Premium
Spatiotemporal variations and driving factors of the potential wind erosion rate in the Hexi region, PR China
Author(s) -
Lin Jinkuo,
Guan Qingyu,
Pan Ninghui,
Zhao Rui,
Yang Liqin,
Xu Chuanqi
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
land degradation and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.403
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1099-145X
pISSN - 1085-3278
DOI - 10.1002/ldr.3702
Subject(s) - aeolian processes , environmental science , erosion , physical geography , wind speed , china , prevailing winds , hydrology (agriculture) , climatology , geography , geology , meteorology , geomorphology , geotechnical engineering , archaeology
To reduce the damage caused by wind erosion, the accurate evaluation of wind erosion dynamics and revelation of their driving mechanism are crucial. In this study, the revised wind erosion equation was applied for the estimation of the potential wind erosion rate (PWER) from 1982 to 2015 in the Hexi region, China. Geographic detection, variable control, and correlation analysis were used to determine the contributions of climatic factors and land use patterns to wind erosion. The results showed that the PWER decreased remarkably from 1982 to 2015 (annual average of 67.7 t ha −1 yr −1 for the entire region). Each year a severe and a mild wind erosion period occurred from October to May and from June to September, respectively. Spatially, the PWER was strong in the eastern, western, and northern regions (especially in the west) and less severe in the central and southern regions, and there was a decreasing tendency in 95% of the area. The PWER of Mongolia (north) was highest, while that of Minle was lowest. Climatic factors primarily determined the PWER in Hexi, among which wind speed was the main factor controlling the intensity of wind erosion. The area with a land use inhibiting wind erosion (3,240 km 2 ) was four times larger than that with a land use promoting wind erosion (800 km 2 ). Meanwhile, the total area with a changing land cover was less than 2% of the study area; therefore, this factor did not significantly affect the PWER in the short term.