Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Samuel-Rosa, Alessandro
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Moura-Bueno, Jean Michel, Dalmolin, Ricardo Simão Diniz
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Scientia Agrícola (Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/183588
Resumo: The method used to sample the runoff collected from soil erosion plots can be a significant source of error. In this study, we performed a laboratory experiment to evaluate the efficiency of the runoff sampling method most commonly used in Brazil. It is based on the manual homogenization and sampling of the collected runoff. Using soil material with 583 g kg–1 of sand and 89 g kg–1 of clay, the manual sampling method was tested for its ability to produce representative samples of artificial suspensions with a concentration of 2, 10 and 50 g L–1 of total solids. An underestimation of 30 % or more of the concentration of total solids was observed, with a variation of the same magnitude (CV between 20 and 45 %). We then developed a prototype sample splitter to replace the manual sampling method and tested it using the same artificial suspensions. The splitter was efficient in producing samples representative of the artificial suspensions, even without altering the particle size distribution of the total solids. Both absolute percentage errors (|< 5 %|) and the variation between five replicates (CV < 3 %) were small. The problems with the manual method are due to the inefficient homogenization that facilitates the differential sedimentation of particles of different sizes. If these problems are also found in other areas, then the prototype that we developed is a reasonable alternative.
id USP-18_1a38eb7822e6b3e0636bf8ffbd8dfe37
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/183588
network_acronym_str USP-18
network_name_str Scientia Agrícola (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splittererosion monitoringsoil losssandy soiluncertaintyThe method used to sample the runoff collected from soil erosion plots can be a significant source of error. In this study, we performed a laboratory experiment to evaluate the efficiency of the runoff sampling method most commonly used in Brazil. It is based on the manual homogenization and sampling of the collected runoff. Using soil material with 583 g kg–1 of sand and 89 g kg–1 of clay, the manual sampling method was tested for its ability to produce representative samples of artificial suspensions with a concentration of 2, 10 and 50 g L–1 of total solids. An underestimation of 30 % or more of the concentration of total solids was observed, with a variation of the same magnitude (CV between 20 and 45 %). We then developed a prototype sample splitter to replace the manual sampling method and tested it using the same artificial suspensions. The splitter was efficient in producing samples representative of the artificial suspensions, even without altering the particle size distribution of the total solids. Both absolute percentage errors (|< 5 %|) and the variation between five replicates (CV < 3 %) were small. The problems with the manual method are due to the inefficient homogenization that facilitates the differential sedimentation of particles of different sizes. If these problems are also found in other areas, then the prototype that we developed is a reasonable alternative.Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz2021-03-23info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/18358810.1590/1678-992X-2019-0117Scientia Agricola; v. 78 n. 4 (2021); e20190117Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 Núm. 4 (2021); e20190117Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 No. 4 (2021); e201901171678-992X0103-9016reponame:Scientia Agrícola (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/183588/170130Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricolahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSamuel-Rosa, Alessandro Moura-Bueno, Jean Michel Dalmolin, Ricardo Simão Diniz 2021-04-09T18:49:26Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/183588Revistahttp://revistas.usp.br/sa/indexPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpscientia@usp.br||alleoni@usp.br1678-992X0103-9016opendoar:2021-04-09T18:49:26Scientia Agrícola (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
title Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
spellingShingle Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
Samuel-Rosa, Alessandro
erosion monitoring
soil loss
sandy soil
uncertainty
title_short Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
title_full Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
title_fullStr Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
title_full_unstemmed Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
title_sort Replacing the (inefficient) manual runoff sampling method used in Brazil – a prototype sample splitter
author Samuel-Rosa, Alessandro
author_facet Samuel-Rosa, Alessandro
Moura-Bueno, Jean Michel
Dalmolin, Ricardo Simão Diniz
author_role author
author2 Moura-Bueno, Jean Michel
Dalmolin, Ricardo Simão Diniz
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Samuel-Rosa, Alessandro
Moura-Bueno, Jean Michel
Dalmolin, Ricardo Simão Diniz
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv erosion monitoring
soil loss
sandy soil
uncertainty
topic erosion monitoring
soil loss
sandy soil
uncertainty
description The method used to sample the runoff collected from soil erosion plots can be a significant source of error. In this study, we performed a laboratory experiment to evaluate the efficiency of the runoff sampling method most commonly used in Brazil. It is based on the manual homogenization and sampling of the collected runoff. Using soil material with 583 g kg–1 of sand and 89 g kg–1 of clay, the manual sampling method was tested for its ability to produce representative samples of artificial suspensions with a concentration of 2, 10 and 50 g L–1 of total solids. An underestimation of 30 % or more of the concentration of total solids was observed, with a variation of the same magnitude (CV between 20 and 45 %). We then developed a prototype sample splitter to replace the manual sampling method and tested it using the same artificial suspensions. The splitter was efficient in producing samples representative of the artificial suspensions, even without altering the particle size distribution of the total solids. Both absolute percentage errors (|< 5 %|) and the variation between five replicates (CV < 3 %) were small. The problems with the manual method are due to the inefficient homogenization that facilitates the differential sedimentation of particles of different sizes. If these problems are also found in other areas, then the prototype that we developed is a reasonable alternative.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-03-23
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/183588
10.1590/1678-992X-2019-0117
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/183588
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/1678-992X-2019-0117
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/183588/170130
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricola
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricola
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scientia Agricola; v. 78 n. 4 (2021); e20190117
Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 Núm. 4 (2021); e20190117
Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 No. 4 (2021); e20190117
1678-992X
0103-9016
reponame:Scientia Agrícola (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Scientia Agrícola (Online)
collection Scientia Agrícola (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Scientia Agrícola (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv scientia@usp.br||alleoni@usp.br
_version_ 1800222794561093632