Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

Research papers

Soil, water and nutrient loss under simulated rainfall patterns in an area
fertilised with chicken litter
Amanda Sales Alves a, Nivaldo Schultz b, Bruno Antonio Augusto Faria Conforto a,
Everaldo Zonta b, Daniel Fonseca de Carvalho a, *
a
Department of Engineering, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, RJ 23897-000, Brazil
b
Department of Soil, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, RJ 23897-000, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

This manuscript was handled by Huaming Guo, The process of erosion, characterised by the loss of soil, water and nutrients, is the main cause of soil degradation
Editor-in-Chief. and has numerous consequences for the agricultural sector and the environment. The aim of the present study
was to evaluate the loss of soil, water and nutrients, and the chemical attributes of the soil, in an area with and
Keywords: without fertilisation with chicken litter under simulated rainfall in different rainfall patterns, in addition to the
Water erosion
financial impact resulting from the loss of nutrients. Using the InfiAsper simulator, rainfall with Advanced (AV),
Rain simulator
Intermediate (IN), Delayed (DL) and Constant (CT) patterns were simulated in an area of a Dystric Acrisol,
Organic fertiliser
Dystric acrisol following a randomised block design, in a 2 × 4 factorial scheme totalling eight treatments, with four replica­
Financial loss tions. The treatments comprised the areas with (WCL) and without (NCL) the surface application of chicken litter
Rio de Janeiro and subjected to the four rainfall patterns, giving a total of 32 experimental units. Rainfall was applied for 40 min
at an average intensity of 45 mm h− 1. The mean values of the runoff depths did not vary as a function of fer­
tilisation, however there were differences in soil loss between the NCL and WCL treatments with the DL (10.55
and 34.98 g m− 2) and CT (7.22 and 15.88 g m− 2) patterns. The greatest nutrient loss in the WCL treatments,
irrespective of the rainfall pattern, is related to the presence of chicken litter. In the WCL treatments, the IN
pattern afforded the greatest loss of N (26.76 g kg− 1) and P (14.58 g kg− 1), while the AD pattern gave the greatest
value for K (8.42 g kg− 1). In the WCL plots, the mean value for total organic carbon loss was 202.01 g kg− 1. In
WCL areas, the greatest financial losses were seen for P2O5, reaching US$ 12.86 ha− 1 in Baixada Fluminense, for
sowing/transplanting in April, and 3.7 times greater in the Serrana region of the state of Rio de Janeiro, in
January. In NCL areas, N presented greater financial loss. It can be concluded that in an area with the surface
application of chicken litter, the rainfall pattern interferes with the loss of N, P and K, and that financial losses
from the loss of nutrients caused by water erosion can be even more marked when considering areas of greater
slope.

1. Introduction deposited in nearby locations (Panachuki et al., 2006). As a conse­

Water erosion has a large impact on the environment, especially in
areas of high rainfall (Lima et al., 2013), and is responsible for the
degradation of approximately 56% of the agricultural areas in the world
(Correa et al., 2016). As a result, annual soil loss in Brazil is estimated at
1.18 billion tons, giving a total cost annually of USD 5.2 billion simply to
replace the nutrients lost in agricultural areas (Simões and Ferraz,
2019).
The erosion process starts with raindrops impacting on the ground,
causing the soil particles to detach and then be transported and
quence, there is a loss of nutrients, organic matter, water and sediment,
as well as contamination of the soil and water (Bertol et al., 2003; Gilles,
et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2014; Bramorski et al., 2015), which become
more intense in cultivated areas with steep slopes (Santos et al., 2020)
and high-intensity orographic rainfall (Carvalho et al., 2005).
Soil and nutrient losses occur due to surface runoff, which when
heavy, can transport both soluble nutrients and the nutrients adsorbed
on entrained sediment (Bertol et al., 2017). As such, the nutrient con­
centration of the sediment and of the water drained by water erosion
varies, mainly as a function of the nutrient concentration in the soil and

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: carvalho@ufrrj.br (D.F. Carvalho).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129543
Received 19 December 2022; Received in revised form 13 April 2023; Accepted 15 April 2023
Available online 21 April 2023
0022-1694/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
A.S. Alves et al.
the type of soil, management and fertilisation employed (Hernani et al.,
1999; Bertol et al., 2011).
Mineral or organic fertilisers used in agricultural areas are nutrient
sources that are incorporated into the soil. Due to the growth of poultry
farming, many producers, specially in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
have been using chicken litter in fertilization, because it is low cost and
has good agronomic characteristics (Macedo et al., 2023). This material
has great potential as an organic fertiliser (Blum et al., 2003; Santos
Dalólio et al., 2017) in the production of different crops, particularly
vegetables. According to Mitchell and Tu (2006), chicken litter is an
organic source with high levels of nutrients, especially N, P and K.
The use of rainfall simulators in studies related to water erosion is
widespread, with the aim of obtaining quick results for dealing with the
problem (Oliveira et al., 2010; Carvalho et al. 2015; Panachuki et al.,
2015; Almeida et al., 2016; Almeida et al., 2018). Simulators are pieces
of equipment with different characteristics that allow experiments to be
reproduced, eliminating the variability, unpredictability and irregular­
ity of natural rainfall events (Boulange et al., 2019; Saber et al., 2019).
Among portable models, the InfiAsper (Alves Sobrinho et al., 2008) is the
most used in Brazil, and has been employed in studies of water erosion
under different conditions of soil management and land use (Carvalho
et al., 2022).
As natural rainfall events show variations in precipitation intensity
(PI) throughout their duration (Alavinia et al., 2019; Dunkerley, 2021),
simulators can better represent a natural event if they have mechanisms
that allow instantaneous variation of the intensity during tests, repro­
ducing different rainfall patterns. In this respect, Macedo et al. (2021)
proposed a new control panel for the InfiAsper simulator that allows the
PI to be varied automatically by selecting pre-defined rainfall patterns.
According to Flanagan et al. (1988), the patterns are classified according
to the moment of occurrence of the precipitation peak in relation to the
rainfall duration, which may influence the erosion process. In the
delayed pattern, for example, the PI peak occurs in the final third of the
rainfall when the surface layer of the soil has a high water content, fa­
voring greater runoff.
Using rainfall simulators, the effects of rainfall patterns on runoff and
soil losses have been evaluated across different classes, land use and
management (Oliveira et al., 2010; Carvalho et al., 2012; Gao et al.,
2018; Carvalho et al., 2022), but little information is available regarding
associated nutrient losses. In the present study, rainfall with different
patterns was related to fertilisation with chicken litter, with the aim of
evaluating the loss of nutrients and organic carbon in eroded sediment,
and evaluating the chemical attributes of the soil after applying simu­
lated rainfall using the InfiAsper simulator. The aim of the present study,
therefore, was to evaluate the effect of rainfall patterns on the loss of
soil, water and nutrients, including changes in the chemical attributes of
the soil, after simulated rainfall in an area with and without fertilisation
using chicken litter, and the financial impact resulting from the loss of
nutrients.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Characterization of the experimental area
The experiment was carried out from August to September 2021, in
Table 1
Physical attributes of the different horizons of a Dystric Acrisol.
Horizon Depth pH Ca Mg Al
(cm) H2O
(cmolc dm− 3)
AP 0–18 6.41 2.10 0.30 0.15
A 18–34 6.19 2.00 0.50 0.10
AB 34–41 6.09 2.50 0.70 0.10
Ca (calcium), Mg (magnesium), Al (aluminium), H + Al (hydrogen and aluminium), Na (sodium), P (Phosphorous), K (potassium), S (sum of bases), T (cation exchange
capacity) and V (base saturation).
Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543
an experimental area located in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
(22.76083 S, 43.69760 W and average altitude of 33 m), with an average
slope of 0.09 m m− 1. The predominant soil in the experimental area is a
Dystric Acrisol with a loamy sand texture (0.0–0.34 m), according to the
World Reference Base for Soil Resources (IUSS Working Group WRB,
2022), which is equivalent to an ARGISSOLO VERMELHO-AMARELO
Distrófico típico, according to the Brazilian Soil Classification System
(Santos et al., 2018). The physical and chemical attributes of the soil
were evaluated, as per the Methods of Soil Analysis Handbook (Teixeira
et al., 2017), and are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, up to the AB
horizon, corresponding to a depth of 41 cm.
In addition to the chemical characterisation of the profile, sampling
was carried out at 10 random points in the arable layer (0–0.20 m) of the
experimental area to characterise the chemical attributes (Teixeira et al.,
2017) (5,82 pH H2O; 2,48 cmolc kg-1H++Al+3; 1,40 cmolc dm− 3 Ca+2;
0,40 cmolc dm− 3 Mg+2; 59 mg dm− 3 K+; 5 mg dm− 3P) and quantify the
soil organic carbon (SOC),via wet oxidation with potassium dichromate
(Walkley and Black, 1934) (25,82 g kg− 1). The soil in the experimental
area was ploughed once and harrowed twice in the direction of the
terrain contour curves, and kept without vegetation cover during the
experiment.
2.2. Rainfall simulator characteristics and soil erosion evaluation
The InfiAsper rainfall simulator (Alves Sobrinho et al., 2008) was
used (Fig. 1A), operating with 1.0 hp motor pump (DANCOR/W48J) and
a circular experimental plot of 0.8 m diameter (0.5 m2) (Fig. 1B), built of
galvanized steel sheet. According to Moraes et al. (2018), rainfall sim­
ulations on areas smaller than 1.5 m2 have been used to study surface
sealing, interrill, and splash erosion. The simulator model is a rotating
disk and operates with two Veejet 80.150 nozzles, installed at a height of
2.3 m above the ground and with a service pressure of 35.6 kPa (Almeida
et al, 2021). Operating under these conditions, InfiAsper has shown an
average drop diameter ranging from 1.45 to 2.20 mm, simulating the
kinetic energy of natural rain from 73.8 to 88.0%, depending on the
rotation of the disk (Macedo et al., 2021).
Once installed, the plots were pre-wetted in order to standardise the
soil moisture and favour the occurrence of surface runoff (Cogo et al.,
1984). Surface runoff and sediment loss were assessed by collecting the
runoff volume in each plot at 1-minute intervals from the onset of runoff.
The volume was quantified with the aid of a 1000-mL graduated test
tube, and the runoff depth was calculated from the ratio between its
volume and the area of the experimental plot (Carvalho et al., 2022).
2.3. Experimental design and soil erosion evaluation
The experimental design was of randomised blocks in a 2 × 4
factorial scheme, with four replications. The treatments comprised plots
with (WCL) and without (NCL) chicken litter, and four rainfall patterns
(Advanced – AV, Intermediate – IN, Delayed – DL and Constant – CT)
(Fig. 2), giving a total of 32 experimental units. In the plots that received
fertilisation (WCL), 165.50 g of chicken litter (100 kg of N ha− 1) were
applied directly to the experimental plot, after pre-wetting. The chem­
ical characterisation (Brasil, 2017) of the fertilizer indicated: 7,60 pH
H2O; 4,30% K2O; 3,17% Ca+2; 0,67 % Mg+2; 0,64% Na+2; 15,11% P2O5;
H + Al Na P K S T V
(mg dm− 3) (cmolc dm− 3) (%)
3.14 0.02 13 33 2.51 5.64 44
1.98 0.01 4 9 2.54 4.52 56
2.31 0.02 1 9 3.24 5.55 58
2
A.S. Alves et al. Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Table 2
Chemical attributes of the different horizons of a Dystric Acrisol.
Horizon Depth pH Ca Mg Al H + Al Na P K S T V
(cm) H2O
(cmolc dm− 3) (mg dm− 3) (cmolc dm− 3) (%)

AP 0–18 6.41 2.10 0.30 0.15 3.14 0.02 13 33 2.51 5.64 44

A 18–34 6.19 2.00 0.50 0.10 1.98 0.01 4 9 2.54 4.52 56
AB 34–41 6.09 2.50 0.70 0.10 2.31 0.02 1 9 3.24 5.55 58

Ca (calcium), Mg (magnesium), Al (aluminium), H + Al (hydrogen and aluminium), Na (sodium), P (Phosphorous), K (potassium), S (sum of bases), T (cation exchange
capacity) and V (base saturation).

Fig. 1. InfiAsper model rainfall simulator (a) and circular experimental plot (b).

1
Fig. 2. Rainfall patterns obtained by calibrating the rainfall simulator for tests with a duration of 40 min, peak intensity of 110 mm h− and depth of 30 mm.

3
A.S. Alves et al.
3.20 % N and 59,17% organic matter (OM).
Based on the method presented by Carvalho et al. (2022), the
InfiAsper was programmed to simulate rainfall with the different rainfall
patterns, considering an average PI of 45 mm h− 1, a depth of 30 mm,
duration of 40 min and maximum RI of 110 mm h− 1 (Fig. 2).
From collected runoff, soil loss was estimated by determining the
weight of the entrained sediment per sample after oven-drying the
material at 60 ◦ C (Oliveira et al., 2010). All the sediment from the runoff
was then removed with the aid of a brush and stored in plastic containers
for later analysis of the N, P, K and SOC. In analysing the N, P and K,
0.20 g of the material from the WCL treatments and 0.50 g of the ma­
terial from the NCL treatments were used. To analyse the SOC, 0.25 g
were used for each sample.
P and K in the sediment were determined by spectrophotometer and
flame photometer, respectively, following nitric digestion, as per
Tedesco et al. (1995). The total N was determined using the Kjeldahl
digestion and distillation method (Teixeira et al., 2017). The amount of
N, P, K and SOC (g kg− 1) in the sediment from the runoff from each plot
was multiplied by the total loss of sediment (g m− 2), and later converted
into kg ha− 1.
Following the simulated rainfall, soil samples were collected from
each experimental plot using a 0–0.20 m soil auger, and the pH, Ca, Mg,
Al, H + Al, Na, K, P and SOC were determined as per Teixeira et al.
(2017).
2.4. Experimental design and statistical analyses
The data were submitted to the Shapiro-Wilk test to verify the
normality of the residuals, to an analysis of variance (ANOVA) and
Tukey’s test at 5% probability to compare the mean values, using the
SISVAR 5.6 software (Ferreira, 2011).
2.5. Simplified financial analysis
A simplified financial analysis relativeto the loss of N, P2O5 and K2O
by water erosion was performed considering the rainfall in the Baixada
Fluminense, where the field study was carried out, and in the Serrana
region of the state of Rio de Janeiro (RJ), an important hub for vegetable
production in the state (Santos et al., 2020). Therefore, rainfall indices
from 1981 to 2010 and from 1991 to 2020 were used,relative to stations
located in the cities of Seropédica, RJ (code 83741, 22.80 S, 43.68 W,
altitude 33.0 m) and Teresópolis, RJ (code 83744, 22.42 S, 42.97 W,
altitude 874.2 m), respectively, as per the Normais Climatológicas do
Brasil (Brazilian Climatological Standards) (INMET, 2022).
The cost estimate of nutrient losses was performed for the months
corresponding to the sowing or transplanting of vegetables, when they
do not absorb significant amounts of nutrients and their aerial parts still
do not influence the impact of raindrops on the soil. Therefore, the price
of mineral fertilisers and chicken litter available at the Rio de Janeiro
Supply Centre (CEASA) were used; these were US$126.75, US$69.24, US
$160.00 and US$14.67 for each 100 kg of urea, simple superphosphate,
potassium chloride and chicken litter, respectively. N was expressed
based on the price of one kg of N in the form of urea (45 % N), P based on
the price of one kg of P2O5 in the form of single superphosphate (18%
P2O5), and K based on the price of one kg of K2O in the form of potassium
chloride (60% K2O), resulting in values per kg of US$2.82 (N), US$3.46
(P2O5) and US$2.67 (K2O). For the chicken litter, the values of the nu­
trients were US$0.57, US$0.70 and US$ 0.54 per kg of N, P2O5, and K2O,
respectively, considering the chemical characterisation.
Due to the characteristics of the climate, the sowing time or trans­
planting of species such of cauliflower, broccoli, beetroot, tomato, okra,
and cabbage, among other vegetables that use both mineral fertilisers
and chicken litter, takes place from April to August in the Baixada Flu­
minense, and from October to February in the Serrana region. The
average monthly rainfall during the respective periods is 76.3, 63.8,
38.6, 37.7 and28.9 mm (Apr-Aug) and 106.4, 231.5, 277.4, 285.1
4
Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543
and179.1 mm (Oct-Feb). To estimate the financial losses from the loss of
N, P and K, the respective losses in kg ha− 1 were transformed into kg
ha− 1 mm− 1 of simulated rainfall and then multiplied by the monthly
rainfall corresponding to each region, considering the percentage of the
Advanced (60.0%), Intermediate (24.0%) and Delayed (16.0%) rainfall
patterns, as determined by Carvalho et al. (2005).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Soil loss and surface runoff
Precipitation patterns influenced runoff and soil loss in plots without
chicken litter application (NCL) (Table 3). Despite being widely used in
rainfall simulation studies, the constant pattern (CT) does not represent
the characteristics of rainfall (Dunkerley, 2012), thus not reproducing
the natural process of soil loss (Nielsen et al., 2019). In this conditions,
runoff and soil loss were 1.8 and 3.0 times lower than in Advanced (AV)
and Intermediate (IN) patterns. With AV, the PI peak occurs 8 to 10 min
after the onset of rain, promoting greater accumulation of water at the
outlet of the collecting plot.
With the application of chicken litter (WCL), soil loss were affected
by the rainfall pattern. In this condition, the sediment present in the
runoff contained fertilizer residues, providing greater loss in relation to
the NCL, especially in the DL and CT patterns. This increase in sediment
loss is possibly due to the impact of raindrops in the soil surface
(Mohamadi and Kavian, 2015), associated with the translocation of fine
particles of the chicken litter in the upper soil layers. As a consequence,
pore clogging may occur, promoting greater accumulation of water on
the soil surface during the final phase of the tests.
As the erosion process is the result of a combination of factors related
to the soil type and management (Amore et al., 2004), characteristics of
the simulator, such as diameter and kinetic energy of drops (Mhaske
et al., 2019), size and shape of the collecting plot (Kinnell, 2016), among
others, results found in the literature are not often possible to compare.
When evaluating surface runoff in experimental stands with two types of
soil and a slope of 0.5%, Alavinia et al. (2019) found no significant
differences in the mean values of the runoff depth considering different
rainfall patterns. According to Tao et al. (2017), the onset of surface
runoff is related to the moment of peak rainfall, however, rainfall pat­
terns have little effect on total runoff.
Studies that evaluate water and sediment loss under simulated
rainfall with different rainfall patterns, both with and without the
application of organic fertilisers, are scarce in the literature. Gilles et al.
(2009) verified that the form of soil preparation had a greater influence
on water losses compared to the type of fertilizer used (chicken litter as
an organic fertilizer; urea and triple superphosphate as a mineral fer­
tilizer). The study was carried out in an area of a typic dystrophic Red
Argisol with a sandy loam texture in the surface layer and an average
slope of 0.13 m m− 1, applying simulated rainfall for 90 min at a constant
intensity of 64 mm h− 1. Mecabô Júnior et al. (2014) evaluated the effect
of applying liquid swine manure on water erosion under a rainfall of
75 min and precipitation intensity of 65 mm h− 1 applied by a Swanson
rainfall simulator. Soil and water loss was not affected by the doses of
manure, and the authors attributed the similarity of the results to the
effect of the moisture content of the soil prior to applying the rainfall.
3.2. Nutrient loss
With the exception of K2O in the DL pattern, the mean concentrations
of N, P2O5, K2O and SOC in entrained sediment differed between the
NCL and WCL treatments for the four rainfall patterns (Table 4). These
results confirm that a large part of the entrained material came from the
chicken litter, and show that, in agricultural areas, the use of this organic
fertiliser increases the nutrient levels in the entrained material (Mishra
et al., 2006). When evaluating the use of chicken litter to improve the
physical attributes of the soil, Valadão et al. (2011) found a chemical
A.S. Alves et al. Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Table 3
Runoff depth and sediment loss in experimental plots with no chicken litter (NCL) and with chicken litter (WCL), subjected to different rainfall patterns.
Rainfall patterns Runoff depth (mm) Sediment loss (g m− 2)

NCL WCL NCL WCL

Advanced 14.41 ± 0.68 aA 11.97 ± 4.85 aA 27.19 ± 7.17 aA 28.42 ± 12.78 aAB
Intermediate 14.28 ± 2.01 aA 10.98 ± 1.30 aA 16.75 ± 0.87 aAB 27.82 ± 6.17 aAB
Delayed 10.41 ± 2.72 aAB 12.51 ± 0.65 aA 10.55 ± 1.16 bBC 34.98 ± 4.51 aA
Constant 7.78 ± 2.02 aB 9.94 ± 2.01aA 7.22 ± 2.33 bC 15.88 ± 2.66 aB

Average of 4 replications. Uppercase letters compare rainfall patterns within the NCL and WCL treatments. Lowercase letters compare NCL and WCL treatments within
each rainfall pattern. Tukey’s test at 5% probability.

Table 4
Concentrations of N, P2O5, K2O and SOC (g kg− 1) in entrained sediment in plots with no chicken litter (NCL) and with chicken litter (WCL) under different rainfall
patterns, for simulated rainfall with a duration of 40 min, depth of 30 mm and peak intensity of 110 mm h− 1.
Rainfall N P2 O5 K2O SOC
patterns
NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL

Advanced 8.22 ± 1.84bA 20.81 ± 6.88aAB 2.88 ± 0.36bA 22.31 ± 6.38aB 3.83 ± 0.61bA 10.10 ± 2.83aA 90.58 ± 17.15bA 203.15 ± 15.62aA
Intermediate 8.02 ± 3,52bA 26.76 ± 4.55aA 1.98 ± 0.80bA 33.53 ± 8.88aA 3.59 ± 0.98bA 6.97 ± 4.30aAB 89.57 ± 7.79bA 202.52 ± 18.50aA
Delayed 7.93 ± 2.65bA 17.94 ± 5.32aB 2.62 ± 0.44bA 20.31 ± 4.12aB 3.61 ± 0.81aA 5.92 ± 1.20aB 92.90 ± 5.51bA 211.92 ± 22.40aA
Constant 9.76 ± 2.20bA 21.94 ± 7.62aAB 2.60 ± 0.29bA 26.61 ± 8.52aAB 3.97 ± 0.78bA 7.82 ± 1.14aAB 107.84 ± 21.04bA 194.32 ± 34.20aA

Average of 4 replications. N – Nitrogen; P – Phosphorus(P2O5); K – Potassium (K2O); SOC – organic carbon from the sediment. Lowercase letters compare rainfall
patterns within each treatment (NCL and WCL). Uppercase letters compare the NCL and WCL treatments within each rainfall pattern. Tukey’s test at 5% probability.

composition of 243 g kg− 1 of OC, 40 g kg− 1 of N, 37.7 g kg− 1 of P and
32 g kg− 1 of K. In contrast, Bolan et al. (2010) found concentrations of
25.7, 6.7 and 10.1 kg Mg− 1 for N, P and K, respectively. This variability
in the chemical composition of chicken litter is related to several factors,
such as the origin of the material and the efficiency of the feed, among
others (Avila et al., 2008).
There was no difference in the concentrations of N, P2O5 and K2O in
the sediment present in the runoff measured in the NCL plots. Due to the
low content of these elements in the soil, the simulated rainfall does not
provide energy in sufficient amounts to differ between the rainfall pat­
terns. With the application of chicken litter (WCL), however, differences
in nutrient loss were seen as a function of the rainfall pattern. The
greater N and P2O5 concentrations in the sediment from the IN pattern,
in relation to the other patterns, may be due to its greater solubility and
also to the moment of occurrence of the PI peak, allowing the applica­
tion of a greater depth until the end of the test. Similar reasoning applies
to K2O, however, as it is more soluble than N and P2O5, the highest
concentrations occurred with the AV pattern. This pattern provided
greater solubilisation at the start of the test and runoff continuing until
the end, but with a lower PI. Tao et al. (2017) reported that rainfall with
intensity peaks during the early stages of the event favours the
entrainment of nutrients that are available on the soil surface.
The increase in nutrient and SOC losses due to the application of
chicken litter corroborate Quinton et al. (2010), who evaluated the
impact of erosion in agricultural soils on the carbon, nitrogen and
phosphorus cycles. The highest measured nutrient loss was P2O5 when
compared to the range of values in the NCL and WCL plots, which can be
explained by its high concentration in the chicken litter. The type
(mineral or organic) and amount of fertilizer applied to the soil lead to
the distinction of soil nutrients, affecting nitrogen and phosphorus losses
(Du et al., 2021). A high potential for P contamination of the surface
runoff water was also seen by Lemos et al. (2020) when evaluating the
loss of P, K, Ca and Mg with simulated rainfall under conventional
management and direct-planting systems using swine manure as organic
fertiliser.
The moment of occurrence of PI peak did not influence the SOC
losses in both the NCL and WCL treatments. This is possibly due to the
short duration of the simulated rainfall (40 min) and the applied depth
(30 mm) not being enough to entrain different amounts of sediment
between patterns, especially in the WCL treatment (Table 3), even with
an PI of 110 mm h− 1. When evaluating soil organic carbon loss and
selective transport under field simulated rainfall events, with 60 min
duration, Nie et al. (2014) observed greater losses in the PI of
82.8 mm h− 1 compared to 31.8 mm h− 1 in no-tillage system. It is well
known that higher precipitation intensities lead to greater erosion
damage, however, the SOC loss is rarely portrayed in the literature when
the PI variation occurs in the same simulated rainfall event.
We observed the loss of nutrients (in g kg− 1) had been influenced by
rainfall pattern, depending on its availabity (Table 4). However, when
N, P2O5, K2O and SOC losses were expressed in kg ha− 1 mm− 1 (Table 5),
it was not observe significant differences between the evaluated pat­
terns. In some situations, there were differences between the NCL and
WCL treatments within each pattern. In general, losses were higher
when applying chicken litter, albeit without differing statistically from
the NCL treatment for some rainfall patterns due to the high variability
of the measured values, a result normally observed in studies of this
nature. Ma et al. (2016) reported that the loss of nutrients is associated
by the runoff volume and amount of eroded soil. Thus, there are many
variables that influence these losses, such as rainfall intensity, terrain
slope, soil class, physical properties, and soil use and management
(Wang et al., 2013; Kuma et al., 2022).
The IN and DL patterns had a greater potential for dissolution and
incorporation of nutrients and SOC, however, the great variability of
values makes any consistent conclusion difficult. But anyway, it is
possible to infer that rainfall with different patterns influence the loss of
nutrients, specially those transporting in the sediment (Dai et al., 2018).
3.3. Nutrients in soil following the simulated rain
After the application of simulated rainfall, the soil chemical attri­
butes analyzed in the 0.0–0.20 m layer showed small variations
depending on the chicken little application and the rainfall pattern
evaluated (Table 6). These results are related to the short period of
permanence of poultry manure on the soil surface, there is no time for its
mineralization, as the rains were applied soon after the fertilizer was
distributed.
The results show that turning the soil by ploughing once and har­
rowing twice, and the process of simulating rainfall promoted an in­
crease in the P content of the soil, compared to the content before these
activities (5.0 mg dm− 3). The reduction in P content with the AD pattern
infers that this rainfall, which was more intense at the start of the event,
caused greater loss by surface runoff, which is confirmed by the higher

5
A.S. Alves et al. Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Table 5
N, P2O5, K2O and SOC losses, in kg ha− 1 mm− 1, in plots with no chicken litter (NCL) and with chicken litter (WCL) under different rainfall patterns, for simulated
rainfall with a duration of 40 min, depth of 30 mm and peak intensity of 110 mm h− 1.
Rainfall patterns N P2 O5 K2 O SOC

NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL

Advanced 0.075 ± 0.63aA 0.197 ± 7.54aA 0.026 ± 0.20bA 0.211 ± 8.17aA 0.035 ± 0.34bA 0.095 ± 2.35aA 0.821 ± 10.33aA 1.925 ± 15.98aA
Intermediate 0.045 ± 0.62bA 0.250 ± 2.40aA 0.011 ± 0.14bA 0.311 ± 3.02aA 0.020 ± 0.17aA 0.065 ± 0.87aA 0.500 ± 1.95bA 1.878 ± 12.38aA
Delayed 0.028 ± 0.33bA 0.209 ± 1.95aA 0.009 ± 0.06bA 0.236 ± 2.36aA 0.013 ± 0.13bA 0.069 ± 0.60aA 0.327 ± 0.56bA 2.471 ± 14.93aA
Constant 0.023 ± 0.18aA 0.116 ± 1.20aA 0.006 ± 0.06aA 0.141 ± 0.84aA 0.010 ± 0.12bA 0.041 ± 0.36aA 0.260 ± 3.10bA 1.030 ± 2.58aA

Average of 4 replications. N-Nitrogen; P-Phosphorus (P2O5); K – Potassium (K2O); SOC – organic carbon from the sediment. Lowercase letters compare rainfall patterns
within each treatment (NCL and WCL). Uppercase letters compare the NCL and WCL treatments within each rainfall pattern. Tukey’s test at 5% probability.

Table 6
Chemical attributes and soil organic carbon at a depth of 0–20 cm in areas with (WCL) and without chicken litter (NCL), under different rainfall patterns for a simulated
rainfall of 30 mm.
Rainfall patterns pH P K SOC
H2O 3 1
mg dm− g kg−

NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL NCL WCL

Advanced 5.98 ± 0.24aA 5.85 ± 0.02aA 3.33 ± 2.36bB 12.24 ± 3.65aB 45 ± 7.83bA 111 ± 31.97aA 17.94 ± 2.95bA 39.96 ± 5.94aA
Intermediate 5.85 ± 0.56aA 5.84 ± 0.01aA 8.48 ± 1.29aA 9.01 ± 2.62aBC 59 ± 5.53aA 70 ± 19.97aB 18.66 ± 1.55bA 39.50 ± 5.91aA
Delayed 6.14 ± 0.11aA 5.85 ± 0.12aA 7.67 ± 2.50aAB 7.26 ± 1.25aC 58 ± 7.91aA 79 ± 10.53aAB 18.57 ± 2.45bA 35.75 ± 3.08aA
Constant 5.95 ± 0.30aA 5.77 ± 0.07aA 7.38 ± 1.80bAB 16.50 ± 1.0aA 39 ± 9.45bA 111 ± 23.63aA 17.04 ± 0.82bA 39.56 ± 0.95aA

pH (H2O), P (phosphorus), K (potassium), CO – organic carbon.(1)Lowercase letters compare NCL and WCL mean values. Uppercase letters compare the mean values of
the different rainfall patterns. Mean values followed by the same letters do not differ by Tukey’s test at 5% probability.

P2O5 content in the NCL treatment with the AD pattern when evaluating
the sediment concentration in g kg− 1 (Table 4), although the difference
is only numerical, as the values are relatively low for each of the four
rainfall patterns. In the WCL treatments, the P concentration with the CT
rainfall pattern differed from the other patterns.
As the CT pattern does not show the peak rainfall intensity, the
applied depth may have influenced the greater P concentration in the
soil. The reduction in the K content of the soil in the WCL treatment for
the IN and DL patterns may be associated with the PI peak occurring
during the most central part of the event (IN at 22 min and DL at
33 min), and to the high solubility and mobility of K in the soil solution
(Ernani et al., 2007). This favours its leaching beyond the depth of
0.20 m, since the K concentration in the entrained sediment with these
same rainfall patterns was also lower than the values seen with the AD
and CT patterns (Table 4).
The similar levels of organic carbon between the rainfall patterns,
both in the entrained sediment and in the soil after the simulated rainfall
event are probably a result of the cured state of the chicken litter used in
the test and of the soil texture. The sandy texture (820 g kg− 1 total sand
from a depth of 0.0 to 0.34 m) possibly favoured water infiltration and
accumulation of organic matter in the surface layer of the soil irre­
spective of the rainfall pattern.
3.4. Financial analysis of nutrient loss
Considering the rainfall regime, the estimated financial losses of
nutrients were more expressive when sowing/transplanting takes place
in April (Baixada Fluminense) and January (Serranaregion). The great­
est financial losses were seen for P2O5, followed by N and K2O with the
use of chicken litter, reaching US$ 12.86 ha− 1 and US$ 48.06 ha− 1,
respectively in Baixada Fluminense (Fig. 3A) and Serrana Region
(Fig. 3B). The greater loss of P2O5 relative to N and K2O can be explained
by the high P concentration in the chicken litter compared to the con­
centrations of N and K. In total, the estimated financial loss reached US
$25.58 ha− 1 and US$95.56 ha− 1, respectively in Baixada Fluminense
and Serrana Region. On the other hand, N presented greater financial
loss in area without fertilization of chicken litter, with US$ 12.88 ha− 1
and US$ 48.11 ha− 1, respectively in Baixada Fluminense (Fig. 4A) and
Serrana Region (Fig. 4B). Thus, depending on the market prices of the
evaluated fertilizers, it is observed that N becomes more expensive in
mineral fertilizers than in organic fertilizers (chicken litter). For the
Baixada Fluminense (Fig. 3A and 4A), the smallest losses are seen in
August while in the Serrana region (Fig. 3B and4B), these values occur in
October. In areas without chicken litter fertilization, the total financial
loss was estimated at US$23.72 ha− 1 and US$88.64 ha− 1, respectively in
Baixada Fluminense and Serrana Region.
As nutrient loss was calculated based on the cost per hectare per
millimetre of rainfall (US$ ha− 1 mm− 1), the variation between the
highest and lowest losses for each region occurred as a function of the
variation in the respective rainfall indices and sowing/transplanting
month, which is more intense during the spring/summer in the Serrana
(rainy period) and during the autumn/winter in the Baixada Fluminense
(period of low rainfall), in addition to the cost of the nutrient in the
evaluated fertilizer, as already mentioned. When evaluating nutrient
loss from surface runoff under a direct-planting system with mineral and
organic fertilisation, Bertol et al. (2011) found total K concentration in
the sediment from the runoff 120% higher when rainfall of 120 mm h− 1
was applied, compared to rainfall with intensities of 60 and 70 mm h− 1.
It is important to point out that the experiment with simulated
rainfall was conducted on uncovered soil, which is why the financial loss
was evaluated only considering the month of sowing or transplanting
the vegetables. Despite being a simplified analysis, the results found
indicate the financial impact on farmers, which reach even higher values
when considering the complete cycle of cultivation. However, it is
necessary to consider that plants play an important role in reducing the
erosion process, consequently, in nutrient losses.
When assessing the impacts of soil management practices and sug­
arcane (Saccharum sp.) fertilizers on nutrients and sediments in surface
runoff from simulated rainfall, Melland et al. (2022) concluded that
maintaining soil cover in sugarcane reduced the suspension of total
solids, N and P in runoff water during rainfall. Almeida et al. (2016)
found reduction in soil losses with the increase in vegetation cover
provided by the soybean crop grown in a Typic Hapludalf, when
applying rainfall of 60 mm h− 1 using the InfiAsper simulator, in 6 times
throughout the cultivation cycle.
Even with the effect of ground cover, it is worth mentioningthat the
areas generally occupied with vegetable crops in the Serrana region
have steep slopes (Schultz et al., 2020), well above the slope of the

6
A.S. Alves et al. Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Fig. 3. Financial loss of nutrients due to the erosion process in an area fertilized with chicken litter, considering the months of sowing/transplanting vegetables in
Seropédica-RJ, Brazil (Baixada Fluminense) (A) and Teresópolis, RJ, Brazil (Serrana region) (B).

experimental area where the tests with simulated rainfall were carried the present study.
out (0.09 m m− 1), and that vegetables are grown in the region during the
period of more intense and frequent rainfall, the financial losses from the
loss of soil, water and nutrients may be even greater than those found in

7
A.S. Alves et al. Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543

Fig. 4. Financial loss of nutrients due to the erosion process in an area without fertilization of chicken litter, considering the months of sowing/transplanting
vegetables in Seropédica-RJ, Brazil (Baixada Fluminense) (A) and Teresópolis, RJ, Brazil (Serrana region) (B).

4. Conclusion
Fertilising with chicken litter reduces the differences in surface
runoff and sediment loss between different rainfall patterns.
In the absence of fertilisation with chicken litter, the AD, IN and DL
rainfall patterns have the same potential for promoting surface runoff,
but with fertilisation (WCL), the DL and CT patterns promote an increase
in sediment loss.
Regardless of the rainfall pattern, applying chicken litter increases
the concentrations of N, P, K and SOC in the entrained sediment and,

8
A.S. Alves et al.
consequently, financial losses and environmental damage; however
after simulated rainfall, applying chicken litter promotes no changes in
pH, or in the levels of Ca, Mg, Al and H + Al in the soil.
Applying chicken litter promotes an increase in the SOC content of
the soil after simulated rainfall in the four rainfall patterns, as well as in
the P and K content with the AD and CT patterns, and Na with the AD, DL
and CT patterns.
The greatest financial losses are associated with P, followed by N and
K.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Amanda Sales Alves: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investiga­
tion, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Nivaldo Schultz: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
Writing – original draft. Bruno Antonio Augusto Faria Conforto:
Investigation, Data curation. Everaldo Zonta: Methodology, Writing –
review & editing. Daniel Fonseca de Carvalho: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Funding acquisition, Project
administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cien­
tífico e Tecnológico – Brasil (CNPq) for the financial support (Process
422394/2018-1). This study was also financed in part by the Coor­
denação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil
(CAPES) – Finance Code 001. We thank the Federal Rural University of
Rio de Janeiro, specifically the PPGA-CS and GPASSA.
References
Alavinia, M., Saleh, F.N., Asadi, H., 2019. Effects of rainfall patterns on runoff and
rainfall-induced erosion. Int. J. Sedim. Res. 34, 270–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijsrc.2018.11.001.
Almeida, W.S., Carvalho, D.F., Panachuki, E., Valim, W.C., Rodrigues, S.A., Varella, C.A.
A., 2016. Erosão hídrica em diferentes sistemas de cultivo e níveis de cobertura do
solo. Pesquisa Agropececuária Brasileira 51, 1110–1119. https://doi.org/10.1590/
S0100-204X2016000900010.
Almeida, W.S., Panachuki, E., Oliveira, P.T.S., Silva Menezes, R., Sobrinho, T.A.,
Carvalho, D.F., 2018. Effect of soil tillage and vegetal cover on soil water infiltration.
Soil Tillage Res. 175, 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2017.07.009.
Almeida, W.S., Seitz, S., Oliveira, L.F.C., Carvalho, D.F., 2021. Duration and intensity of
rainfall events with the same erosivitychange sediment yield and runoff rates. Int.
Soil Water Conserv. Res. 9, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2020.10.004.
Alves Sobrinho, T., Gómez-Macpherson, H., Gómez, J.A., 2008. A portable integrated
rainfall and overland flow simulator. Soil Use Manag. 24, 163–170. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00150.x.
Amore, E., Modica, C., Nearing, M.A., Santoro, V.C., 2004. Scale effect in USLE and
WEPP application for soil erosion computation from three Sicilian basins. J. Hydrol.
293, 100–114. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.01.018.
Avila, V.S., Oliveira, U., Figueiredo, E.A.P., Costa, C.A.F., Abreu, V.M.N., Rosa, P.S.,
2008. Avaliação de materiais alternativos em substituição à maravalha como cama
de aviário. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 37, 273–277. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-
35982008000200013.
Bertol, I., Mello, E.L., Guadagnin, J.C., Zaparolli, A.L.V., Carrafa, M.R., 2003. Nutrient
losses by water erosion. Sciencia Agricola 60, 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1590/
S0103-90162003000300025.
Bertol, I., Luciano, R.V., Bertol, C., Bagio, B., 2017. Nutrient and organic carbon losses,
enrichment rate, and cost of water erosion. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 41, e0160150.
Bertol, O.J., Rizzi, N.E., Fey, E., Lana, M.C., 2011. Perda de nutrientes via escoamento
superficial no sistema plantio direto sob adubação mineral e orgânica. Ciência Rural
41, 1914–1920. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782011005000135.
9
Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543
Blum, L.E.B., Amarante, C.V.T. do, Güttler, G., Macedo, A.F. de, Kothe, D.M., Simmler, A.
O., Prado, G., Guimarães, L.S., 2003. Produção de moranga e pepino em solo com
incorporação de cama aviária e casca de pinus. Horticultura Brasileira. 21, 627–631.
10.1590/S0102-05362003000400010.
Bolan, N., Szogi, A.A., Chuasavathi, T., Seshadri, B., Panneerselvam, P., 2010. Uses and
management of poultry litter. World’s Poultry Sci. J. 66, 673–698. https://doi.org/
10.1017/S0043933910000656.
Boulange, J., Malhat, F., Jaikaew, P., Nanko, K., Watanabe, H., 2019. Portable rainfall
simulator for plot-scale investigation of rainfall-runoff, and transport of sediment
and pollutants. Int. J. Sedim. Res. 34, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijsrc.2018.08.003.
Bramorski, J., Trivelin, P.C.O., Crestana, S., 2015. Nitrogen loss by erosion from
mechanically tilled and untilled soil under successive simulated rainfalls. Rev. Bras.
Ciênc. Solo 39, 1204–1211. https://doi.org/10.1590/01000683rbcs20140521.
Brasil,, 2017. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento. Manual de métodos
analíticos oficiais para fertilizantes e corretivos / Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária
e Abastecimento. In: Secretaria de Defesa Agropecuária –. MAPA, Brasília, p. 240 p..
Carvalho, D.F., Montebeller, C.A., Franco, E.M., Valcarcel, R., Bertol, I., 2005. Padrões de
precipitação e índices de erosividade para as chuvas de Seropédica e Nova Friburgo,
RJ. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola Ambiental 9, 7–14. https://doi.org/
10.1590/S1415-43662005000100002.
Carvalho, D.F., Souza, W.J., Pinto, M.F., Oliveira, J.R., Guerra, J.G.M., 2012. Perdas de
água e solo sob diferentes padrões de chuva simulada e condições de cobertura do
solo. Engenharia Agrícola 32, 708–717. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-
69162012000400010.
Carvalho, D.F., Eduardo, E.N., Almeida, W.S., Santos, L.A.F., Alves Sobrinho, T., 2015.
Water erosion and soil water infiltration in different stages of corn development and
tillage systems. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola Ambiental 19, 1072–1078.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v19n11p1072-1078.
Carvalho, D.F., Macedo, P.M.S., Pinto, M.F., Almeida, W.S., Schultz, N., 2022. Soil loss
and runoff obtained with customized precipitation patterns simulated by InfiAsper.
Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 10, 407–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
iswcr.2021.12.003.
Cogo, N.P., Moldenhauer, W.C., Foster, G.R., 1984. Soil loss reductions from
conservation tillage practices. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 48, 368–373. https://doi.org/
10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800020029x.
Correa, S.W., Mello, C.R., Chou, S.C., Curi, N., Norton, L.D., 2016. Soil erosion risk
associated with climate change at Mantaro River basin, Peruvian Andes. Catena 147,
110–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2016.07.003.
Dai, C., Liu, Y., Wang, T., Li, Z., Zhou, Y., 2018. Exploring optimal measures to reduce
soil erosion and nutrient losses in southern China. Agric. Water Manag. 210, 41–48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.07.032.
Du, Y., Li, T., He, B., 2021. Runoff-related nutrient loss affected by fertilization and
cultivation in sloping croplands: An 11-year observation under natural rainfall. Agr.
Ecosyst. Environ. 319, 107549 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107549.
Dunkerley, D., 2012. Effects of rainfall intensity fluctuations on infiltration and runoff:
Rainfall simulation on dryland soils, Fowlers Gap, Australia. Hydrol. Process. 26,
2211–2224. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8317.
Dunkerley, D., 2021. The importance of incorporating rain intensity profiles in rainfall
simulation studies of infiltration, runoff production, soil erosion, and related
landsurface processes. J. Hydrol. 603, 126834 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jhydrol.2021.126834.
Ernani, P.R., Bayer, C., Almeida, J.A.D., Cassol, P.C., 2007. Mobilidade vertical de
cátions influenciada pelo método de aplicação de cloreto de potássio em solos com
carga variável. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 31 (2), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1590/
S0100-06832007000200022.
Ferreira, D., 2011. Sisvar: A computer statistical analysis system. Ciência e
Agrotecnologia 35, 1039–1042. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-
70542011000600001.
Flanagan, D.C., Foster, G.R., Moldenhauer, W.C., 1988. Storm patterns effect on
infiltration, runoff, and erosion. Trans. ASAE. 31(2), 414–420. 10.13031/
2013.30724.
Gao, J., Kirkby, M., Holden, J., 2018. The effect of interactions between rainfall patterns
and land-cover change on flood peaks in upland peatlands. J. Hydrol. 567, 546–559.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.10.039.
Gilles, L., Cogo, N.P., Bissani, C.A., Bagatini, T., Portela, J.C., 2009. Water, soil, organic
matter, and nutrient losses by rainfall erosion from an area of native pasture cropped
with corn, influenced by tillage methods and fertilization types. Rev. Bras. Ciênc.
Solo 33, 1427–1440. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-06832009000500033.
Hernani, L.C., Kurihara, C.H., Silva, W.M., 1999. Sistemas de manejo de solo e perdas de
nutrientes e matéria orgânica por erosão. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 23, 145–154.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-06831999000100018.
INMET – Instituto Nacional de Meteorologia. Disponível em: https://portal.inmet.gov.
br/normais. Accessed on april 9th, 2022.
IUSS Working Group WRB, 2022. World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International
soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps, 4th ed.
International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS), Vienna, Austria.
Kinnell, P.I.A., 2016. A review of the design and operation of runoff and soil loss plots.
Catena 145, 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2016.06.013.
Kuma, H.G., Feyessa, F.F., Demissie, T.A., 2022. Land-use/land-cover changes and
implications in Southern Ethiopia: evidence from remote sensing and informants.
Heliyon 8 (3), e09071.
Lemos, A.M., Cassol, E.A., Barros, C.A.P., 2020. Losses of water, soil, and nutrients
during high-intensity simulated rainfall in two soil management systems different
sources of fertilization. Ciência Rural 50 (10), e20190306.
A.S. Alves et al.
Lima, C.A., Palácio, H.A.Q., Andrade, E.M., Santos, J.C.N., Brasil, P.P., 2013.
Characteristics of rainfall and erosion under natural conditions of land use in
semiarid regions. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola Ambiental 17,
1222–1229. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662013001100014.
Ma, X., Li, Y., Li, B., Han, W., Liu, D., Gan, X., 2016. Nitrogen and phosphorus losses by
runoff erosion: Field data monitored under natural rainfall in Three Gorges Reservoir
Area, China. CATENA. 147, 797–808. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.
catena.2016.09.004.
Macedo, J.A.S., Araújo, E.F., Araújo, R.F., Galvão, J.C.C., Cecon, P.C., Macedo., L.R.,
Campos, S.A.,, 2023. Physical and physiological qualities and productivity of corn
seeds fertilized with poultry waste. Ciência Rural 53, e20210515.
Macedo, P.M.S., Pinto, M.F., Alves Sobrinho, T., Schultz, N., Coutinho, T.A.R.,
Carvalho, D.F., 2021. A Modified portable rainfall simulator for soil erosion
assessment under different rainfall patterns. J. Hydrol. 596, 126052 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126052.
Mecabô Júnior, J., Bertol, I., Barbosa, F.T., Oselame, G.S., 2014. Erosão hídrica
influenciada por uma aplicação de dejeto líquido de suínos no solo cultivado em
semeadura direta. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 38, 1601–1611. https://doi.org/10.1590/
S0100-06832014000500025.
Melland, A.R., Bosomorth, B., Cook, F.J., Silburn, D.M., Eyles, M., 2022. Impacts of
sugarcane trash and fertilizer management practices on plot-scale nitrogen and
phosphorus runoff from simulated rainfall. Soil Tillage 216, 10529. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.still.2021.105259.
Mhaske, S.N., Pathak, K., Basak, A., 2019. A comprehensive design of rainfall simulator
for the assessment of soil erosion in the laboratory. Catena 172, 408–420. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.08.039.
Mishra, A., Benham, B.L., Mostaghimi, S., 2006. Sediment and nutrient losses from field-
scale cropland plots treated with animal manure and inorganic fertilizer. Water Air
Soil Pollut. 175, 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-006-9111-4.
Mitchell, C., Tu, M., 2006. Nutrient Accumulation and Movement from Poultry Litter.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 70 https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.0234.
Mohamadi, M.A., Kavian, A., 2015. Effects of rainfall patterns on runoff and soil erosion
in field plots. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 3, 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
iswcr.2015.10.001.
Moraes, A.G.L., Carvalho, D.F., Antunes, M.A.H., Ceddia, M.B., 2018. Relationship
between remote sensing data and field measured interril erosion. Pesquisa
Agropecuárias Brasileira 53, 332–341. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-
204X2018000300008.
Nie, X., Li, Z., Huang, J., Huang, B., Zhang, Y., Ma, W., Yu, Y., Zeng, G., 2014. Soil
organic carbon loss and selective transportation under field simulated rainfall
events. PLoS One 9 (8), e105927.
Nielsen, K.T., Moldrup, P., Thorndahl, S., Nielsen, J.E., Duus, L.B., Rasmussen, S.H.,
Uggerby, M., Rasmussen, M.R., 2019. Automated rainfall simulator for variable
rainfall on urban green areas. Hydrol. Process. 33, 3364–3377. https://doi.org/
10.1002/hyp.13563.
Oliveira, J.R., Pinto, M.F., Souza, W.J., Guerra, J.G.M., Carvalho, D.F., 2010. Erosão
hídrica em um Argissolo Vermelho-Amarelo, sob diferentes padrões de chuva
simulada. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola Ambiental 14, 140–147.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662010000200004.
Panachuki, E., Alves Sobrinho, T., Vitorino, A.C.T., Carvalho, D.F., Urchei, M.A., 2006.
Parâmetros físicos do solo e erosão hídrica sob chuva simulada, em área de
10
Journal of Hydrology 620 (2023) 129543
integração agricultura-pecuária. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola
Ambiental 10, 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662006000200003.
Panachuki, E., Aparecida, N.S., Dorly, S.P.T.A., Rafael, M., 2015. Soil and water loss in
Ultisol of the Cerrado-Pantanal Ecotone under different management systems.
African J. Agric. Res. 10, 926–932. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2014.8908.
Quinton, J.N., Govers, G., Van Oost, K., Bardgett, R.D., 2010. The impact of agricultural
soil erosion on biogeochemical cycling. Nat. Geosci. 3, 311–314. https://doi.org/
10.1038/ngeo838.
Saber, A.N., Somjunyakul, P., Ok, J., Watanabe, H., 2019. Rainfall-runoff simulation of
radioactive cesium transport by using a small-scale portable rainfall simulator.
Water Air Soil Pollut. 230, 226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-019-4268-9.
Santos, C.A., Carmo, M.G.F., Bhering, A.S., Costa, E.S.P., Amaral Sobrinho, N.M.B., 2020.
Use of limestone and agricultural gypsum in cauliflower crop management and
clubroot control in mountain farming. Acta Scientiarum-Agronomy 42. https://doi.
org/10.4025/actasciagron.v42i1.42494.
Santos Dalólio, F., Silva, J.N., Carneiro de Oliveira, A.C., Ferreira Tinôco, I.F., Christiam
Barbosa, R., Resende, M.O., Teixeira Albino, L.F., Teixeira Coelho, S., 2017. Poultry
litter as biomass energy: A review and future perspectives. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 76, 941–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.104.
Santos, H.G., Jacomine, P.K.T., Anjos, L.H.C., Oliveira, V.A., Lumbreras, J.F., Coelho, M.
R., Almeida, J.A., Araujo Filho, J.C., Oliveira, J.B., Cunha, T.J.F., 2018. Sistema
Brasileiro de Classificação de Solo, 5ed. Embrapa, Brasília, DF.
Schultz, N., Junior, C.R.P., Rodrigues, G.C.S., Costa, E.S.P., Pereira, M.G., Amaral
Sobrinho, N.M.B., 2020. Production of cauliflower under no-tillage and conventional
system with black oats as soil cover plant. Braz. J. Dev. 6, 30107–30122. https://doi.
org/10.34117/bjdv6n5-461.
Simões, M., Ferraz, R.P.D., Lumbreras, J.F., Coelho, M.R., BACA, J.M., Freitas, P.L., Lima,
E.P., Kuchler, P.C., Almeida, M.B.F, 2019. Mapeamento da vulnerabilidade à erosão
hídrica dos solos brasileiros em função da dinâmica de uso e cobertura da terra –
Subsídio às políticas de conservação de solo e água conduzidas pelo MAPA. Empresa
Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária Embrapa Solos.
Tao, W., Wu, J., Wang, Q., 2017. Mathematical model of sediment and solute transport
along slope land in different rainfall pattern conditions. Sci. Rep. 7, 44082. https://
doi.org/10.1038/srep44082.
Tedesco, M.J., Gianello, C., Bissani, C.A., Bohnen, H., Volkweiss, S.J., 1995. Análise de
solo, plantas e outros materiais, 2. ed. Universidade, Porto Alegre.
Teixeira, P.C., Donagemma, G.K., Fontana, A., Teixeira, W.G., 2017. Manual de Métodos
de Análise de Solo. 3ª. edição Brasília, DF: Embrapa, 574.
Valadão, F.C.A., Maas, K.D.B., Weber, O.L.S., Valadão Júnior, D.D., Silva, T.J., 2011.
Variação nos atributos do solo em sistemas de manejo com adição de cama de frango.
Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 35, 2073–2082. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-
06832011000600022.
Walkley, A., Black, I.A., 1934. An examination of the degtjareff method for determining
soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration
method. Soil Sci. 37, 29–38.
Wang, L., Huang, J., Du, Y., Hu, Y., Han, P., 2013. Dynamic assessment of soil erosion
risk using landsat TM and HJ satellite data in Danjiangkou Reservoir Area, China.
Remote Sens. (Basel) 5 (8), 3826–3848. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5083826.
Wang, G., Wu, B., Zhang, L., Jiang, H., Xu, Z., 2014. Role of soil erodibility in affecting
available nitrogen and phosphorus losses under simulated rainfall. J. Hydrol. 514,
180–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.028.