Table 9.
Establishing correlation between erodibility and erosion indices under different soil conservation strategies.
| Soil Conservation Strategy | Erodibility | Erodibility Indices |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silt: Clay | Clay ratio | Unstable Aggregate | ||
| I.wombulu | Inter-Rill Erodibility | −0.34 | 0.50 | −0.01 |
| Rill Erodibility | −0.35 | 0.51 | −0.01 | |
| Wischmeier and Mannering | 0.99 | 0.95 | −0.97 | |
| El-Swaify and Dangler | 0.60 | −0.44 | −0.84 | |
| I.garbonensis | Inter-Rill Erodibility | −0.21 | −0.03 | −0.21 |
| Rill Erodibility | −0.21 | −0.01 | −0.21 | |
| Wischmeier and Mannering | 0.33 | −0.17 | −0.11 | |
| El-Swaify and Dangler | 0.14 | −0.77** | −0.28 | |
| Paddock | Inter-Rill Erodibility | −0.34 | 0.50 | −0.35 |
| Rill Erodibility | −0.35 | 0.51 | −0.35 | |
| Wischmeier and Mannering | 0.99 | −0.95 | −1.00* | |
| El-Swaify and Dangler | 0.60 | 0.42 | −0.70 | |
| C. plectostachyus | Inter-Rill Erodibility | 0.999* | −1.00* | 0.61 |
| Rill Erodibility | 0.999* | −1.00* | 0.61 | |
| Wischmeier and Mannering | 1.00* | −1.00* | 0.30 | |
| El-Swaify and Dangler | 0.90 | −0.86 | 0.17 | |
NB: * = Significant at 5%; ** = Significant at 1%.