Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Determining and mapping the soil erodibility factor (K) in relation to pedological properties across land uses in the Umsarang micro-watershed, Meghalaya

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.12499
Submitted
30 October 2025
Published
04-02-2026

Abstract

Soil erosion poses a significant threat to agricultural productivity, ecosystem stability and sustainable land management, particularly in fragile hill landscapes of the Northeastern Himalayas. The soil erodibility factor (K) plays a critical role in determining the susceptibility of soils to detachment and transport by water, with key controls including organic matter, texture, structure and permeability. Despite its importance, knowledge of K variability under different land-use systems in Meghalaya remains limited, constraining effective soil conservation planning. Therefore, this study focused on determining and mapping the soil erodibility factor across the Umsarang micro-watershed, while examining its relationship with critical pedological properties. Forest and agricultural land-use systems were treated as comparative management conditions to assess land-use-induced variability in soil erodibility. The K-factor values ranged from 0.135 to 0.345 t ha h ha-1 MJ-1 mm-1, with forest soils exhibiting higher soil organic matter content (4.32 %) and lower variability in K compared to agricultural soils (3.49 %). Forest soils exhibited balanced texture and greater aggregate stability, resulting in lower and more uniform K-values, whereas agricultural soils showed reduced organic matter and greater variability in K, indicating higher erosion risk. Correlation analysis showed that K increased with silt content and decreased with organic matter, sand and clay fractions, highlighting the combined influence of soil composition and structural stability on erodibility. The generated spatial maps provide a clear visualization of erosion-prone areas and offer a practical tool for prioritizing site-specific soil and water conservation interventions to minimize crop loss. By linking soil properties with erosion vulnerability, the study provides actionable insights for sustainable watershed management, emphasizing the importance of maintaining organic matter, stable soil structure and vegetative cover to reduce erosion risks and enhance long-term soil health, which further safeguards crop yield and health in hilly regions.

References

  1. 1. Sodoke S, Andam-Akorful SA, Amuah EEY, Amoah EG, Anokye K, Nang DB, et al. GIS-based assessment of soil erosion impact and mitigation strategies for sustainable agriculture in Ghana’s most vulnerable region. Environ Sustain Indic. 2025;25:100551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2024.100551
  2. 2. Demir S, Akdogan Y, Oguz I, Kocyigit R. Comparison of the K factor in different areas on the slope. J New Results Sci. 2021;10(1):46–53.
  3. 3. Kumar R, Mishra SN, Pandey R, Panwar VP. Estimation of soil erosion risk and vulnerable zone using the revised universal soil loss equation and geographic information system approaches. In: Azam M, Chakrabortty R, Pal SC, editors. Modern Cartography Series. Vol. 12. Academic Press; 2024. p. 597–626.
  4. 4. Owens PN. Soil erosion and sediment dynamics in the Anthropocene: a review of human impacts during a period of rapid global environmental change. J Soils Sediments. 2020;20(12):4115–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-020-02815-9
  5. 5. Olaniya M, Bora PK, Das S, Chanu PH. Soil erodibility indices under different land uses in Ri-Bhoi district of Meghalaya (India). Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):14986. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-72070-y
  6. 6. Mishra PK, Rai A, Abdelrahman K, Rai SC, Tiwari A. Land degradation, overland flow, soil erosion and nutrient loss in the Eastern Himalayas, India. Land. 2022;11(2):179. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11020179
  7. 7. Ed-daoudy L, Lahmam N, Benmansour M, Afilal H, Damnati B. Hydric erosion rates in Raouz watershed, Morocco: RUSLE, GIS and remote sensing. Remote Sens Appl Soc Environ. 2023;32:101056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2023.101056
  8. 8. Zahoor S, Wani AA, Gatoo AA, Islam MA, Murtaza S, Masoodi TH, et al. Soil erosion vulnerability assessment in the eco-sensitive Himalayan region using modeling approach. J Indian Soc Remote Sens. 2024;52(6):1347–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-024-01874-6
  9. 9. Das A, Ghosh PK, Yadav GS, Layek J, Babu S, Singh R, et al. Conservation agriculture in North-Eastern Hill region of India: potential and opportunities for sustainable development. J Agric Phys. 2021;21(1):113–34.
  10. 10. Choudhury BU, Nengzouzam G, Ansari MA, Islam A. Causes and consequences of soil erosion in northeastern Himalaya, India. Curr Sci. 2022;122(7):772–89. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v122/i7/772-789
  11. 11. Wischmeier WH, Smith DD. Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. Agriculture Handbook No. 537. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1978.
  12. 12. Renard KG, Foster GR, Weesies GA, McCool DK, Yoder DC. Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Agriculture Handbook No. 703. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1997.
  13. 13. Wischmeier WH, Johnson CB, Cross BV. A soil erodibility nomograph for farmland and construction sites. J Soil Water Conserv. 1971;26:189–93.
  14. 14. Auerswald K, Fiener P, Martin W, Elhaus D. Use and misuse of the K factor equation in soil erosion modeling: an alternative equation for determining USLE nomograph soil erodibility values. Catena. 2014;118:220–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.01.008
  15. 15. Radziuk H, Świtoniak M. Soil erodibility factor (K) in soils under varying stages of truncation. Soil Sci Annu. 2021;72(1):134621. https://doi.org/10.37501/soilsa/134621
  16. 16. Abiye W, Dengiz O. Digital mapping of soil erodibility factor in response to land use change using machine learning models. Environ Syst Res. 2025;14(1):14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-025-00402-w
  17. 17. Dutta D, Bandopadhyay S, Baruah U, Sarkar D, Singh SK, Maji AK, et al. Soil erosion in Meghalaya. NBSS Publ No. 160. Nagpur: NBSS&LUP (ICAR); 2014. 29 p.
  18. 18. Jena RK, Padua S, Ray P, Ramachandran S, Bandyopadhyay S, Deb Roy P, et al. Assessment of soil erosion in sub-tropical ecosystem of Meghalaya, India using remote sensing, GIS and RUSLE. Indian J Soil Conserv. 2018;46(3):273–82.
  19. 19. Das S, Bora P, Katre P. Determining and mapping of soil erodibility index for Nongpoh watershed. Indian J Hill Farming. 2019;32(1).
  20. 20. Badavath N, Sahoo S, Samal R. Assessing soil erosion risk in Meghalaya, India: integrating geospatial data with RUSLE model. Environ Dev Sustain. 2024:1–36.
  21. 21. Piper CS. Soil and plant analysis. Bombay: Hans Publishers; 1966.
  22. 22. Walkley A, Black IA. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934;37(1):29–38.
  23. 23. Tirkey AS, Pandey AC, Nathawat MS. Use of satellite data, GIS and RUSLE for estimation of average annual soil loss in Daltonganj watershed of Jharkhand (India). J Remote Sens Technol. 2013;1(1):20–30. https://doi.org/10.18005/JRST0101004
  24. 24. Smith JL, Halvorson JJ, Papendick RI. Using multiple-variable indicator kriging for evaluating soil quality. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 1993;57(3):743–9. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1993.03615995005700030020x
  25. 25. Wang G, Gertner G, Liu X, Anderson A. Uncertainty assessment of soil erodibility factor for revised universal soil loss equation. Catena. 2001;46(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0341-8162(01)00158-8
  26. 26. Perez-Rodriguez R, Marques MJ, Bienes R. Spatial variability of the soil erodibility parameters and their relation with the soil map at subgroup level. Sci Total Environ. 2007;378(1–2):166–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.044
  27. 27. Vaezi AR, Bahrami HA, Sadeghi SHR, Mahdian MH. Spatial variability of soil erodibility factor (K) of the USLE in North West of Iran. J Agric Sci Technol. 2010;12(2):241–52.
  28. 28. Shi K, Liao J, Zou X, Chen HY, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Wanek W, et al. Forest development induces soil aggregate formation and stabilization: implications for sequestration of soil carbon and nitrogen. Catena. 2024;246:108363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2024.108363
  29. 29. Lal R. Tillage and agricultural sustainability. Soil Tillage Res. 1991;20(2–4):133–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(91)90036-W
  30. 30. Panagea IS, Apostolakis A, Berti A, Bussell J, Čermak P, Diels J, et al. Impact of agricultural management on soil aggregates and associated organic carbon fractions: analysis of long-term experiments in Europe. Soil. 2022;8(2):621–44. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-8-621-2022
  31. 31. Xu C, Lin TC, Yang Z, Liu X, Xiong D, Chen S, et al. Forest conversion effects on soil organic carbon are regulated by soil aggregate stability and not by recalcitrance: evidence from a reforestation experiment. Catena. 2022;219:106613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2022.106613
  32. 32. Henderson GS. Soil organic matter: a link between forest management and productivity. In: McFee WW, Kelly JM, editors. Carbon forms and functions in forest soils. Madison (WI): Soil Science Society of America; 1995. p. 419–35. https://doi.org/10.2136/1995.carbonforms.c19
  33. 33. Samdaliri H, Jourgholami M, Salajegheh A, Sohrabi H, Latterini F, Venanzi R, et al. Runoff and sediment response to different fire intensities in a Hyrcanian mixed broadleaved forest ecosystem. Land Degrad Dev. 2025;36:5405–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.70014
  34. 34. Li J, Luo B, Liu B, Wei X, Zhong S, Wei C. Raindrop-impact-induced ejection characteristics of surface particles for soils with a textural gradient. Catena. 2023;223:106930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2023.106930
  35. 35. Wang L, Guo M, Chen Z, Zhang X, Zhou P, Liu X. Quantifying the contributions of factors influencing the spatial heterogeneity of soil aggregate stability and erodibility in a Mollisol watershed. Catena. 2024;239:107941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2024.107941
  36. 36. Gupta S, Borrelli P, Panagos P, Alewell C. An advanced global soil erodibility (K) assessment including the effects of saturated hydraulic conductivity. Sci Total Environ. 2024;908:168249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168249
  37. 37. Luo T, Liu W, Xia D, Xia L, Guo T, Ma Y, et al. Effects of land use types on soil erodibility in a small karst watershed in western Hubei. PeerJ. 2022;10:e14423. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14423
  38. 38. Othmani O, Khanchoul K, Boubehziz S, Bouguerra H, Benslama A, Navarro-Pedreño J. Spatial variability of soil erodibility at the Rhirane catchment using geostatistical analysis. Soil Syst. 2023;7(2):32. https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems7020032
  39. 39. Alqadhi S, Mallick J, Talukdar S, Alkahtani M. An artificial intelligence-based assessment of soil erosion probability indices and contributing factors in the Abha-Khamis watershed, Saudi Arabia. Front Ecol Evol. 2023;11:1189184. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2023.1189184
  40. 40. Rehman MA, Abd Rahman N, Ibrahim ANH, Kamal NA, Ahmad A. Estimation of soil erodibility in Peninsular Malaysia: a case study using multiple linear regression and artificial neural networks. Heliyon. 2024;10(7):e28579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28854
  41. 41. Wu Y, Jia G, Yu X, Rao H, Peng X, Wang Y, et al. Response of soil nutrients and erodibility to slope aspect in the northern agro-pastoral ecotone, China. Soil. 2024;10(1):61–75. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-10-61-2024
  42. 42. Deore SB, Shinde MG, Atre AA, Gavit BK, Kadam SA, Durgude AG, et al. Estimation of soil erodibility for soil conservation in upper Godavari sub basin of India. Int J Res Agron. 2024;7(11):102–s7. https://doi.org/10.33545/2618060X.2024.v7.i11b.1949
  43. 43. Wang Y, Ruan J, Li Y, Kong Y, Cao L, He W. Soil macropore and hydraulic conductivity dynamics of different land uses in the dry-hot valley region of China. Water. 2023;15(17):3036. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15173036

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.