Mission Report: PESERA 6th Progress Meeting [30 months] · 2004. 3. 22. · 27-2 EUROPEAN...

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL JRC JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE Institute fro Environment & Sustainability European Soil Bureau

PESERA 6th Progress Meeting (30 months)

Joint Research Centre Ispra 27-29/November/2002

Contract QLKS-CT-1999-01323

Mission Report:

PESERA 6th Progress Meeting [30 months]

European Soil Bureau Soil & Waste Unit

Institute for Environment & Sustainability Joint Research Centre

Ispra (VA) Italy

27-29 November 2002

Prepared by:

Robert J A Jones and

Luca Montanarella

European Soil Bureau JRC Ispra

Incorporating the official project report

prepared by Anne Gobin (KUL)

15 December 2002 JRC Ispra

Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWW: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB Tel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 http://pesera.jrc.it/ 1 PeseraJRCProg6.doc





Participants Meeting was attended by: the following: Name Partner Anne Gobin KU Leuven Anton Van Rompaey KU Leuven (for JRC) Mike Kirkby Univ. Leeds Brian Irvine Univ. Leeds Costas Kosmas AUA, Athens Yves Le Bissonnais INRA, Orleans Joel Daroussin INRA, Orleans Robert J.A. Jones JRC, Ispra Luca Montanarella JRC, Ispra Ezio Rusco JRC, Ispra (partly) Nicola Filippi JRC, Ispra (partly) Stephan Mantel ISRIC, Wageningen Matthias Boer CSIC, Almeria

Guests Apologies for absence Mike Lane (Syngenta) Hans-Jörg Lutzeyer (DG-RES) Mirco Grimm (Invited Expert) Juan Puigdefabregas (CSIC) Gerard Govers (KU Leuven)

Agenda

Wednesday 27/11/2002 Time Subject Leading Team 14.00 - 14.30 Welcome, Soil Protection Strategy for Europe,

Practical Issues JRC (Luca Montanarella)

14.30 - 15.30 Grid Model development and model specification Uleeds (Mike Kirkby & Brian Irvine)

15.30 - 16.00 Discussion on Grid All 16.00 - 16.30 Coffee Break 16.30 - 18.00 Grid-version (recap) and operational issues Uleeds, All

Thursday 28/11/2002 Time Subject Leading Team 09.00 – 10.00 Database development on high resolution test sites /

Plant growth model / Spatialising plant parameters KULeuven (Anne Gobin)

10.00 – 10.30 Validation of erosion estimates in Italy Anton Van Rompaey (JRC)

10.30 – 11.00 Coffee Break 11.00 – 11.45 Resolution Linkages CSIC (Matthias Boer) 11.45 – 12.30 Low resolution test sites/Database development

/Pedotransfer rules INRA (Yves Le Bissonnias)

12.30 – 14.00 Lunch 14.00 – 14.45 European level/Availability of databases/ Website

development Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC) JRC (Bob Jones) (Mirco Grimm)

14.45 – 15.30 Cooperation with Syngenta Syngenta (Mike Lane) 15.30 – 16.00 Land use and climate change scenarios ISRIC (Stephan Mantel) 16.00 – 16.30 Coffee Break 16.30 – 17.30 End-users and end-user involvement AUA (Costas Kosmas)






17.30 – 18.00 General Discussion All 20.00 Dinner

Friday 29/11/2002 Time Subject Leading Team 09.00 – 10.30 Tasks for the next 6 months (timetable + discussion) All 10.30 – 11.00 Coffee Break 11.00 – 12.30 Summary of tasks for the next 6 months (timetable +

discussion) – continuation All

12.30 – 14.00 Lunch 13.30 – 15.30 Working groups and further discussions and close All 15.30 – 16.00 Coffee Break

Presentations and discussions by Anne Gobin (KU Leuven)

Soil Thematic Strategy The ESB/EI/JRC is involved in the development of a thematic strategy for soil protection. Soil erosion is seen as one of the eight major threats to soil in Europe. To date, a number of Community directives are in place and positively influence soil protection. The Soil Geographic Database managed at the European Soil Bureau together with a nested soil information system provides georeferenced soil information for Europe. A soil monitoring network will be set up in order to add a temporal dimension to the existing knowledge base. To this extent, several initiatives have taken place: LUCAS, forest soil monitoring, the French soil monitoring system and other national or regional initiatives. It is intended to streamline the information into one single system at different levels of detail. Four working groups have already been identified by DG-ENVto discuss soil policy development. At the end of 2003 a conference will be held with all end-users on issues related to soil erosion and soil organic matter. The PESERA team is strongly encouraged to have key-note on soil erosion assessment across Europe.

WP1: PESERA Modelling Strategy

The Grid version The primary task has continued to be the development of the final version of the model. A fully functional and near-final version has been delivered to the ISRIC group for scenario testing, in the form of an executable for PC, together with data files for selected areas. However there are still residual problems, which should be resolved. The PESERA model uses over 100 ARC grids to generate the forecast erosion rate, and there is a severe penalty in file handling, even though computations for a grid cell only require data from that cell. We have tried a number of strategies to minimise this overhead, and in the latest version, the time taken to run the whole of Europe is approximately 24-36 hours on a single fast PC. To put this in proportion, it takes circa 5-6 hours for the whole of France or Spain, and 5 minutes for a 100 x 100 km area. This problem has taken some time, but has now, we hope and expect, been laid to rest as far as practicable.






The extent of implementation of the plant growth model, developed by KULeuven, still requires development. The code of the plant growth model was sent by KULeuven early June 2002. The incorporation of the code into the final model version requires some additional collaborative work between Leeds and Leuven. There is also the question of whether this approach should be extended to non-arable crops, or whether we should continue to use look-up tables, as at present. There may also be possible knock-on effects for consistent treatment of growth for natural vegetation in uncultivated areas. The present version of the model is available for distribution and can be used in practice mode by all the teams, bearing in mind that a final version is still to be completed. Concerning the model output, one should look at ratios rather than absolute values when climate and/or land use are changed. The final question remains whether there are all the mechanisms / processes in the model which are required to respond to the environmental differences in Europe. In this context, the response to spatial scale effects needs to be addressed. A large part of this scale effect can be represented by taking into account the heterogeneity of land use within larger areas, but with the understanding that there are residual effects of reducing runoff coefficients (and therefore sediment yields) with area which reflect other factors, such as the reduction in ‘effective’ rainfall intensity with increasing area. The PESERA model has been of great value to other projects, notably the DESERTLINKS project (2001-04), and there is now some return spin-off, in the development of a web-based version of the model, which is nearly complete. This will access data bases held in Leeds to generate erosion forecasts online for an area specified as a rectangle on the map or DEM of Europe. In the future it may also be possible to link this semi-dynamically with associated economic forecasts.

WP1 Plant Growth Model The plant growth model is developed so that it explicitly links to the regional and continental scale, and so that it can replace the vegetation module present in some of the older PESERA model versions. The plant growth model has the potential to be used for all types of annual and perennial vegetation. It is used to determine water removal from the root zone and determine the amount of biomass production and evapotranspiration from the bare and covered fractions of vegetation. The plant growth model is primarily designed to run in a forecasting mode and links explicitly to methodologies used in remote sensing to calculate biomass. In a monitoring mode, the biomass module could be replaced by data obtained from optical remote sensing, using the FPAR. The methodology of using the remotely sensed variable FPAR and an example for Flanders were elaborated in the first progress report and the first annual report. The model code was finalised and sent to Uleeds early june 2002. It is envisaged that the model code will be primarily used for arable land and pastures. The model will require a few additional layers. A spatial crop database was developed to include planting dates, harvesting dates, crop phenological stages and all necessary coefficients for calculating the crop actual evapotranspiration. For major arable crops, the data are interpolated across Europe. INRA prepared a net radiation layer, and JRC prepared a plant available water capactity layer in order to run the plant growth model. Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWW: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB Tel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 http://pesera.jrc.it/ 4 PeseraJRCProg6.doc





One major problem remains the spatialisation of crop information. Agricultural areas cover 57% of the total land cover of Europe according to Corine Land Cover (CLC), and includes arable land, pastures, permanent crops and heterogeneous agricultural areas. The CLC class ‘arable land’ covers a vast proportion of Europe (31% of total, and 54% of agricultural land), where a wide variety of arable crops are grown: cereals, root crops, industrial crops, vegetables, fruits, flowers and forage crops. The Farm Structure Survey (FSS) provides data on crop types, cropping area and yields but the information made public is aggregated to administrative units (NUTS). Three levels of differences exist between FSS and CLC: spatial referencing, classification and time of data acquisition, although both FSS and CLC data are available at approximately the same year for NUTS3. Together with ISRIC and the ACCELERATES Project the likely crop change scenarios across Europe will be discussed. If the ACCELERATES Project cannot provide all required information in time, own scenarios will be developed. Meanwhile the following layers will be prepared: (1) maize, where it will grow, + dominant cereal elsewhere, and (2) dominant crop.

WP3: Low resolution test sites / Database development The database has been finalised and contains the following sites for validating and calibrating the final PESERA version of the model: Italy, Haute-Normandie, Germany, The Netherlands, Austria, UK, Portugal and Clarinda (USA). This dataset will be augmented with the dataset from Rambla Honda (Spain) and the field plots from Syngenta Company for final evaluation of the grid output of the model. As soon as the final point-version of the model is available, the model can be validated with the prepared dataset.

WP4: Soil Erosion in Italy Long term sediment yield records in Italian lakes and reservoirs were used to validate a RUSLE-based soil erosion map of Italy (van der Knijff et al., 1999). Paolo Bazzoffi at the ISSDS (Instituto Sperimentale per lo Studio e la Difesa del Suolo) in Firenze (Italy) compiled a database with sediment yield data for 47 lakes and reservoirs in Italy. The sediment yield data were acquired by direct RADAR measurements or derived from dredging volumes. A subset of 23 lakes and reservoirs was georeferenced by means of an overlay of the point locations with the Corine Land Cover map. Georeferencing of the other 24 lakes and reservoirs will be done in a later stage as it requires the use of high resolution orthophotos. The drainage basins contributing to the georeferenced lakes and reservoirs were delineated using an automatic GIS-procedure. Next the sediment sources in each of the basins, as predicted on the soil erosion map of van der Knijff (1999), were connected with the river channels by means of procedures implemented in the SEDEM sediment delivery model (Van Rompaey et al., 2001). After calibration of the transport capacity parameters of SEDEM, the correlation between observed and predicted sediment yield values was analysed. The overal R²-value was 51% with a model efficiency of 0.32. In general the model overestimates the sediment yield in the alpine mountain basins. Further






research will focus on a seperate calibration for mountain catchments using the total dataset (n=47) of the ISSDS-dataset. The question remains on which percentage of sediments is devoted to the erosion model and which percentage to the sediment delivery model. A similar analysis will be carried out if the first result of the PESERA erosion map for Italy is available.

WP2: Resolution Linkages The effects of spatially structured variation in vegetation cover and soil attributes, and the effects of temporally structured variation in rainfall intensity on predicted hillslope erosion rates were investigated under dry Mediterranean conditions. The effect of spatial structure was studied in terms of the mean vegetation cover fraction of the hillslope, the autocorrelation length of the vegetation pattern, rainfall duration and intensity, and the slope gradient. Simulation experiments were carried out with an existing spatially distributed soil erosion model (LISEM) at the Rambla Honda Field Site (SE Spain). The model was parameterised according to observed relations between certain model parameters and vegetation cover. Hypothetical hillslopes were constructed on the basis of straight slopes (100m), simulated vegetation patterns and rectangular rainfall events to study of effects of vegetation structure on hillslope yields. The simulations were done at 60 min runs and 10 s time steps and compared with recorded total water and sediment yields at base of slope. Differences in water and sediment yields between spatially structured and uniform vegetation covers are most pronounced when runoff generation or sediment transport thresholds are exceeded in bare soil areas but not in vegetated patches. The greater the contrast in soil hydrological and erosional properties of bare soil and vegetated patches the greater the difference in water and sediment yields between structured and uniform vegetation covers. Water and sediment yields from slopes with structured and uniform vegetation cover converge with increasing mean vegetation cover fraction, storm volume, rainfall intensity, or slope gradient. Coarsely aggregated vegetation patterns affect hillslope discharge more than finely aggregated patterns, both on gentle and steep slopes. Coarsely aggregated vegetation patterns affect hillslope sediment yields more than finely aggregated patterns on steep slopes, whereas the reverse occurs on gentle slopes. In a second set of simulations, storms were simulated on straight slopes (100m). Under temporally structured variation in rainfall intensity differences in discharge between spatially structured and uniform vegetation covers are (1) more pronounced for storms of low mean intensity than for storms of high mean intensity, (2) more pronounced for gentle slopes than for steep slopes and (3) more pronounced for coarsely aggregated vegetation patterns than for finely aggregated vegetation. Under temporally structured variation in rainfall intensity differences in soil loss between spatially structured and uniform vegetation covers are (1) more pronounced for gentle slopes than for steep slopes and (2) more pronounced for coarsely aggregated vegetation patterns than for finely aggregated vegetation. Temporal variation in rainfall intensity increases the impact of spatial variation in vegetation cover on hillslope runoff and erosion rates. The effect of using LISEM with the Holtan infiltration equation, which allows for drainage and recovery of infiltration capacity, will be further investigated. Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWW: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB Tel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 http://pesera.jrc.it/ 6 PeseraJRCProg6.doc





Implications for the PESERA parameters soil storage (h) and soil erodibility (k) were derived. The results of spatial and temporal resolution linkages will be synthesised in a report. Contribution to WP3 will be a high resolution verification of the PESERA model at Rambla Honda. Contribution to WP4 will be a qualitative comparison of the PESERA model output with land degradation assessment in the Guadalentín basin (SE Spain).

WP4: Low Resolution Test Sites and Database Development The datasets available for the European scale have been reworked to input grid layers for the PESERA model. They have been delivered on 3 CD-Roms, together with an accompanying text. Example grids were provided for the reclassified CORINE, soil crusting class and soil erodibility class. For the latter two, pedotransfer rules have been made and a correspondence table was provided: Proposed values (before effective calibratio

classe erodibility crusting1 0.1 1002 1 203 3 104 6 55 12 2

Approximate adjustment gives the following equations, with the final calibration depending on the plot database analysis (WP3):

Erodibility PESERA = 0,1 x (erodibility weighted value)3 Crusting PESERA = 100 x (crusting weighted value)-2

For validating the model grid output, it was suggested to use the European map of annual soil erosion risk as inferred from rainfall erosivity and soil sensitivity to erosion (combined crusting and erodibility). For France the output can be compared to the results from the expert model from France and to the spatial database on muddy floods that is recorded per small agricultural region in France. For the regional case study of Haute-Normandie, a comparison was made between the locally available datasets at high resolution (50m) and the Pan-European datasets at low resolution (1000m). This was done for crusting (SGDBE), elevation (DEM), slope gradient (DEM), land cover (CLC), and Interpolated Rainfall. For the same region, three different scales of soil erosion records under similar agro-ecological conditions were presented for validation: plots of 450 m², one catchment of 90 ha and one catchment of 1100 ha. The runoff coefficient seems to decline logarithmically with size of runoff area. The effects of connectivity and patchiness on observed runoff were studied.

WP5: Application at the Pan-European Scale Together with INRA, all data layers for running the model at the European scale have been processed and transformed to parameter grids as input to the PESERA-grid version of the model. It was suggested to stop the processing of newly available data layers. Other data layers have the potential to be incorporated as soon as they become available but not within the timeframe of the project.






Based on the dominant soil textural class, soil typological unit (classification) and soil depth, pedotransfer rules were derived to calculate:

1. Available Water Capacity (AWC) – as a proportion (%); 2. Soil Water Available to Plants (SWAP) – integrated over a soil depth of 100cm or

less if rooting is restricted by rock or other impenetrable material – in mm 3. Drainable Pore Space (PO), the water retained in the soil at suctions of < 5kPa; 4. Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC), as a total in mm.

The pedotransfer rules and equations have been detailed in a separate document. It was decided to keep all the individual building blocks to the pedotransfer equations separately to allow for adjustments when and if needed. The MARS Rainfall data have been re-interpolated from 50km x 50km to the 1km x 1km grid using an inverse spline function in Arc/Info. The temperature data have been re-interpolated using the same function applying a correction for elevation. The resulting re-interpolated data (to a 1km grid) have been compared where possible with national data to check the overall accuracy. It is clear from the comparisons that the 1km temperature data are much more accurate than the 1km rainfall data, for which no further corrections were applied. In future, the rainfall data will be corrected on the basis of altitude and distance from the sea. However, the PESERA model will run first using the current re-interpolated 1km data sets. Other climatic data, such as PET, have also been re-interpolated using the inverse spline function but, as for rainfall, have not been subjected to further correction. However, although the rainfall and PET data from MARS are considered adequate for vegetation modelling purposes, they are unfortunately not detailed enough for hydrology-related studies such as soil erosion modelling. Some of the comparisons show very large differences comparing the 1km rainfall (interpolated data) for Italy and UK with data interpolated using more dense national networks of climatic recording stations. On-going work is the Catchment Information System (contact: Roland Hiederer), which contains data layers that are of considerable interest for PESERA, such as European land cover and catchment boundaries. Use of the CIS European land cover 1km data set would allow application of the PESERA model to the whole of Europe whereas the CLC map shows several gaps, e.g. Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland.

WP6: Scenario Analysis The PESERA grid version was sent from Uleeds to ISRIC a couple of months ago. It was an uncompiled model, not fit for DOS operations. Moreover, there was no transfer between INRA data layers and GRID-model and no documentation of intermediate files. Since then a lot of work has been devoted to compile the model for running on a PC (dos environment). Some additional descriptions and explanations were given. It was felt necessary to have a user-manual and to develop a rudimentary user-interface with explanations for end-users. A more comprehensive manual could then be compiled at a later stage. The ATEAM and ACCELERATES projects (contact: Mark Rounsevell) planned to deliver four draft land use scenario’s and a comprehensive report in September 2002. Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWW: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB Tel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 http://pesera.jrc.it/ 8 PeseraJRCProg6.doc





Nothing has been completed to date and the final versions are now expected in January 2003. The ATEAM/ACCELERATES will deliver 10 min. grid land use scenarios with multiple components. It remains to be seen whether PESERA-GRID is capable of handling such data. Alternatives to the ATEAM/ACCELERATES would be to run GCM scenarios, Leemans/RIVM-GEO outputs for land use and GC scenarios, or the scenarios discussed under section 4 on plant growth modelling. The scenarios should be relative to average actual land use, and provide a relevant indicator for policy formulation. The scenarios could depict worst case land use or decrease/expansion of certain land uses such as set-aside and others relevant to the CAP. This calls for a sensitivity analysis and a prediciton error indication.

WP7: End-user Involvement The PESERA model was presented in the MEDRAP workshop held in Troia (Portugal) and organised by theUNCCD Portuguese Focal Point, the MEDRAP Concerted Action to Support the Northern Mediterranean Regional Action Plan to Combat Desertification, and the European Union. Participants came from Turkey, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Focal Points from South America. It was demonstrated how the PESERA model can be applied define environmentally sensitive areas to desertification. The importance of the model lies in the definition of rates of soil erosion under different types of land use and climatic conditions. A user’s manual is being prepared. It contains the following sections: (1) introduction, (2) model description, (3) data requirements, (4) input model parameters, (5) calibration of the model, and (6) applications. The applications are concerned with the Sea Turtle National Park of Sekania (Zante, Greece), the definition of ESA to desertification in the island of Lesvos and the SYNGENTA field plots. It was commented that the model description should include both the worksheet functions as well as the VBA Code. Leuven will contribute to the vegetation model description after the vegetation module has been finalised at Leeds.

Syngenta Cooperation The Gramoxone EU Conservation Agriculture Project (GECAP) is a Syngenta funded cooperation that aims to assess a variety of agronomic practices for their effectiveness in reducing soil erosion and improving soil structure. The initial target of work are the Mediterranean perennial crops olives and vines. More specifically, the project investigates the role of cover crops in soil conservation, and measures the impacts of the practices on soil erosion. The amount of sediment and water run-off from conventionally tilled system (5 annual cultivations) is compared to that from an area with managed cover crops under vines or olives. The sites are located near Sevilla (S) and Pedrera (S) for Olives, and near Carcassonne (F), Gigondas (F), Teramo (I) and Abruzzso (I) for vines. All sites are equiped with an authomatic weather station and sediment collector tanks. In order to investigate the protective capacity of rainfall, 1m square plots are exposed to a known amount of rainfall in a replicated fashion. A similar project, Northern European Mechanised Conservation Agriculture Project (NEMCAP), has been submitted for EU funding. NEMCAP deals with Northern annual crops (wheat, sugar beet, barley etc) and compares minimum tillage with conventional practices in Belgium, UK and Hungary. The objectives of NEMCAP are to demonstrate Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWW: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB Tel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 http://pesera.jrc.it/ 9 PeseraJRCProg6.doc





that minimum tillage agriculture has an economically viable role in the conservation of soil and water in Northern European Mechanised Agriculture. Such conservation may reduce pollution of surface waters by both fertilisers and pesticides, and may have benefits for the environment w.r.t. biodiversity, terrestrial ecology and soil health. A strategic approach to dissemination of this approach can be achieved in cooperation with farmers. More details on the achievements of the Syngenta Projects can be found on www:\gecap.co.uk. PESERA is allowed to make use of the plot data that have been dathered by Syngenta. This will augment the number of sites available to test the point-version of the model.

Tasks to be done This list was compiled during the PESERA meeting at Ispra and augmented with tasks listed by individual participants on the basis of their presentations. Tasks Who? When? Coordination: Meeting report All asap Progress report (send text report to Leuven) All Feb/March 03 NEXT PESERA MEETING: WAGENINGEN All 5-6 June 03 Model: Latest VBA (excel) model version Leeds Dec 02 Fortran model code distribution (purpose : running in practice mode)

Leeds Dec 02

File format description Leeds Dec ‘02 Pedotransfer rules to Brian INRA Dec 02 Coding vegetation model changes Leeds-Leuven Feb 03 GUI (web-based version of model) Leeds June 03 Resolution Linkages: Technical report CSIC Almeria ?? Calibration and validation: Calibration on European database Leuven Jan 03 Obtain data from Syngenta Leuven/Syngenta Dec 02 Test at Rambla Honda CSIC Jan 03 Regional validation: Grid output from Normandy to INRA Leeds Dec 02 Data from Italy, Andalucia, Flanders JRC, CSIC, Leuven Dec 02 Output grids to JRC (it), CSIC, Leuven ULeeds Jan 02 European scale: SWAP (soil) layers JRC/INRA Dec 02 Planting dates and plant parameters KULeuven (to Joel) Jan 02 Spatial distribution of crops (FSS / CLC) KULeuven (to Joel) Jan 02 Roland Heiderer land use map of Europe Leeds/JRC ?? Scenario Analysis: Discuss land use scenarios Leuven/ISRIC Dec 02 Final land use scenarios Leuven/ISRIC/Rounsevell Jan ‘03 End User: Manual to Uleeds (for check) AUA Jan ‘03 Vegetation Module (after coding) Leuven March 03 End-user meeting: ‘soil erosion in Europe’ (Keynote + report to be discussed)

JRC/All/COST623 Nov 03






Annex I

Database Development & Application at European Scale Robert J A Jones, Mirco Grimm and Luca Montanarella

European Soil Bureau, IES, JRC Ispra, 27 Nov 2002

Soil Water Storage Capacity

European Level/Availability of Databases:Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC)

Bob Jones, Mirco Grimm& Luca Montanarella

European Soil BureauInstitute for Environment & Sustainability, JRC

PESERA 6th Progress Meeting (month_30)

27 - 29 November 2002Joint Research Centre

Ispra, Italy

0

25

50

100

120

5 200 1500Suction kPa

EAW

RAW

actualabstraction

Dep

th c

m

0

25

50

100

120


EAW

RAW

0

PO

Dep

th c

m

0

30

50

100


EAWRAW

actual abstractionof water byroots

0

PO

Topsoil

Subsoil

Rock

Dep

th c

m

dept

hde

pth

kPa5 1500

+ 0.5(drainable pore space)

Soil Water Available to Plants -

=Soil waterstoragecapacity

0

30

50

100


0

PO_TOP

PO_SUB

SWAP_TOP

SWAP_SUB

SWSC = (SWAP_TOP + SWAP_SUB) + (PO_TOP + PO_SUB) …….. (1)

SWSC_EFF = {P1(SWAP_TOP) + P2(SWAP_SUB)} + 0.5(PO_TOP + PO_SUB)….. (2)

SWSC_EFF_2 = {P1(SWAP_TOP) + 0.5(PO_TOP + PO_SUB)…..(3)

Dep

th c

m

0.5 SWAP Soil Water Available to PlantsPO Pore Space (drainable)TOP topsoil SUB subsoilP1, P2 factors between 0 and 1.0

(PO_TOP + PO_SUB)

WP5 - Database Development & Application at European scale

PESERA - 6th Progress Meeting (month_30)

Soil Water Availableto Plants (SWAP)

Soil Water StorageCapacity (SWSC)

Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC)_1 Soil Water Storage Capacity

European Soil Water Databases

SWAP

SWAP

Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC)_2

Pore Space(Drainable) mm- Profile (Tot)






(SWAP_TOP + SWAP_SUB)

SWSC_R = (SWAP_TOP) + (SWAP_SUB) + 0.5 (PO_TOP + PO_SUB)

SWSC_EFF_2 = {P1(SWAP_TOP) + 0.5(PO_TOP + PO_SUB)

SWSC_EFF_2 = {P1(SWAP_TOP) + 0.5(PO_TOP + PO_SUB)

Soil WaterAvailable to Plants

SWAP (mm)5-1500kPa

Soil WaterStorage Capacity

(mm) - ProfileTotal

Effective SoilWater Storage

Capacity(mm)

Effective SoilWater Storage

Capacity(mm)






Annex II Climatic data for Europe:

Validation of a 1km x1km data set, based on the interpolation of MARS 50km data

Robert J A Jones, Mirco Grimm & Luca Montanarella

European Soil Bureau, IES, JRC Ispra,

27 Nov 2002

European Level/Availability of Databases:Soil Water Storage Capacity (SWSC)

Website developmentBob Jones, Mirco Grimm

Anton Van Rompaey & Luca Montanarella

European Soil BureauInstitute for Environment & Sustainability, JRC

PESERA 6th Progress Meeting (month_30)

27 - 29 November 2002Joint Research Centre

Ispra, Italy

Erosivity R: Interpolation of rainfall Results using national data eg Italy

European level data sets Soil 1km x 1km Meteo 1km x 1km interpolated Soil Water Storage Capacity

PESERA Website Operation of the Web site How to use it in future

Future for PESERA Soil Monitoring Extend east and south

mm

mm

mm

mmmm

mm

WP5 - Database Development & Application at European scale


Partner 4 JRC: Progress


MARS 50km grid ARC/INFOInterpolated

Average Annual Precipitation(AAR mm), MARS DB: Italy

Meteo Stations [366] recordingprecipitation in Italy

Meteo Stations [47] recordingprecipitation for MARS in Italy






Average Annual Rainfall UK

MARS data interpolated at 1km

Mean Temperature Jan UK MARS interpolated 1km

Mean Temperature July UK

Mean Annual PotentialEvapotranspiration (mm) UK

MARS 50km griddata for Italy

Interpolated at1km by

ARC/INFO

Meteo Stationdata for Italy

Interpolated at5km by NNA

Interpolatedfrom MARS






Roland Hiederer, Land Management Unit

European Soil & Land Information






Annex III Remote Sensing Images for Europe:

Corrected MARS Images for the 1998 Campaign Roland Hiederer1 Robert J A Jones2

1Land Management Unit &

2European Soil Bureau Soil and Waste Unit

Institute for Environment & Sustainability

JRC Ispra

Satellite images for selected MARS sites, from the 1998 Campaign, have been re-projected to facilitate use and supplied on CD Rom for further validating the PESERA model.






MARS sites (20) selected toprovide data for PESERA

Location of MARS sites in Europe


EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL JRC JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE Institute fro Environment & SustainabEuropean Soil Bureau




The data supplied are for the same sites a ose providing the classified land use, as follows:

MARS sites BEAU Beauvais (F) BOUR Bourges (F) CHAR Chartres (F) COLM Colmar (F) COUT Coutras (F) DOLE Dole (F) LOCH Loch (F) MELU Melun (F) MONT Montauban (F) VALE Valence (F) CIUD Cuidad Real (E) ZARA Zaragosa (E) DEVI Devises (UK) DRIF Great Driffield (UHASS Hasselt (B) FARS Farsala (Gr) THES Thessaloniki (Gr) ESSE Essen (D)

Joint Research Centre TP 280 I-21020 Ispra (VA), Italy E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] WWWTel 0039 0 332 786 329/330 Fax: 0039 0 332 786 394 PeseraJRCProg6.doc

ility

s th

K)

: http://www.ei.jrc/sw/projects/ESB http://pesera.jrc.it/ 18

Mission Report: PESERA 6th Progress Meeting [30 months] · 2004. 3. 22. · 27-2 EUROPEAN...

Documents

Transcript of Mission Report: PESERA 6th Progress Meeting [30 months] · 2004. 3. 22. · 27-2 EUROPEAN...