Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487

www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

Use of cover crops in short rotation hardwood plantations

to control erosion
R.K. Malik*, T.H. Green, G.F. Brown, D. Mays
Center for Forestry and Ecology, Department of Plant and Soil Science, Alabama A&M University, P.O. Box 1208, Normal, AL
35762, USA
Received 5 June 1999; received in revised form 10 February 2000; accepted 25 February 2000

Abstract

This study was designed to test whether the cultivation of cover crops between tree rows in short-rotation woody
crop (SRWC) plantations could reduce erosion. Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraci¯ua L.) seedlings were planted as the
SRWC at a 1.5  3 m spacing. Four cover crops, annual ryegrass (Lolium multi¯orum L. a winter annual grass); tall
fescue (Festuca arundinacea L. a cool-season perennial grass); crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L. a winter
annual legume); and Interstate sericea lespedeza [Lespedeza cuneata (Dumont) G. Don. a summer growing-perennial
legume], were tested at two di€erent strip widths (1.22 and 2.44 m) in comparison with complete competition
control. Erosion was measured from 1 August, 1995 to 8 March, 1997 (585 days) by sediment accumulation near
the fence where 72 PVC pipes were inserted into soil on a 4.65 m2 (50 ft3) grid area of each plot. The total rainfall
recorded during this period was 2422.91 mm (95.3 in.). All cover crops reduced erosion over the complete
competition free plot (control), although tall fescue performed poorly at the narrow strip width. There were no
signi®cant di€erences between grasses and legumes for erosion control. Winter annual crops provided signi®cantly
more erosion protection than summer growing-perennials. With the exception of tall fescue, narrow strip widths
performed as well as wider strip widths. The results indicate that cover crops ryegrass, crimson clover, lespedeza and
tall fescue controlled about 64, 61, 51 and 37% soil erosion respectively as compared to the control during the
critical early years of stand development in SRWC hardwood plantations. 7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved.

Keywords: Cover crops; Soil erosion; Short rotation hardwood; Sweetgum; SRWC

1. Introduction worldwide. It is dicult to assess reliably and

Soil erosion is a widely recognized problem
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-256-858-8304.
precisely the extent, rate and magnitude of soil
erosion and its economic and environmental con-
sequences [1]. About 75 billion metric tons of soil
are removed every year from agricultural land by
water and wind erosion [2]. Of the total annual

0961-9534/00/$ - see front matter 7 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 6 1 - 9 5 3 4 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 1 6 - 7
480 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
sedimentation load of one billion milligrams car-
ried by the rivers from the continental United
States, about 60% is estimated to be from agri-
cultural land [3]. Thus, soil erosion poses a
serious threat to the sustainability and productive
capacity of agriculture [2].
Conversion of cropland to short-rotation
woody crops (SRWC) is considered one way to
enhance sustainability by reducing soil erosion
[4±6], while still providing economic returns
through the Conservation Reserve Program [7].
The average erosion rate of US cropland has
been estimated as 18.1 mg/ha/yr [5]. Erosion
rates for herbaceous and woody biomass systems
are expected to be much lower; estimates average
0.2 mg/ha/yr for perennial herbaceous systems
and 2 mg/ha/yr for SRWC, although these rates
could vary considerably among regions and crop
type [4,5].
Although SRWC production on previously
row-cropped land is expected to reduce erosion
overall, erosion is a serious concern during the
SRWC establishment phase. The current stan-
dard SRWC practice is clean cultivation,
whereby all competition in the plantation is rig-
orously controlled by either chemical or mechan-
ical means [8]. This practice results in exposed
soil which may result in erosion problems until
trees grow large enough to reduce rain impact.
Ranney and Mann [6] suggested that use of
cover crops between SRWC rows has the poten-
tial of decreasing erosion during the critical early
years after establishment. This practice has been
resisted by SRWC managers for fear that compe-
tition by cover crops will unacceptably reduce
growth of SRWC crops.
It is expected that erosion rates for the SRWC
system will vary during and after establishment
of the crop. During the ®rst two to three years of
the establishment period, if no ground cover
exists, erosion from the SRWC system could be
comparable with erosion from conventional row
crop systems. For example, complete weed con-
trol within a SRWC plantation resulted in ero-
sion levels similar to no-till agriculture lands [9].
Once root systems develop and canopy closure
occurs (often within two years), erosion rates
should be substantially lower, more similar to
land in hay [4]. In this short-rotation systems,
however, the establishment phase can represent a
large percentage of the life of the stand. As such,
erosion is potentially more severe in the SRWC
system when taken as a whole.
Experimental evidence indicates that the ero-
sion±cover relationship is curvilinear and that the
erosion is little di€erent whether cover is 100 or
60% [10,11]. This fact provides SRWC managers
with an option which might allow for acceptable
growth with good erosion control: cultivating a
strip of cover crops between tree rows to control
erosion, while maintaining tree rows free of com-
petition, thereby maximizing tree growth. As
long as at least 60% of the ground area is cov-
ered with vegetation, erosion should be e€ectively
controlled. There is, however, the question con-
cerning whether a 60% cover crop strip would
signi®cantly reduce growth of trees.
SRWC plantations are highly nutrient
demanding. Ranney and Mann [6] have suggested
that for maintaining long term SRWC pro-
ductivity, nitrogen applications are required after
the ®rst or second year of establishment. Adverse
growth e€ects from cover crops may probably be
due to competition for nutrients and water. If
this is true, the ideal cover crop for use in
SRWC plantations would be one that minimally
competes with trees for both nutrients and water,
while providing good cover to the site for erosion
protection. The natural solution would be a win-
ter annual legume.
Legumes would be expected to compete very
little with trees for nitrogen, since they ®x atmos-
pheric nitrogen. In fact, legumes ®x nitrogen in
excess of their own needs. In temperate zones,
nitrogen ®xation in most legume stands is esti-
mated to be about 112 kg/ha (100 lb/acre) per
year and in intensively managed pasture approx.
112±224 kg/ha (100±200 lb/acre) per year [12].
Annual legumes are estimated to ®x between 56
and 112 kg/ha (50±100 lb/acre) per year while
perennials may have the capacity for ®xing larger
quantities [12]. A leguminous cover crop might
ameliorate the need for exogenous nitrogen ferti-
lizer application. Since winter annual plants are
active during the dormant season of the SRWC,
competition for water is expected to be mini-
 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
mized. However, cover crop competition might
not be a signi®cant concern for SRWC planta-
tion management if only 60% of the site is
planted to the cover crop. The remaining 40%
might be sucient to allow adequate growth of
trees, while achieving maximum erosion control.
If that were the case, then perennial grasses
might be the cover crop of choice, from the
standpoint of site protection and ease of estab-
lishment and maintenance.
The objective of this research was to begin to
develop a cover crop regime for use in SRWC
plantations that protects the site from erosion
while allowing optimal growth of SRWC sweet-
gum trees. This paper presents only erosion data
(plant growth results in paper to follow) and
reports on the e€ectiveness of the various cover
crops and strip widths on controlling erosion in
Fig. 1. Mean temperature and total monthly rainfall at hazel
Green, AL, USA, from January 1995 to August 1997.
481
SRWC plantations for the ®rst two years follow-
ing establishment.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Location
The experiment was located at the Winfred
Thomas Agricultural Research Station in Hazel
Green, AL, USA, latitude 34855'N, longitude
86835 'E and 234 m altitude, nine miles north of
Huntsville, AL, USA. The site is mapped as Dec-
atur series and is a Decatur silty clay loam (Rho-
dic peleudult ), undulating phases with 2±6%
slope, good natural drainage, moderate per-
meability and high moisture holding capacity.
The site had previously been used for soybean
and corn cultivation, in rotation, for several
years. Mean monthly temperature and total
monthly rainfall from January 1995 to August
1997 are presented in Fig. 1.
2.2. Experimental design and plot layout
The experiment was laid out in a split-plot de-
sign with the four cover crops as the main plots
and strip widths the splits within the main plots.
Each cover crop/strip width combination con-
sisted of a single plot 21.3 m in length (70 ft) and
7.6 m (25 ft) wide. Plots were arranged side-by-
side in a single block matched for soil, slope and
aspect. Between each plot, and around the out-
side of the end plots, was a 3.05 m (10 ft) border
row to minimize competition e€ects across treat-
ments. A single plot in each block was main-
tained competition free (control). Each block
contained two plots per cover crop plus the con-
trol for a total of nine plots. There were three
blocks in the study Ð for a total of 27 plots.
Each plot was enclosed on three sides by a 25 cm
high soil berm to direct runo€ to the bottom of
the plot (Fig. 2).
A trench of about 25±30 cm deep was made at
the downslope end of each plot. A sediment
fence, made from permeable non-woven geotex-
tile fabric on an iron frame of 0.91  0.76 m (3 
2.5 ft) size, was ®xed at the downslope end of
482 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487

Fig. 2. A plot layout with details.

 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
each plot. The fabric was extended down into
and across the trench bottom. The trench was
®lled with soil and compacted on both sides to
anchor the fabric. In order to measure sedimen-
tation, 1.27 cm (0.5 in.) diameter PVC pipe was
cut to lengths of 60.96 cm (2 ft), graduated from
0 to 15 cm, and then inserted into the ground to
a 15.24 cm (6 in.) depth so that the 0 point was
at the ground level. The pipes were positioned at
the intersections of a 30.48  30.48 cm (1  1 ft)
grid. The ®rst row of 24 stakes, 30.48 cm (1 ft)
apart, was ¯ush against the sediment fence. The
second and third rows were driven into the
ground 30.48 cm (1 ft) from each other, resulting
in a grid area of 4.65 m2 (25  2 ft=50 ft2;
Fig. 2).
2.3. Plant culture
2.3.1. Trees
One-year-old sweetgum seedlings were planted
in March 1995, with a row spacing of 3.05 m (10
ft) and plant-to-plant spacing of 1.52 m (5 ft)
within the row. Each plot had 35 sweetgum trees.
Trees were planted directly into troughs that had
been previously subsoiled to a depth of approx.
45 cm (18 in.). Winter annual cover crops were
already well established when trees were planted.
2.4. Cover crops
The cover crops represented a cool season per-
ennial grass (tall fescue), a winter annual grass
(ryegrass), a summer growing perennial legume
(Interstate sericea) and a winter annual legume
(crimson clover). Comparisons were made among
four di€erent cover crops, cultivated at two
di€erent strip widths each with a clean cultivated
control. Tall fescue and sericea were expected to
compete with the trees for nutrients and moisture
during the growing season, while the ryegrass
and crimson clover died shortly after the tree
growth started in the spring with dead plant ma-
terials providing summer erosion protection.
Both legumes were expected to contribute nitro-
gen to their respective systems. Because of the
confounding e€ects of grasses and legumes and
growth habits the most meaningful comparisons
483
are those made among individual species. How-
ever, these four growth habits allow us to gain
some idea about comparison of grasses vs.
legumes, summer growing perennials vs. winter
annuals (as there is at least one crop of same
duration in each category) and determine inter-
actions between growth form and strip width.
Ryegrass, variety Kino (62 kg of seed/ha) plus
wheat (Triticum aestivum L.; 98 kg of seed/ha)
was sowed using a no-till grain drill on 3 Novem-
ber, 1994. The wheat was used to ensure quick
establishment of cover during ®rst growing sea-
son. Only ryegrass (no wheat) was broadcast
sowed in second growing season. Tall fescue, var-
iety Kentucky 31 (37 kg of seed/ha) plus wheat
(94 kg of seed/ha) was sowed using a no-till
grain drill on 3 November, 1994. Only tall fescue
(no wheat) was broadcast sowed in second grow-
ing season. Crimson clover, variety Big Bee (62
kg of seed/ha) was broadcast sowed using a
cyclone seeder on 3 November, 1994. No fresh
seeding was done in 1995 as crimson clover
reseeded itself. Sericea lespedeza, variety Inter-
state 76 (75 kg of seed/ha) was broadcast sowed
using a cyclone seeder on 17 May, 1995. Due to
poor germination (roughly 40±50%), it was
reseeded at the same rate on 29 May, 1995. No
fresh seeding was done in 1995 as sericea lespe-
deza reseeded itself. The cover crops, including
wheat were not harvested but allowed to mature
and provided soil cover within the strip.
2.5. Strip widths
Two strip widths, across the slope, centered
between tree rows, were used for each cover
crop: 122 cm (4 ft) and 244 cm (8 ft). In ad-
dition, a control plot was maintained for each
block. All areas without cover crop, including
tree rows and the entire control plots were kept
weed-free by hand applications of herbicides
roundup (glyphosate) and poast (sethoxdim).
There were three cover treatments (discounting
cover provided by trees): 0% cover (control
plot), 40% cover (122 cm strip-width plots), and
80% cover (244 cm strip- width plots). These
treatments were chosen to bracket the 60% cover
level, which is reported to be sucient to achieve
484 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487

good erosion control [10,11]. This would allow of the statistical analysis system (SAS) [14]. Strip
for a more sensitive comparison of performance widths were analyzed using regression analysis,
between annuals and perennials or grasses and with the control plots serving as the 0 strip width
legumes. of all cover crops. The control plots served as the
control for both the cover crops and strip widths
2.6. Erosion measurement resulting in 5 covers and 3 strip widths being
analyzed (i.e. control represents both no cover
Sedimentation was measured on the grid sys- crop and a 0-cm strip width of cover crop). The
tem of graduated pipes described above [13]. The interaction degrees of freedom were consequently
number of grid points (72) with or without sedi- reduced in all analyses.
ment for each trap were counted and height of
sediment noted. The following equation was used
to calculate the erosion volume for di€erent 3. Results and discussion
treatments:
3.1. Cover crops
Erosion volume
At the end of two years (two measurement
fEV;m3 =plot…ft3 =plot† ˆ A  P  D periods Ð 585 days), erosion was signi®cantly
reduced by cover crops ( p = 0.0004; Table 1).
where: A=grid area in m2 (ft2); P=number of Approximately 68% of the variance in sediment
grid points with sediment deposits/total number loss is accounted for by cover treatment. The lar-
of grid points; D=average depth of sediment for gest single factor was cover crop vs. no cover ( p
grid points with deposits. = 0.0001) which accounted for about 57% of the
Erosion volume/ha (acre) was calculated by total variance. All cover crops signi®cantly
dividing EV by plot area m3/ha (ft3/acre). Sedi- reduced sediment loss compared to the control
mentation weight was estimated by assuming an except for tall fescue which was not statistically
average bulk density of sediment of 1281.6 kg/m3 di€erent from the control. However, it was
(80 lbs/ft3) [13]. The data were ®rst calculated in poorer than the rest of covers (Table 2). The
non-SI as suggested by Dissmeyer [13] then con- rank order for soil loss by the end of the second
verted into mg/ha. growing season was ryegrass < crimson clover <
Sediment fences were installed in August of lespedeza < tall fescue < control (Table 2).
1995. The ®rst assessment of sedimentation Erosion was not signi®cantly a€ected by cover
occurred in February of 1996, representing the crop during the ®rst growing season (Table 2).
®rst growing season. Assessment of the sedimen- The ®rst erosion measurement period was from 1
tation for the second growing season was con-
ducted during March of 1997. Both these seasons
also included the dormant period. Table 1
Analysis of variance for soil erosion at the end of two grow-
ing seasons (measurement periods)
2.7. Data analysis
Source DF SS p>F
Using a split plot design, the cover crops were
Redp 2 10.28 0.2158
the main treatments, the strip widths were the Cover 4 206.64 0.0004
split treatments with 15 trees nested within each None vs. any cover 1 173.76 0.0001
experimental unit. ANOVAs (analysis of var- Tall fescue vs. other 1 25.82 0.0155
iance) were calculated and means were separated Rep  cover 8 22.02
Strip width 2 19.20 0.0747
by Tukey's Studentized Range Test at the 95%
Cover  strip width 4 20.14 0.1969
con®dence level. The analyses were conducted Error b 6 27.29
using the general linear models (GLM) procedure
 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
August, 1995 to 28 February, 1996 (212 days).
The relationship between the amount of vegeta-
tive cover and soil erosion has been a neglected
area of research [15]. Ranney et al. [6] found that
there was not sucient information available
about erosion in woody biomass planting, how-
ever, Green et al. [9] showed that sediment loss
on plots of sweetgum trees which were weed free
increased as the year progressed. These authors
predicted that erosion would be reduced as
crown closure increased in subsequent years of
growth. This study also showed a great increase
in cumulative erosion under cover free sweetgum
trees during the ®rst two years after planting
(Table 2). Ranney et al. [7] suggested that SRWC
could be an excellent vehicle for attaining econ-
omic return from Conservation Reserve Program
land while still providing needed soil protection.
It may be possible that erosion during early tree
establishment could be less than from conven-
tional annual cropping systems if ground cover is
present. Hohenstein and Wright [4] estimated
that erosion rate for herbaceous and woody bio-
mass planting is expected to be 0.2±2 mg/ha/yr
while the composite rate for US crop land is said
to be 18.1 mg/ha/yr.
In this study, we observed that the erosion rate
ranged from 4.08 mg/ha/yr to 7.08 mg/ha
(Table 2) over the 585 days of treatment period
or approx. 2.6±4.5 mg/ha/yr. This is well below
the current rate of 18.1 mg/ha/yr for crop land.
This indicates that sweetgum with a cover crop
would be a suitable Conservation Reserve Pro-
Table 2
Soil erosion as a€ected by cover crops from 1 August, 1995 to 8 March, 1997 (two measurement periodsa)
Average soil loss (mg/ha)
Cover 1995 (8/95±2/96) % of control
Control (no strip width) 2.04b
Crimson clover 1.60b 78.43
Rye grass 1.59b 77.94
Lespedeza 1.70b 83.33
Tall fescue 1.74b 85.29
a
Rainfall from 1 August, 1995 to 28 February, 1996 was 31.67 in. (804.42 mm). Rainfall from 1 March, 1996 to 8 March, 1997
was 63.72 in. (1618.49 mm) for a total of 95.3 in. (2422.91 mm).
b
Results are not signi®cantly di€erent at p = 0.05 from Tukey's Studentized Range Test (HSD).
485
gram crop. This study supports the ®ndings of
other scientists that canopies of vegetation pro-
tect the soil from erosion [15±17]. During the
®rst seven months (measurement period) of this
experiment, erosion control was not signi®cantly
better with cover crops than without. This could
be possible because much erosion occurred from
the date of planting trees (March 1995) to when
the sediment traps were ®xed by 1 August, 1995.
However, during the following year the use of
ryegrass (64%) followed by crimson clover (61%)
and lespedeza (51%) resulted in signi®cantly less
erosion than no cover. Tall fescue (37% less than
no cover) was not signi®cantly di€erent from no
cover or other cover crops. Erosion was over-
estimated in the wide strip ryegrass treatment
due to a failure of a berm during two heavy rain-
storms.
The poor performance of tall fescue in redu-
cing erosion is enigmatic. The thick sod strips
with lots of gaps in between may divert water lat-
erally, straight through the gaps, or even over the
leaves by making a conveyor belt type of struc-
ture. This facilitates rapid movement of water
along with sediment increasing the water ¯ow at
the edges and through the strips causing
increased erosion. Further, the coarser leaves,
compared to leaves of any other cover crop used
in this experiment, may also have caused greater
soil movement due to the splash action of falling
raindrops and thus aggravating soil loss with
small strips. Tall fescue, therefore, appears more
suitable for controlling erosion when planted
1996 (3/96±3/8/97) 5 of control Total % of control
9.27b 11.31b
2.82b 30.42 4.42b 39.08
2.49b 26.86 4.08b 36.07
3.85b 41.53 5.55b 49.07
5.34b 57.60 7.08b 62.60
486 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
across an entire area, rather than when planted
in small strips as is evident from this study.
A contrast of legumes vs. grasses showed no
signi®cant ( p = 0.4078) e€ect on soil loss. A con-
trast of annuals vs. perennials, however, showed
that the erosion was signi®cantly reduced by
using winter annual cover crops compared to
perennial cover crops ( p = 0.0160). The summer
growing perennial crops used in this experiment
were active during the spring and summer. These
seasons are characterized by higher temperatures
(Fig. 1) and higher evaporative demand, and less
hydrologic ¯ow compared to fall and winter.
Higher stand densities of cover crops during the
fall and winter might therefore be an important
attribute for erosion protection in SRWC planta-
tions. Therefore, ryegrass and crimson clover
were able to provide maximum protection.
3.2. Strip width
There were no signi®cant interactions between
cover crop and strip width. In general, wider
strips of cover crops reduced soil loss more than
narrower strips (Fig. 3). In this study, the 122 cm
cover crop strip represented 40% herbaceous
cover, while the 244 cm strip represented 80%
cover. It was expected that the 40% cover would
Fig. 3. Soil erosion a€ected by strip width (% cover 0=con-
trol, 40%=122 cm,and 80%=244 cm) from 1 August, 1995
to 8 March, 1997.
perform nearly as well in controlling erosion as
the 80% cover and the regression models would
re¯ect the curvilinear relationship. An examin-
ation of the data revealed that the expected re-
lationship was generally found (Fig. 3) and these
results also support the ®ndings of other scien-
tists [10,11]. With the exception of tall fescue, the
narrow strips controlled erosion as much or
nearly as much as the wider strips (data not
shown as interactions between cover crop and
strip width were not signi®cant). Narrow strips
of tall fescue a€orded little protection against
erosion. Wider strips, however, protected the soil
about as much as the other cover crops. This
shows that tall fescue is more suitable for erosion
control when entire blocks, rather than narrow
strips, are used.
4. Conclusion
Soil erosion was signi®cantly reduced in
SRWC plantations by the introduction of a cover
crop strip between the rows of trees. This result
is important for managers recommending SRWC
hardwood production on Conservation Reserve
Program land. Since the principal goal of the
Conservation Reserve Program is erosion preven-
tion, the added protection of these sites during
the early years of stand development is import-
ant.
This study shows that the best cover crops to
use for erosion protection are winter annuals.
They are active during the seasons when erosion
potential is the highest. Legumes provide the
same erosion protection as grasses. Therefore, if
it can be established that legumes will add su-
cient nitrogen to the system to enhance pro-
ductivity of the SRWC hardwoods, the cover
crop of choice would be a winter annual legume.
This study showed that any cover with either
strip width is better than none, however, tall fes-
cue was not a favorable choice of cover.
Acknowledgements
The research was supported by the Biofuels
 R.K. Malik et al. / Biomass and Bioenergy 18 (2000) 479±487
Feedstock Development Program, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.
Contributed by the Agricultural Experiment
Station, Alabama A &M University, Journal No.
424.
References
[1] Lal R. Erosion by wind and water: problems and pro-
spects. In: Soil erosion research methods. Delary Beach,
FL: Soil and Water Conservation Society and St. Lucie
Press, 1994. p. 1±9.
[2] Pimental D, Harvey C, Resosudarmo P, Sinclair K, Kurz
D, McNair M, Crist S, Shpritz L, Fitton L, Sa€ouri R,
Blair R. Environmental and economic costs of soil ero-
sion and conservation bene®ts. Science 1995;267:1117±23.
[3] Milliman JD, Mead RH. Worldwide delivery of river
sediment to the oceans. J Geol 1981;91:1±21.
[4] Hohenstein WG, Wright LL. Biomass energy production
in the United States: an overview. Biomass Bioenergy
1994;6:161±73.
[5] Pimental D, Krummel J. Biomass energy and soil ero-
sion: assessment resource cost. Biomass 1987;14:15±38.
[6] Ranney JW, Mann LK. Environmental considerations in
energy crop production. Biomass Bioenergy
1994;6(3):211±28.
[7] Ranney JW, Wright LL, Layton PA. Hardwood energy
crops: the technology of intensive culture. J Forest
1987;85:17±28.
487
[8] Kennedy Jr HE. Hardwood growth and foliar nutrient
concentrations best in clean cultivation treatments. For
Ecol Manage 1984;8:117±26.
[9] Green TH, Brown GF, Bingham L, Mays D, Sistani K,
Joslin JD, et al. Environmental impacts of conversion of
cropland to biomass production. Proc Seventh Nat
Bioenerg Conf 1996;II:918±23.
[10] Elwell HA. 1980. Design of safe rotational systems,
Harare, Zimbabwe: Department of Conservation and
Extension.
[11] Elwell HA, Stocking MA. Rainfall parameters and a
cover model to predict runo€ and soil loss from grazing
trials in the Rhodesian sandveld. Proc Grassland Soc
SAfr 1974;9:157±64.
[12] Tisdale SL, Nelson WL, Beaton JD. Soil and fertilizer
nitrogen. In: Soil fertility and fertilizers. 4th ed. New
York: Macmillan, 1985. p. 113±4.
[13] Dissmeyer GE. 1982. How to use fabric dams to com-
pare erosion from forestry practices. US Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service-Southern Area, Forestry
Report SA-FR13.
[14] SAS/STAT User's guide, version 6. vol. 1, 4th ed. ed.
Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, 1990.
[15] Stocking MA. Assessesing vegetative cover and manage-
ment e€ects. In: Lal R, editor. Soil erosion. Dearly
Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press, 1994.
[16] Browning GM. Forages. In: The science of grassland
agriculture. 3rd ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University
Press, 1973.
[17] Shi¯et TN, Darby GM. Forages and soil conservation.
In: Heath ME, Barns RF, Metcalfe DS, editors. Forages.
4th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press, 1985.