4 p B 9 # z 7 9 F#!
6 9 : 4 I:
28 ] 4 .
# 2 ! ) 0 1! ! .) / # .1 ,$
3 $1! # 4 !
* a
; 4% ]
#F# ' (#< 9 m- 4
2
#
. = 9
&1 ! 4 Q : M)
9 121
< { #+ # Ca 15
A C: B 4 ! 4 M, T * 3 C: PSI
= A!
3
#1
# I: C:
35
× 35
× 3 C 7 9
C: T=Y C ^ % 9 F#! . 3 2
+' 9 M) 9 ) OP C: * ' 25
Ca 1 !
. Y &
CI- P B 4
4 : e 4 : T ! * 1
: - (z- *F+Y 4 : T ! . Q !
T' ) * T#' ! ; 4% *F+Y ($
2 3 Y : B< *a m 4 : - *F+Y .(
15 3 #1 2800 rpm
B#: - *F+Y #- ! : * .* T#' ! 3
/ 0 ! 20 e Q! C X : 30
9 : B .
B a C Y H 7 *F+Y m - *F+Y a . Q ; 4% 9 : : * k1 ^ 4 CI- P C: (# - B % CY 4 ; 4% *F+Y .* Q : * 1 * ' 9 : 9 = 4 C j C'= m *F+Y
H / 4 e Q! : 35
| 35 C F .* T#' !
: E *F+Y B < Y 4 T=Y
4 I: B 4 ! 15
# 4 ; 1 . B 4 ! : 4% CA#Y *<
. :
(( , /) 56 ! 3 ! # 4 ! .2 ,$
9 : ;6 # 2 !
<6
1Open Circuit Wind Tunnel
T' 3 3 2 C: ( 9 ) 9 u: ; u < (u# / u 1 3 T# , F# , z 7 9 Fu#! X
: Tu ! u 4%
F#! U { : .
0) C ) F#! : 6 )1 : ( (6 )1 :
OP z 7 n P 5
% F#! B#: 9 (# . I I 3 Q! ' : z 7 9
9
.
( (= + 1) ) >( ? / @ 0 A .3 ,$
: T ! 4% U 6 )1 9 :
' G - #:
; (< C1 I #X !
OP 9 5
9 : 2
. *<
I #X ! (# / 8 q]^
u I D& u z 8 n P B#: C *< (# : 9 9
OP 5
OP #: *< . 2
264
# (# : #- 33
/ 58 uP Tu#- Cu:
9
I H C: *< (# 9 1 : *E > ; (< : . : ; 4%
OP 9 5
*u< . 1 #, ; 1 2
) 9 1 : 9 ) : : OP 58
/ 8 ) 9 ) : m 4 F1 ( 58
/ 23 ( ) 9 1 : : 76
( . u : U u
q]^ 9Zx 9 1 : T: A X I 3 Q! F#! C1 / 8
B u F1 C1 9 H C: C q : 9 u
F#! m (# : *<
F14
/ 8 q]^ + 9 1 : 9 ) : ) 264
# #- : + B #: (9Zx
(# C: *<
264 F#!
F5
/ u 8 qu]^ + 9 1 u: :) 264
9Zux u + u #- u # 5
/ 0 u ( j
T' ) : 4
.(
< : C1 4% B U 1 H C:
9 1 u: *E > OP ; ( u (u#
; u1 u *<
: F#! *< C1 9 H C: : 9 ) :
1
* 9 1 : : 9 ) : m 4 F .
@ D3 E (F . GH I ) DJ(K L :! , 2 C ! .4 ,$
MF F# , 3 T# ,
*=+
C:
1 : 6 )1 *< ; 1
I H C:
9
#:
u: Zu #X !
F#! *E > ; (< : C' H C:
C4
9 #: ; 1 (#
; <
. T j 4 (u# u: B# u,
; <
C: !
=+c *#2 Cu 1 u #: '8 C1 F + 4 F# , C: *=+ F# , B
#X u!
Z . : 3 uQ! u *u< : / 8 q]^ z 7 n P 9Zx z 7 n P • 8- 4 + 4 6 )1
I F#! 9 : 9 1 : *E > ; (< B# dF . 4 9 : ; < : 9
2t 9 ) : :BS
OP 5 .*< ; 1 9 : ; < 9 I H C: 2 1 H C:
F# , q 3 u Tu# , 9 1 u: *uE >
u:
F# , #X ! : Z #X ! 9 (#
.* + 4 F# , 4 #: #F#
uP#8 *u+ 4 T€ u+ Cu: Ca ! :
+ 4 6 )1 O#a ! F# , : 1 :-
. C < : @#A8! B U *uA: P 9 u^ u! B#uAA8 u 9
. 1 ) 'F 1391
: ( Z $
9 4 + + 1 3 : 1
# q 9
C 9 X u!
# (u< u: %
;
C: * A B
# C]
# TY ^ C1 28
: 4 9
# * A C:
1 u: 4 Q : OP 9
*u 4j
: C 9 4 ! i 1 : 9
#
% <
(! 8
@ X !
# ( C:
4 Q u u: u * A k1 ^ .
1 : 9 :
^ 600 1
# / ' , .* 6 ( B
AA8
# B :
# 1 : C1
9 u 9 uQ 7 ua u
+ , C1
# T 4 + C
# : 1 : 5
9 u z 7 Q u
uY u#
. 9 u uF# , 4 Q u
z 7 B#AA8 V ! &=Y ' G - #: #F#
u: : =+ U C < Y : 4 Q a
) *u u ul ^ CuI- P
Bazgir & Namdar Khojasteh, 2018; Roose, 1975; Hewitt, 1996; Barber, 1978;
Oades, 1976
(
A4! 1!
: CI- P B 9 I - * F^
^ v u2 ) u 1 u h, 4 *u F
(
INSFu]
4j : C- A B + . F & B 4 C F#F2 ' ! 5!
.
N O . .
. .
) 1391 ! .(
#
#$ % &
' ( )
*!
+ , - ./
0 1 2$3 * &$40 .( ) 5 - 6 7
8 5#
52 ) 14 ( : 1-11 .
>?@
- .A - #B C . ) 1387
$F, .(
G /
! H &
>
. 0 , I . ! ) . ! JK -
$7 1 -LH * 0 MN
JO P . 65 ) 32 :(
48-45 .
) .R .C S / T JU .V W- 1392
( V > X! V $ ! X ! - ( ) 5 JY,. $ Z X& [ @- –
. $ \6F ]? . ^ &>, _` !a&S
>$
$ . 2 V . a!
. J, . ) 1395 ( - > ! .
&
% [b 5 JY, .. -
6 6F, . ( ) - / %
47 ) 19 :(
407-415 .
. aU ) . .. ! J3 . 1392
(
*! d$ B ( ) 1 ! 0 % ! G & - $H + ]? / ! . .
( ) - / 5e XU 1 -LH 20
) 1 :(
55-75 .
) . B .R 0 ! . f g a2F 1395
( h- * ( ) # #S + G 3 . ,
S ) \
*!
( P JO i & - - ? . &0 - $3)( ) - / $3 * ? . 20
) 7 :(
123-138 .
.R.A S . * #7) a ) . ]&! $I 0 . .
1396 ( j ?& 5 JY,. JK -
# 2 $H X !
. ( ) $3 ]& [ 2 H . &2! . ! 6
, 8 .. SXg P&g ]? Sb
Barber, R. G. (1978). The Influence of Polyvinyl Acetate and Polyvinyl Alcohol on Runoff and Soil Losses from a Highly Erodible Soil from the Semi-Arid Areas of Kenya. East African Agricultural and Forestry Journal, 44(2): 122-125.
Bazgir, M., & Namdar Khojasteh, D. (2018). Biological, chemical and mineral mulches effect on stabilization of dust storm sources, case study: Ilam Province. Watershed Engineering and Management, 10(4): 701- 713.
Hewitt, A. D. (1996). Chemical preservation of volatile organic compounds in soil. Environmental science &
technology, 31(1): 67-70.
Oades, J. M. (1976). Prevention of crust formation in soils by poly (vinyl alcohol). Soil Research, 14(2): 139- 148.
Roose, E. J. (1975). Natural mulch or chemical conditioner for reducing soil erosion in humid tropical areas. Soil Conditioners, 7: 131-138.
Whiffin, V. S., Van Paassen L. A., & Harkes M. P. (2007). Microbial carbonate precipitation as a soil improvement technique. Geomicrobiology Journal 24(5):417-423.
Zomorodian, S. M. A., Ghaffari H., and O'Kelly B. C. (2019). Stabilisation of crustal sand layer using biocementation technique for wind erosion control. Aeolian Research 40:34-41.
