Catena 63 (2005) 85 108

www.elsevier.com/locate/catena

Spatial modeling of soil erosion potential in a

tropical watershed of the Colombian Andes
Natalia Hoyos *
Department of Geography, University of Florida, P.O. Box 117315, Gainesville, FL 32611-7315, USA

Received 8 July 2004; received in revised form 11 January 2005; accepted 30 May 2005

Abstract

Soil erosion potential of a 58 km2 watershed in the coffee growing region of the Colombian
Andes was assessed using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) in a GIS
environment. The RUSLE factors were developed from local rainfall, topographic, soil and land
use data. Seasonal erosivity factors (R) were calculated for six pluviographic stations (19871997)
located within 22 km of the basin. Two regression models, one for the wet and one for the dry
seasons, were created and used to estimate seasonal erosivity for 10 additional stations with
pluviometric data. Erosivity was on average higher in the wet seasons (4686 MJ mm ha
1 h
1
season
1) than the dry ones (2599 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1). Seasonal erosivity surfaces were
generated using the local polynomial interpolation method, and showed increases from west to east
in accordance with regional elevation. Soil erodibility was calculated from field measurements of
water stable aggregates (N 2 mm) and infiltration, which were influenced by land use. Three
erodibility scenarios were considered (high, average and low) to represent the variability in
infiltration measurements within each land use. The topographic and land cover factors were
developed from existing contour and land use data. Model results indicated that in the dry seasons,
and under the average erodibility scenario, 534 ha (11%) of the basins rural area were within the
extreme erosion potential category (above 3.5 t ha
1 season
1). During the wet seasons, this area
increased to 1348 ha (28%). In general, areas under forest and shrub had low erosion potential
values, while those under coffee and pasture varied according to topography. Modeling of probable

* Fax: +1 352 392 8855.

E-mail address: nhoyos@ufl.edu.

0341-8162/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.catena.2005.05.012
86 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

land use change scenarios indicated that the erosion potential of the basin would decrease as a result
of coffee conversion to pasture.
D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Soil erosion potential; RUSLE; Andisol; Coffee; Andes; Colombia

1. Introduction

Erosion by water is a primary agent of soil degradation at the global scale, affecting 1094
million hectares, or roughly 56% of the land experiencing human induced degradation
(Oldeman et al., 1991). This process is considered the major form of soil degradation in the
Colombian Andes, and has been related to overgrazing and inadequate agricultural practices
such as frequent burning, tillage and lack of cover crops (Oldeman et al., 1991; Muller-
Samann, 1999). Undesirable effects include reduced soil productivity and deterioration of
water quality (Lal, 2003). Therefore, the study of soil erosion patterns in the landscape, and
interactions among the major factors that affect this process is essential, particularly in
humid tropical mountainous areas, due to their steep topography and frequently high rainfall
amounts and intensities. One of the most widely used models to study water soil erosion is
the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE, Renard et al., 1997), an empirically
based model founded on the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE, Wischmeier and Smith,
1978). It is designed to predict long-term average annual soil loss from field slopes under a
specific land use and management system, based on the product of rainfall erosivity (R), soil
erodibility (K), slope length and steepness (LS), surface cover and management (C) and
support conservation practices ( P). The R factor is calculated by adding individual storm
EI30 values (product of total storm energy and maximum 30-min intensity) over a year, and
averaging annual values over a period longer than 22 years to account for cyclical patterns
of rainfall (Renard et al., 1997). It is also recommended that this factor be calculated on a
seasonal basis to reflect intra-annual patterns of rainfall (Yu, 1998; Millward and Mersey,
1999; Santos and Azevedo, 2001; Dias and Silva, 2003). The K factor reflects the
susceptibility of soil particles to detachment by rainfall splash or surface flow, and is related
to the integrated effect of rainfall, runoff, and infiltration. It is measured from runoff plots or
through predictive relationships (nomographs, Renard et al., 1997). Specific properties of
Andisols that have been related to their stability include mean weighted aggregate diameter
(dominant aggregate size class), clay content, delta pH (pH in potassium chloride minus pH
in distilled water), organic matter, permeability, and presence of allophane (El-Swaify and
Dangler, 1977; Rivera et al., 1998). The LS factor accounts for the effect of slope length and
gradient. In a slope, the length factor (L) is defined as the horizontal distance from the origin
of overland flow to the point where deposition starts or runoff goes into a channel (Renard et
al., 1997). In a two- and three-dimensional situation however, it should be replaced by the
unit contributing area, i.e., upslope drainage area per unit of contour length (Moore and
Wilson, 1992; Desmet and Govers, 1996). The C factor reflects the effects of cover and
management variables, while the P factor represents the effects of support practices such as
contouring, strip cropping, terracing and subsurface drainage (Renard et al., 1997).
Although the USLE and RUSLE were developed to predict soil loss under temperate
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 87

conditions, their use in other regions is possible by the determination of its factors from
local data (Millward and Mersey, 1999; Mati et al., 2000; Angima et al., 2003; Lufafa et al.,
2003). Additional advantages include attainable data requirements under the limitations
common in developing countries, its compatibility with Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) allowing prediction of erosion potential on a cell by cell basis, and the wealth of
information already available for its factors.
The objective of this study was to predict the spatial patterns of soil erosion potential
for a watershed of the Colombian Andes, by adapting each of the RUSLE factors to local
conditions.

2. Data and methods

2.1. Site description

The Dosquebradas basin is located in the coffee-growing region of the Central

Cordillera of Colombia and covers an area of 58 km2 (Fig. 1). Elevation ranges from 1350
to 2150 m, with a relief characterized by a valley floor surrounded by moderate (up to
25%) to steep (25% to more than 75%) slopes to the west, north and east (Instituto
Geografico Agustn Codazzi [IGAC], 1988). Annual precipitation ranges between 2600
mm in the south and 3200 mm at the northern watershed divide, and has a bimodal
distribution, with two wet (MarchMay, SeptemberNovember) and two dry (December
February, JuneAugust) seasons (Guzman and Jaramillo, 1989). The predominant soil
mapping unit is Chinchina, made up mostly of Melanudands (80%) derived from volcanic
ash deposits (IGAC, 1988). About 16% (908 ha) of the basin has been urbanized, most of
it concentrated on the valley floor. Coffee and pasture are the major land uses in the rural
area (62% and 18% of the rural area, respectively), while forests (natural, planted,
bamboo), shrub and temporary crops make up the remaining 20% (Corporacion Autonoma
Regional de Risaralda [CARDER], 1997).
Modeling of soil erosion potential was limited to the rural area of the basin (4923 ha).
Digital topographic, land use and stream data were provided by the regional environmental
office (CARDER, 1997). The spatial distribution of coffee systems (sun and shade) was
derived from maps of the Colombian Coffee Federation (Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros
[FNC]), and was used for soil sampling and for the models land cover and management
factor surface. The Federation regards these data as private so both categories are
presented as one in all maps. All spatial data were processed within a Geographic
Information System GIS (ArcGIS, ArcINFO and IDRISI) with a spatial resolution of 25
m, equivalent to 1 mm in the topographic base maps (1:25,000). Fig. 2 summarizes the
methods used to derive each of the factors required by RUSLE.

2.2. Erosivity factor

Data for the calculation of the EI30 factor were available from 16 gauging stations
located within 27 km from the center of the basin, operated by the National Coffee
Research Center (CENICAFE) and the National Environmental Institute (IDEAM). From
88 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

er
Riv
illera
Cauca
Cord
River
tral

a
alen
Cen

d
Mag

7545'0"W 7530'0"W
00
12
1200
50'0"N

00

00
21
r
iv e

4
2400
uc aR
900

Ca

3
2
1800
3000 Legend
Rainfall stations
0
360
Pluviographic
1. Catalina
5 r 2. Jazmn
ve
445'0"N

1 Ri 3. Cenicaf
n
tu
`

O 4. Naranjal
6 5. Pta. Tratamiento
1200

6. Cedral
1500

0 5 10
km
Pluviometric

Fig. 1. Location of the Dosquebradas basin on the western flank of the Central Andean Cordillera of Colombia.
Rainfall gauging stations also shown. Only stations with pluviographic data are labeled (modified from Digital
Chart of the World [DCW], 1992; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical [CIAT] y Programa de las
Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente [PNUMA], 1998; CARDER, 1997).

these, only 6 stations had the rainfall intensity (pluviographic) data required to calculate
EI30 values (Renard et al., 1997). In order to use the rainfall totals (pluviometric data)
from the other 10 stations, the following steps were taken:

! Individual storm EI30 values were calculated for the stations with pluviographic data
according to the RUSLE methodology (Renard et al., 1997). A period of 11 years (1987
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 89

Digital contours Rainfall data Infiltration and Land use

aggregate stability

DEM Regional erosivity

model

Slope length and Cover management

steepness surface Erosivity surface Erodibility surface surface

Soil erosion potential

Fig. 2. Summary of data and methods used to derive the RUSLE factors.

to 1997) was used because 1987 was the earliest date with available data at all 6
stations, and because it represented a reasonable compromise between the number of
available stations and the amount of data to be analyzed.
! For each pluviographic station, EI30 values were added on a seasonal basis and
differences among seasons were tested through analysis of variance. Two regression
models (one for the wet and one for the dry seasons) of seasonal EI30 (dependent
variable) and seasonal rainfall (independent) were built and subsequently used to
estimate seasonal EI30 at the pluviometric stations.
! Seasonal EI30 surfaces for the wet and dry seasons were generated by interpolating the
seasonal values from all stations with the local polynomial interpolation technique
(ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst).

2.3. Slope length and steepness factor

The LS factor for this study was calculated with the USLE2D (Desmet and Govers,
1996), a program readily available over the Internet that works within IDRISI. The LS
surface was derived by:

! Creating the basins DEM from 50 m interval contours (Arc/INFO Topogrid

command).
! Running the USLE2D using the multiple flow algorithm (Quinn et al., 1991) as it was
considered more appropriate than the single flow algorithm, given the complex relief of
the basin.
! Calculating the LS algorithm by using the USLE slope length function (Wischmeier
and Smith, 1978) and Nearings slope steepness function (Nearing, 1997). The original
USLE slope length function was selected as it has performed better on steep slopes (up
to 60%) than the RUSLE algorithm (Liu et al., 2001). Nearings slope steepness
function, developed with empirical data from slopes up to 55%, was also considered a
90 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

better fit for this basin than the RUSLE algorithm, developed with data from slopes up
to 25% (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978; McCool et al., 1987). As a reference, the
Dosquebradas basin has 43% of its rural area on slopes between 25% and 55%, and
13% on slopes above 55%.
! Modifying the generated LS surface by (a) removing a 25 m strip from the watershed
divide as unrealistically high LS values were generated at the edge of the basin, and (b)
removing the urban areas which were assigned a bno dataQ value so that they were
excluded from further analyses.

2.4. Soil erodibility factor

Erodibility is determined largely by the stability of soil aggregates and the hydrological
properties of the soil profile (Keersebilck, 1990; Barthes et al., 2000; Barthes and Roose,
2002). The former is an indication of how susceptible soil particles are to detachment,
while the latter indicates how easily water moves and is retained in the soil profile, thus the
probability of runoff generation. The soil erodibility (K) factor for the study area was
estimated as a qualitative index based on soil properties measured in the field (June
August 2002), i.e., the percentage of water stable aggregates and infiltration. Soil sampling
units were defined based on land use and topography as follows (Table 1):

! The urban land use was discarded. Within the rural area (4923 ha), minor land uses
were also discarded as their combined area represented only 2.1% (108 ha). These
included annual crops (tomatoes, yuca, beans, maize) and bamboo forests.
! Slopes were classified into three major categories: 015% (ridges and footslopes), 15
50% (shoulders and backslopes) and N 50% (very steep slopes), based on the DEM.
! The selected land uses were subdivided by slope class and the area of each land use/
slope combination was determined. The number of sampling locations within each land
use/slope unit was calculated proportional to its areal extent.
! In the field, sampling locations were determined with a GPS (Magellan 315) and later
downloaded to the GIS. At each location, soil samples were collected for aggregate
stability (020 cm).

The percent of water stable aggregates was measured using a method modified from
Arshad et al. (1996). Soil samples were air-dried in the shade for 24 h and passed through
2 mm and 1 mm sieves to obtain three aggregate sizes (N 2 mm, 1 to 2 mm and b 1 mm).
Ten grams of each of these subsamples were oven dried at 105 8C to determine the dry
weight (W 1). Another 10 g were spread evenly over (a) a 2 mm sieve for the aggregates N 2
mm, (b) a 1 mm sieve for the 1 to 2 mm aggregates, and (c) a 0.05 mm sieve for aggregates
b1 mm. Sieves were placed on a saturated terry cloth sheet for 5 min to let aggregates
absorb water slowly. Sieves with aggregate samples were placed in a container filled with
distilled water, so that the water level was just above the aggregates. Then, sieves were
moved up and down at a rate of 30 oscillations per min (one oscillation being an up and
down stroke of 3.7 cm in length) for 3 min. After wet sieving, aggregates were placed in a
weighing can and oven dried at 105 8C to determine their weight (W 2). The weight of the
sand fraction (W 3) of each subsample was determined by (a) removing organic matter with
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 91

Table 1
Soil sampling units defined by land use and slope categories, and number of sampling locations within each unit
Land use Slope (%) Area (ha) Sampling locations
Each class Total for land use Each class Total for land use
Coffee-sun (COS) 015 724.3 2752.5 6 41
1550 1588.9 21
N50 439.3 14
Coffee-shade (COSSH) 015 37.4 283.7 3 13
1550 185.0 6
N50 61.3 4
Pasture (PA) 015 366.1 885.2 8 23
1550 416.6 10
N50 102.5 5
Pasture-shrub (PASHR) 015 39.3 194.0 4
1550 84.1 2
N50 70.6 2
Shrub (SHR) 015 66.6 260.7 2
1550 133.3
N50 60.9 2
Planted forest (PF) 015 5.6 52.9 3
1550 39.3 2
N50 8.0 1
Natural forest (NF) 015 16.6 386.8 3
1550 220.3
N50 150.0 3
Total 4815.8a 4815.8a 89 89
a
This area represents the total rural area (4923.3 ha) minus discarded rural land uses (107.5 ha).

peroxide, and (b) chemical dispersion through the addition of 20 ml of sodium

hexametaphosphate followed by overnight shaking.
The percent of water stable aggregates for each aggregate size was calculated as
W2
W3
Water stable aggregates%  100
W1
W3
Infiltration was measured in the field with a single ring infiltrometer by pouring 500 ml
of water at a time (USDA, 1999). This process was repeated until infiltration was fairly
constant and these values were taken to approximate the saturated infiltration rate. The
probability that the 30-min rainfall intensity exceeded the saturated infiltration rate at each
location was calculated by:

! Assigning each sampling location to the closest rainfall intensity station (Thiessen
polygons, Spatial Analyst Distance Allocation function in ArcGIS).
! Calculating the cumulative probability distribution for each rainfall stations maximum
30-min intensity (I30), with data from 1987 to 1997 transformed with natural logarithm
since they were log-normally distributed.
! Using the I30 distribution parameters (mean and standard deviation) and measured
saturated infiltration rate to calculate the probability of exceedance at each location.
92 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

The selection of properties to calculate the erodibility index was performed in the
following way. Correlation analyses were run to determine which properties were
redundant in order to exclude them from further analysis (a = 0.05). Exploratory spatial
analysis on the surviving properties showed no spatial pattern suggesting that
interpolation of values between sampling locations would be meaningless. Therefore, it
was decided to study the effect of land use on selected soil properties to use the land use
grid as the base for the erodibility surface. The K value for each land use was then
calculated as the product of the selected soil properties (average value for that specific
land use) scaled to the range of K values reported in the literature for this soil unit
(Hincapie et al., 2000).

2.5. Cover management factor

Coffee and pasture cover 80% of the rural area (Table 1). Most of the coffee is grown as
sun or btechnifiedQ coffee with very little or no shade, while there are some patches of
shade coffee clustered on the west side of the basin. Major differences between the coffee
systems include (a) coffee varieties, with short varieties used for sun coffee and tall
varieties used for shade coffee, (b) planting densities, higher in sun coffee systems (up to
10,000 plants ha
1) than in shade coffee (around 2500 plants ha
1), (c) plot cycle, which
lasts between 7 and 12 years for sun coffee, and 20+ years for shade coffee before the plot
is renewed, and (d) input levels, higher in sun coffee in terms of fertilizers (Perfecto et al.,
1996; Moguel and Toledo, 1999; FNC, 2000). The following characteristics on growth and
management practices were used to estimate the C factor:

! Coffee: usually planted at the beginning of the rainy seasons (MarchMay,

SeptemberNovember). Planting preparation includes clearing with machete and
burning, or herbicide spraying. Planting densities and plot cycle as mentioned before.
Cultural practices include: weeding with machete, hoe or brush cutter every 2.53
months (early stages of shade coffee, regularly for sun coffee during whole plot
cycle), and insecticide spraying as needed to control pests and diseases like coffee
borer, leaf rust and leaf cutting ants (FNC, 2000; Ariza, 2003, pers. commun.).
According to these characteristics, values of 0.035 and 0.030 were assigned to sun
and shade coffee, respectively (RUSLE program; Weesies, 2003, pers. commun.).
Both represented the average over an 8-year period (average plot cycle for sun
coffee).
! Pasture: although some plots were being managed for milk production, most of them
had little management and were used for occasional grazing. A value of 0.01 was
assumed, corresponding to pasture in good condition (Morgan, 1995), or to pasture
with rotational grazing with 50% growth removal in each grazing cycle (RUSLE
program for Puerto Rico humid uplands). This value was selected because although it
was common to see some signs of overgrazing (cattle trampling), the pasture cover was
usually dense. For pasture-shrub, a value of 0.0028 was used (RUSLE program for
Puerto Rico humid uplands), described as dense grass with low vigor and not harvested.
! Forest and shrub: a value of 0.001 was used for natural and planted forest, and shrub
(Roose, 1977).
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 93

2.6. Support practice factor

A value of 1 (no support practice factor) was assumed for the entire basin, since the
only support practice observed on some sun coffee plots was contouring but was not
consistent throughout the area, and detailed information for each agricultural plot was not
available.

2.7. Erosion potential surfaces

The seasonal erosion potential surfaces were calculated as the product of the seasonal
erosivity, erodibility, slope length and steepness, and land cover and management surfaces,
on a cell by cell basis. In addition, an annual erosion potential surface was generated
following the same procedure but using an annual erosivity surface created by
interpolation of annual erosivity values (local polynomial interpolation, ArcGIS
Geostatistical Analyst). This annual surface allowed for comparison with published
erosion potential values under similar conditions, usually expressed on an annual basis.

2.8. Assumptions and limitations

Several assumptions were made in this analysis, such as the use of single erodibility
and land cover/management factors, which in reality vary over time. For example,
erodibility changes seasonally depending on temperature, moisture conditions, cultivation
and cultural practices (Roose and Sarrailh, 1989; Renard et al., 1997). On the other hand,
the land cover/management factor for land uses such as planted forest, coffee and pasture
varies throughout the plot cycle (higher C factor during early stages of the growing season,
when the soil is exposed). Another assumption was the consideration of a single C factor
for all plots within each land use, although they had different management levels. For
instance, at the time of field work (JuneAugust 2002), most sun coffee plots were in a
semi-abandoned state due to low international coffee prices. Nevertheless, there were still
a few plots with fertilization, weeding and pest control practices. In terms of the GIS
processing, it was assumed that topographic, erosivity, erodibility and land use conditions
within each cell (25  25 m) were uniform. Finally, rill erosion, sediment delivery and the
effects of single rainfall events were not considered as they are not modeled by RUSLE.

3. Results

The layers used to predict soil erosion potential (seasonal EI30, LS, C and K) are
presented in Fig. 3, while model results are presented in Fig. 6 (only for average soil
erodibility conditions).

3.1. Erosivity surface

Seasonal erosivity at the six pluviographic stations showed a pattern similar to rainfall,
being generally higher during the wet seasons although differences were not statistically
 94
30 Dry season EI30 Wet season EI30

50
(a) 28 00 (b)

4800
00

00
-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
26 (MJ mm ha h season ) (MJ mm ha h season )
00

0 1 2 3 4
km

N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

420

46
24

440

00
22 00

4000

0
00

0
(c) (d) (e)

LS factor K average factor C factor

0 - 25 0.0010 - NF,PF
Urban area 0.0009
25 - 50 0.0010 Excluded rural 0.0028 - PASHR Excluded rural
50 - 75 0.0011 land uses 0.0100 - PA land uses
>75 0.0013 Urban area 0.0300 - COSSH Urban area
0.0350 - COS

Fig. 3. Surfaces used to calculate the soil erosion potential of the basin. (a, b) Dry and wet seasons EI30 (MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1), (c) slope length and steepness LS,
(d) average erodibility K (t ha h ha
1 MJ
1 mm
1), and (e) land cover and management C. Transverse Mercator Projection with origin at 4835V56W N and 77804V51W W,
International Spheroid 1924, Bogota Observatory Datum.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 95

significant for all stations (Table 2). Nevertheless, it was considered worthwhile to carry
out subsequent analyses at the seasonal scale to reflect the bimodal rainfall pattern
identified in long-term regional studies (Guzman and Jaramillo, 1989) and analyze its
effect on soil erosion potential. The dry seasons erosivity surface had an average value of
2599 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1. Its spatial distribution followed the regional elevation
pattern, increasing from the southwest (2103 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1) to the northeast
(3074 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1). The wet seasons erosivity surface had an average
value of 4686 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1. Its spatial pattern presented more local
influences, particularly evident in the high values towards the central and northern part of
the basin (up to 5147 MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1).

3.2. Slope length and steepness surface

The LS surface replicated the local drainage network as well as the slope gradient.
Lines of flow concentration (concave), where overland flow tends to accumulate, had the
highest LS values. On the other hand, areas of convex topography such as ridges, where
flow diverges, had low LS values. A comparison with the slope gradient map (not shown)
revealed a clear effect of steepness on the LS factor, with areas of greater slopes having
high LS values and usually corresponding to the backslopes between the summits and
drainage lines.

3.3. Erodibility surface

The correlation analysis of measured soil properties revealed that water aggregate
stability of all size classes had a significant positive correlation, but was not correlated
with infiltration (Table 3). When land uses with a large enough sample size were analyzed
separately (sun coffee, shade coffee and pasture), there was still a positive correlation
among aggregate sizes, but its strength varied among land uses (Table 3). In addition, the
water stability of 12 mm aggregates under pasture had a positive correlation with
infiltration. The general trend, however, was for water stable aggregates of all size classes

Table 2
Seasonal EI30 for pluviographic stations
Station n Seasonal EI30 (MJ mm ha
1 h
1 season
1)a
Dry season 1 Wet season 1 Dry season 2 Wet season 2
Catalina 43 1947 a 3220 b 1854 a 3345 b
Jazmn 43 3004 ab 4528 a 2242 b 4310 a
Cenicafe 43 3319 4952 3131 4670
Naranjal 43 3006 a 5183 b 3409 ab 4350 ab
Pta. Tratamiento 43 2895 a 4908 b 2566 a 4673 b
Cedral 42 2920 a 3384 a 819 b 4298 a
Values followed by different letters within the same line are significantly different from each other (a = 0.05,
TukeyKramer test). Location of stations shown in Fig. 1.
a
Dry season 1 = DecemberFebruary, Wet season 1 = MarchMay, Dry season 2 = JuneAugust, Wet season
2 = SeptemberNovember.
96 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Table 3
Significant correlation coefficients (Spearmans r) among water stable aggregates and infiltration (*a = 0.05,
**a = 0.10, n = 89)
Variable Water stable aggregates (%)
N2 mm 12 mm b1 mm
Water stable aggregates (%)
N2 mm
12 mm 0.63* (all)
0.55* (COS)
0.89* (COSSH)
0.38** (PA)
b1 mm 0.51* (all) 0.51* (all)
0.39* (COS) 0.40* (COS)
0.64* (COSSH) 0.71* (COSSH)
0.36** (PA) 0.37** (PA)
Infiltration (cm h
1) 0.19** (all) 0.19** (all)
0.55*(PA)
COS = sun coffee (n = 41), COSSH = shade coffee (n = 13) and PA= pasture (n = 23).

to be positively correlated, while little or no correlation existed between water stable

aggregates and infiltration.
Land use influenced the water stability of aggregates N2 mm and infiltration, but did
not affect the stability of smaller aggregates. Average water stability of aggregates N 2 mm
was above 80% for all land uses (Fig. 4), being greatest under planted forest (99.3%) and
lowest under shrub (82.5%). Both values may have been affected by the small number of
samples (3 and 2) and by a rocky substrate in one of the shrub sites. The same is true for
natural forest, with only 3 sampling locations and one of them on rocky substrate, with
particularly low values of water stable aggregates N2 mm (71.2% versus 100% at the other
two forest locations).
Infiltration was significantly different across two land use groups (Fig. 5a), being higher
under forests and coffee and lower under pasture and pasture-shrub. There was however,
great variability within each land use. For example, sun coffee, with 41 samples, had
infiltration values ranging from 1.2 cm h
1 to 148.5 cm h
1. Sixty-eight of the sampling
locations were within Pta. Tratamiento stations area, with a mean maximum 30-min
intensity of 28.6 mm h
1. The remaining 21 locations were assigned to Jazmn, with a mean
maximum 30-min intensity of 27.8 mm h
1. The probability of exceeding these thresholds
was affected by land use, but there was also large variability within each category (Fig. 5b).
Two properties were selected to generate the erodibility surface, water stability of
aggregates N 2 mm and infiltration. These were chosen because they did not provide
redundant information (not correlated), and were affected by land use. Since there was
large variability within each land use, particularly for infiltration, three surfaces were
generated (Table 4):

! Average erodibility: each land use had an erodibility value calculated as the product of
the average percent of water stable aggregates N 2 mm and average probability of not
exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 97

a ab aabcc abc bcd cd

100 d

Water stable aggregates >2 mm (%) 75

50

25

0
PF COS PA NF PASHR COSSH SHR

Fig. 4. Effect of land use on water stable aggregates N2 mm. All samples taken at 020 cm depth. Error bars
represent standard error. Land uses under same letter are not significantly different from each other (a = 0.10,
KruskalWallis Z-test).

! Low erodibility: each land use was assigned an erodibility value calculated as the
product of the 75th percentile for water stable aggregates N 2 mm and the 75th
percentile for probability of not exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity (high water
aggregate stability and low probability of runoff).
! High erodibility: each land use was assigned an erodibility value calculated as the
product of the 25th percentile for water stable aggregates N 2 mm and the 25th

(a) (b)
a a
500 1.0
Probability of exceeding

400 0.8
Itnfiltration (cm h-1)

ab
the infiltration rate

300 0.6
a
200 ab 0.4 c
cd
100
a 0.2
a bcd c
b b d
0 0.0
NF PF SHR COS COSSH PA PASHR PASHR PA COS NF SHR COSSH PF

Land use
Fig. 5. Effect of land use on (a) infiltration (cm h
1) and (b) probability of exceeding the maximum 30-min
intensity. Error bars represent standard deviation. Land uses under same letter are not significantly different from
each other (a = 0.10, TukeyKramer and KruskalWallis Z-test).
98 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Table 4
Values for average, low and high erodibility (K avg, K low, K high in t ha h ha
1 MJ
1 mm
1)
Land use Average erodibility Low erodibility High erodibility
WSA N 2 P Kavg WSA N 2 P Klow WSA N 2 P Khigh
Coffee-sun 95.6 0.8792 0.0010 100.0 0.9999 0.0009 93.1 0.9001 0.0010
Coffee-shade 90.7 0.9694 0.0010 99.2 0.9999 0.0009 83.9 0.9850 0.0010
Pasture 95.4 0.6637 0.0011 100.0 0.9852 0.0009 92.0 0.4204 0.0012
Pasture-shrub 92.1 0.3058 0.0013 97.0 0.7057 0.0011 84.5 0.0378 0.0014
Shrub 82.6 0.9672 0.0010 90.0 0.9999 0.0010 75.1 0.9345 0.0011
Natural forest 90.4 0.8947 0.0010 100.0 0.9999 0.0009 71.2 0.6842 0.0012
Planted forest 99.3 0.9999 0.0009 100.0 0.9999 0.0009 97.8 0.9999 0.0009
Numbers are based on water stable aggregates N2 mm (WSA N 2) and the probability ( P) that the maximum 30-
min rainfall intensity does not exceed the saturated infiltration rate.

percentile for probability of not exceeding the maximum 30-min intensity (low water
aggregate stability and high probability of runoff).

Finally, these values were scaled to a range of 0.00090.0014 t ha h ha
1 MJ
1 mm
1
found by Hincapie et al. (2000) on field runoff plots on bare soil from this same soil unit.

Fig. 6. Soil erosion potential under average erodibility conditions for the (a) dry seasons (t ha
1 year
1), (b) wet
seasons (t ha
1 season
1), and (c) annual summary (t ha
1 year
1). Categories defined by quintile values as
indicated in the legend. Transverse Mercator Projection with origin at 4835V56W N and 77804V51W W, International
Spheroid 1924, Bogota Observatory Datum.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 99

3.4. Erosion potential surfaces

Seasonal erosion potential values were grouped into five ordinal classes defined by the
average quintile value (Fig. 6a and b):

! Minimal: 00.2 t ha
1 season
1

! Low: 0.20.7 t ha
1 season
1
! Medium: 0.71.7 t ha
1 season
1
! High: 1.73.5 t ha
1 season
1
! Extreme: 3.510.0 t ha
1 season
1

Maps showed particularly well the influence of land use, topography and rainfall
seasonality, on erosion potential. In general, minimal and low erosion potential occurred in
areas under forest, shrub, and pasture-shrub, regardless of the relief and erodibility. Areas
under pasture and coffee (sun and shade) showed the combined effects of the cover
management factor and the slope length and steepness factor. Minimal and low erosion
potential was present under these land uses when the slope length and steepness factor was
also low, but increased with higher LS values. There were few cells with extreme erosion
potential in the dry seasons, and these were usually restricted to corridors along stream
channels on coffee and pasture with very high LS values. In the wet seasons, extreme
erosion potential comprised larger areas on coffee and pasture along the drainage network
(high LS values).
The annual erosion potential surface had a spatial pattern similar to the seasonal ones
(Fig. 6c). Categories were also defined by quintiles as follows:

! Minimal: 00.7 t ha
1 year
1

! Low: 0.72.7 t ha
1 year
1
! Medium: 2.77.0 t ha
1 year
1

Table 5
Land area (ha) under each erosion potential category for all model scenarios
Erodibility scenario Erosion potential category Wet seasons (ha)a Dry seasons (ha)a

1
1
t ha season Category
Average 00.7 Minimallow 1725.4 (36.4%) 2239.5 (47.2%)
0.73.5 Mediumhigh 1667.9 (35.2%) 1968.1 (41.5%)
N3.5 Extreme 1348.3 (28.4%) 534.1 (11.3%)
Low 00.7 Minimallow 1834.1 (38.7%) 2371.6 (50.0%)
0.73.5 Mediumhigh 1709.8 (36.1%) 1945.6 (41.0%)
N3.5 Extreme 1197.8 (25.3%) 424.4 (8.9%)
High 00.7 Minimallow 1693.4 (35.7%) 2211.4 (46.6%)
0.73.5 Mediumhigh 1692.4 (35.7%) 1994.6 (42.1%)
N3.5 Extreme 1355.9 (28.6%) 535.6 (11.3%)
Categories have been grouped for easiness of interpretation. Wet seasons: MarchMay and September
November. Dry seasons: DecemberFebruary and JuneAugust.
a
In parenthesis, percent out of 4742 ha (basins rural area minus discarded rural land uses and 25 m strip along
watershed divide removed during LS surface generation).
100 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

! High: 7.014.4 t ha
1 year
1

! Extreme: N14.4 t ha
1 year
1

Erosion potential was clearly affected by seasonality, and to a lesser extent by

erodibility (Table 5). There was consistently more land below the high erosion potential
category during the dry seasons. By comparison, during the wet seasons there were
between 2 and 3 times more hectares with extreme erosion potential. The effect of
erodibility was less evident. Still, under the high erodibility scenario, there was between
1.1 (wet seasons) and 1.3 (dry seasons) more land under the extreme erosion potential
category than under the low erodibility scenario.

4. Discussion

4.1. Model results

Although many assumptions were made in this study, the erosion potential values
obtained were reasonable when compared to measured soil losses from erosion plots
under similar conditions. Studies in Colombia, Venezuela and Indonesia on runoff plots
measured soil losses ranging from 0.2 to 8.9 t ha
1 year
1 in established coffee
plantations (Suarez de Castro, 1953; Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez, 1962; Ataroff and
Monasterio, 1997; Ijima et al., 2003; Table 6). These studies found that soil losses under
both coffee systems were low after the plantation became established, and that pasture
was very effective in preventing soil loss but generated greater runoff than coffee due to
lower infiltration. In addition, a large proportion of the soil loss took place during a few

Table 6
Soil losses from studies on runoff plots under similar conditions
Land use Location Plot characteristics Averagea Sourceb
Slope Measurement Area Soil loss
(%) time (years) (m2) (t ha
1 year
1)
Shade coffee Established Colombia 53 8 90 0.21.1 (a)
Established Colombia 1060 2 6000 10.4 (b)
Established Venezuela 60 2 12 0.6 (c)
Recent Colombia 45 8 120 0.64.8 (a)
Sun coffee Established Venezuela 60 2 12 1.2 (c)
Recent Venezuela 60 1 12 3.2 (c)
Recent Indonesia 27 4 108 2.08.9c (d)
Pasture Colombia 2 2500 0.5 (b)
Pasture-corn rotation Colombia 21 8 1040 34.061.4 (a)
Bare soil Colombia 21 8 30 514.0873.3 (a)
a
Ranges correspond to the minimum and maximum values from different plots.
b
(a) Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez (1962), (b) Suarez de Castro (1953), (c) Ataroff and Monasterio (1997);
(d) Ijima et al. (2003).
c
Under various treatments: tillage, no-tillage, alley cropping and no alley cropping.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 101

large and intense rainfall events, which should be kept in mind when interpreting the
average values predicted by RUSLE.
The erosion potential model for the Dosquebradas basin indicated that 50% of the area
planted in coffee had values below 9 t ha
1 year
1. The maximum value, however, was
very high, reaching 300 t ha
1 year
1. By comparison, 50% of the land on pasture was
below 2 t ha
1 year
1, and the maximum value was 134 t ha
1 year
1. Higher median
and maximum values under coffee are the product of higher C values, as well as higher
LS values related to the steeper slopes found under this land use relative to pasture (Fig.
7). Overall, a large percentage (70%) of the area analyzed was below the frequently cited
soil loss tolerance value (1011 t ha
1 year
1), described as the maximum permissible
rate of erosion at which soil fertility can be maintained over 20 to 25 years (Morgan,
1995). This tolerance value, however, varies depending on factors such as the rate of soil
formation, subsoil characteristics, and effects of erosion on soil productivity and water
quality (Wischmeier and Smith, 1965; El-Swaify and Dangler, 1982; Morgan, 1995).
Specific aspects of tropical mountainous regions that need to be considered include
rainfall aggressiveness and steep topography. Soil formation may also be limited by the
supply of parent material which is the case in the study area where soils form through
weathering of volcanic ash. Studies have identified at least six paleosols, the upper three
being younger than 10,930 F 65 years BP (Toro et al., 2001). Unfortunately, these data
are not detailed enough to infer formation rates for the most recent soil layer. Restrepo
and Kjerfve (2000) estimated an average sediment yield of 5.6 t ha
1 year
1 for the
entire Magdalena Basin of Colombia (daily data 19751995), which contains the study
area. According to this value, they placed the Magdalena as the river with highest
sediment yield along the Caribbean and Atlantic coasts of South America, even
surpassing the Amazon (1.9 t ha
1 year
1, Milliman and Syvitski, 1992). Such results

30 Land use
Coffee (sun and shade)
25
Percent of total land use area

Pasture
20

15

10

0
0-10

10-20

20-30

30-40

40-50

50-60

60-70

70-80

80-90

90-100

100-110

110-120

Slope (%)
Fig. 7. Land (%) under coffee and pasture discriminated by slope categories. Percent calculated from total land
under each land use.
102 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

suggest that a threshold lower than 10 t ha
1 year
1 may better represent the conditions
of the study area.

4.2. Relative importance of erosion factors

The strength of this model relies on the relative spatial differences rather than on exact
values. Therefore, the resulting patterns of erosion potential should indicate which factors
are more or less influential and under what conditions. The spatial distribution of the
erosion potential categories showed the effects of:

! The cover management factor, which was particularly important in areas under forest,
shrub and pasture-shrub where it minimized the effect of topography. Agricultural land
uses (coffee and pasture) showed a more dynamic interaction with topography. The
similarity of C values for shade and sun coffee lead to similar, low erosion potential
values. This was explained by both being the average over a long period (8 years);
nevertheless, the sun coffee factor was 17% higher than the shade coffee factor. This
difference came from different agricultural practices, mainly weeding with soil
disturbance in sun coffee, versus no soil disturbance under shade coffee.
! The topographic factor was reflected by the similar spatial distribution of erosion
potential (in pasture and coffee) with the LS surface. Quantification of the relation
between topography and erosion potential was performed by generating 1000 random
points within the basin coordinates, 506 of which were located in the basins rural area.
LS and erosion potential values for these points yielded correlation coefficients
(Spearman r) ranging from 0.57 to 0.59 (a = 0.01). The LS surface also showed the
effect of both subfactors, the slope steepness (S) and the contributing area (L). Slope
steepness was the major control on LS except in areas of flow concentration where L
values were very high (along stream channels).
! The effect of the erosivity factor was evident as there was more area in the extreme
erosion potential category during the wet seasons. This effect varied with land use,
affecting most areas in pasture and coffee regardless of their topography, but only areas
with high (N 25) LS values under forests, shrub and pasture-shrub.

Although there was an erodibility effect as shown by the results (Table 5), it was
spatially difficult to differentiate because it had the same spatial distribution as the cover
factor, and a very narrow numerical range.

4.3. Sources of error and assessment

In addition to the intrinsic model limitations already mentioned, each of the layers had
errors associated with its data source and generation technique. Their combined effect on
the model results would be multiplicative, since erosion potential was calculated as the
product of all layers. On the other hand, the use of local data whenever possible, instead of
extrapolations, was intended to maintain relative differences in the model outcome as close
to reality as possible. Furthermore, model results were pooled into qualitative categories in
order to keep the focus on relative differences instead of numerical values. Although it was
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 103

not possible to quantify the overall effect of each surfaces error on the model outcome, an
independent error assessment of each layer provided an idea of the uncertainty associated
with the model results.
The erosivity surfaces had a prediction error associated with the interpolation
technique, with maximum values of 43% in the wet seasons and 69% in the dry
seasons. Both of these values were returned from stations located at the edges of the
interpolation surfaces (16 km and 22 km from the watershed divide) and for this
reason were not expected to have a significant effect within the basin. The second
largest interpolation errors were in the order of 28% (wet seasons) and 24% (dry
seasons) at stations near the northern watershed divide (1.5 km and 4 km,
respectively). Over- and underprediction at these stations seemed to result from a
combination of interannual rainfall variability and local topographic effects. There was
also uncertainty associated with the low number of stations used to generate the
interpolation surface (16).
The final precision of the slope length and steepness factor surface was a function of
the accuracy of the DEM and the algorithms used to calculate flow, slope length and
slope steepness. To assess the precision of the digital contours, three random sections of
10 km2 each were printed on transparencies and overlaid on the original paper maps. A
distance of 12 mm between digitized and original contours was found in localized
sections that represented no more than 5% of the area evaluated. Finally, quantification of
the error associated with the algorithms used to generate the surface was not possible.
Nevertheless, a visual assessment of the topographic map and the LS surface indicated a
good correspondence between ridges and low LS values, and depressions and high LS
values.
The land cover and management factor surface was developed from the digital land
use map provided by CARDER (1997). Five categories were used, sun coffee, shade
coffee, pasture, pasture-shrub and shrub-forests. Error assessment of this map was carried
out in two ways. First, a visual assessment during the fieldwork of JuneAugust 2002
confirmed by interviews with local residents was used to correct a few major
inconsistencies. Second, random points were generated within the coordinates of the
study area and exported as a point layer within the GIS. Then, approximately 30 points
within each category in the land use map were compared with the actual land use in the
aerial photos used to generate the map. These photos were taken in July 1997, with a
scale of 1:21,000 to 1:22,000 (Area Metropolitana Pereira-Dosquebradas, 1997). This
assessment showed accuracies ranging from 75% (sun coffee) to 91% (pasture). The
erodibility surface was affected by the same error of the land cover surface (as it was
based on it), and by the inaccuracy of the field infiltration measurements, which were a
rough estimate.
Finally, the chosen cell size (25 m) would also affect the accuracy of model predictions.
This cell size was selected based on the original topographic and land use data. Although
there is no hard rule to determine the appropriate cell size, a common procedure is to set it
at half the distance of the smallest feature to be represented. The smallest topographic
features (e.g. hilltops) and land use patches (shade coffee) had dimensions close to 50 m,
so the cell size was set to 25 m. A visual assessment of the elevation and land use grids
indicated that this resolution adequately represented contours and land use polygons.
104 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Model predictions, however, would have the limitations inherent to the original data,
particularly topography with a fairly coarse scale (1:25,000) for a landscape where relief is
highly variable.

4.4. Implication for current land use change trends

During the fieldwork of the summer of 2002, two major trends on coffee plots were
observed. First, many were completely abandoned, or received few agricultural practices
(no fertilization or harvesting). Second, several pasture areas had been recently (past 5
years) established from previous coffee plots. Conversations with local environmental
officers confirmed that one of the major land use changes at the regional scale was the
conversion of coffee to pasture (Orozco, 2002, pers. commun.). Data from other coffee
producing municipalities throughout the Colombian Andes show this same trend starting
in the late 1990s (Guhl, 2003, pers. commun.).
To understand the effects of this land use change on erosion potential, two model
scenarios were run based on the current distribution of land use and topography. The
current land use distribution has pasture areas on lower slopes than coffee, with
approximately half of the pasture on slopes lower than 20% (Fig. 7). Accordingly, the
modeled scenarios included (a) conversion of sun and shade coffee plots on land with
slopes lower than 20% to pasture, and (b) conversion of sun and shade coffee plots on
slopes lower than 50% to pasture. The model was then run for the wet and dry seasons,
with average soil erodibility conditions. Results showed that under both scenarios and for
both seasons, the percent of land in the minimallow (b0.7 t ha
1 season
1) erosion

Dry season Wet season

70

60 Land use scenario

Percent of analyzed area

current
50 coffee on slopes lower
than 20% to pasture
40
coffee on slopes lower
than 50% to pasture
30

20

10

0
Minimal-low

Medium-high

Minimal-low

Medium-high
Extreme

Extreme

Erosion potential category

Fig. 8. Effect of coffee conversion to pasture on seasonal soil erosion potential (t ha
1 season
1) under average
erodibility conditions.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 105

potential categories increased while that in the extreme category (N 3.5 t ha
1 season
1)
decreased (Fig. 8). They also suggested that the protective effect of the pasture cover
(lower C value) would override its higher erodibility (higher K value due to lower
infiltration). Other studies at the runoff plot and basin level have shown minimal erosion
potential under well managed pasture (Suarez de Castro and Rodrguez, 1962; Veloz and
Logan, 1988; Mati et al., 2000). On the other hand, if water movement, sediment delivery
and land use spatial distribution were considered, results may differ. Although increased
runoff generation was indirectly included in the erodibility factor, its effect on soil
detachment from neighboring cells and sediment delivery to streams was not analyzed.

5. Summary and conclusions

The modeling of soil erosion potential for this basin provided several insights into the
interactions among erosion factors in a tropical, mountainous environment. The cover and
management factor was particularly important in areas under forest, shrub and pasture-
shrub. Its numerical value for these covers was so low that the resulting erosion potential
was low regardless of the topography and erosivity. This point should be kept in mind
when considering areas for conservation. For example, two of the sampled forest areas
were located on very steep slopes, with thin soils underlaid by weathered, fragmented
bedrock. Under such conditions, forest would probably be the only appropriate cover to
maintain soil stability. The influence of topography was evident in areas with agricultural
land uses (coffee and pasture). Land use conversion to less protective covers such as
annual crops, would require use of soil conservation measures if the impact of topography
and climate on erosion potential is to remain minimized.
Modeling of land use change scenarios that are likely to happen given the current
trends, indicated that the erosion potential of the basin would decrease as a result of coffee
conversion to pasture. These results must be interpreted in the context of other issues such
as the gradual deterioration of soil structure under pasture, greater sediment production
due to higher runoff (associated with pasture), and socioeconomic effects. Major changes
on labor availability and land tenure may be expected as coffee usually requires intensive
labor and is planted on smaller plots (b 3 ha for most farms at the state level; FNC, 1997)
compared to pasture.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank A. Jaramillo from CENICAFE for the pluviographic data, R.
Ariza for the information on local cultivation practices, G. Weesies for the C factor values
for the coffee systems and J. Orozco from CARDER for the digital topographic and land
use data. Thanks also to P. Waylen and J. Southworth for their valuable comments on this
manuscript. Funds for this study were provided by the Tropical Conservation and
Development Program and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences of the University of
Florida, the Colombian Institute for Science and Technology COLCIENCIAS, the Tinker
Foundation and LASPAU.
106 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

References

Angima, S.D., Stott, D.E., ONeill, M.K., Ong, C.K., Weesies, G.A., 2003. Soil erosion prediction using RUSLE
for central Kenyan highland conditions. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 97, 295 308.
Area Metropolitana Pereira-Dosquebradas, 1997. Fotos aereas Municipo de Dosquebradas, scale 1:21,000
1:22,000. Pereira, Colombia.
Arshad, M.A., Lowery, B., Grossman, B., 1996. Physical tests for monitoring soil quality. In: Doran, J.W., Jones,
A.J. (Eds.), Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, Special Publication Soil Science Society of America, vol. 49.
Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 123 141.
Ataroff, M., Monasterio, M., 1997. Soil erosion under different management of coffee plantations in the
Venezuelan Andes. Soil Technology 11, 95 108.
Barthes, B., Roose, E., 2002. Aggregate stability as an indicator of soil susceptibility to runoff and erosion;
validation at several levels. Catena 47, 133 149.
Barthes, B., Azontonde, A., Boli, B.Z., Prat, C., Roose, E., 2000. Field-scale run-off and erosion in relation to
topsoil aggregate stability in three tropical regions (Benin, Cameroon, Mexico). European Journal of Soil
Science 51, 485 495.
Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) y Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente
(PNUMA), 1998. Atlas de Indicadores Ambientales y de Sustentabilidad para America Latina y el Caribe.
Cali, Colombia.
Corporacion Autonoma Regional de Risaralda (CARDER), 1997. Informacion digital Municipio de
Dosquebradas, escala 1:25,000. Pereira, Colombia.
Desmet, P.J.J., Govers, G., 1996. A GIS procedure for automatically calculating the USLE LS factor on
topographically complex landscape units. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51, 427 433.
Dias, A.S., Silva, J.R.C., 2003. Rainfall erosivity in Fortaleza, Ceara state, Brazil. I. Distribution, probability of
occurrence and return period1st approximation. Revista Brasileira de Ciencias Solo 27, 335 345.
Digital Chart of the World (DCW), 1992. Digital chart of the world layer interface for Colombia. Penn State
University Libraries. http://www.maproom.psu.edu/dcw/. Accessed in August 2004.
El-Swaify, S.A., Dangler, E.W., 1977. Erodibilities of selected tropical soils in relation to structural and
hydrologic parameters. In: Foster, G.R. (Ed.), Soil Erosion: Prediction and Control. Soil Conservation Society
of America, Ankeny, IA, pp. 105 114.
El-Swaify, S.A., Dangler, E.W., 1982. Rainfall erosion in the tropics: a state of the art. In: Kussow, W., El-Swaify,
S.A., Mannering, J. (Eds.), Soil Erosion and Conservation in the Tropics, American Society of Agronomy and
Soil Science Society of America Special Publication, vol. 43. American Society of Agronomy: Soil Science
Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 1 25.
Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (FNC), 1997. Encuesta Nacional de Cafeteros SICA. Federacion
Nacional de Cafeteros, Bogota, Colombia.
Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (FNC), 2000. Cartilla cafetera. Comite Departamental de
Cafeteros del Valle del Cauca, Cali, Colombia.
Guzman, O., Jaramillo, A., 1989. Estudio climatico de Risaralda y Quindo. Boletn Tecnico Cenicafe 15, 1 64.
Hincapie, E., Rivera, J.H., Obando, F.H., 2000. Determinacion del factor erodabilidad de un andisol en cuatro
localidades de la zona cafetera Colombiana. X Congreso Colombiano de Ciencia del Suelo, Medelln,
Colombia.
Ijima, M., Izumi, Y., Yuliadi, E., Afandi, S., Utomo, M., 2003. Erosion control on a steep sloped coffee field in
Indonesia with alley cropping, intercropped vegetables, and no-tillage. Plant Production Science 6, 224 229.
Instituto Geografico Agustn Codazzi (IGAC), 1988. Estudio General de Suelos del Departamento de Risaralda.
Ministerio de Hacienda y Credito Publico, Bogota, Colombia.
Keersebilck, N.C., 1990. Erosion control in the tropics. In: De Boodt, M.F., Hayes, M.H.B., Herbillon, A. (Eds.),
Soil Colloids and their Associations in Aggregates. Plenum Press, New York, NY, pp. 567 576.
Lal, R., 2003. Soil erosion and the global carbon budget. Environmental International 29, 437 450.
Liu, Q.Q., Chen, L., Li, J.C., 2001. Influences of slope gradient on soil erosion. Applied Mathematics and
Mechanics 22, 510 519.
Lufafa, A., Tenywa, M.M., Isabirye, M., Majaliwa, M.J.G., Woomer, P.L., 2003. Prediction of soil erosion in a Lake
Victoria basin catchment using a GIS-based universal soil loss model. Agricultural Systems 76, 883 894.
 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108 107

Mati, B.M., Morgan, R.P.C., Gichuki, F.N., Quinton, J.N., Brewer, T.R., Liniger, H.P., 2000. Assessment of
erosion hazard with the USLE and GIS: a case study of the Upper Ewaso Ngiro North basin of Kenya.
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 2, 78 86.
McCool, D.K., Brown, L.C., Foster, G.R., Mutchler, C.K., Meyer, L.D., 1987. Revised slope steepness factor
for the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 30,
1387 1396.
Milliman, J.D., Syvitski, J.P.M., 1992. Geomorphic tectonic control of sediment transport to the ocean: the
importance of small mountainous rivers. Journal of Geology 100, 525 544.
Millward, A.A., Mersey, J.E., 1999. Adapting the RUSLE to model soil erosion potential in a mountainous
tropical watershed. Catena 38, 109 129.
Moguel, P., Toledo, V.M., 1999. Biodiversity conservation in traditional coffee systems of Mexico. Conservation
Biology 13, 11 21.
Moore, D., Wilson, J.P., 1992. Length-slope factors for the revised universal soil loss equation: simplified method
of estimation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 47, 423 428.
Morgan, R.P.C., 1995. Soil Erosion and Conservation. John Wiley & Sons, Essex, England.
Muller-Samann, K.M., 1999. Conservacion de suelos y aguas en la Zona Andina: hacia un concepto integral con
mas interaccion, mas adopcion y mas impacto. In: Muller-Samann, K.M., Restrepo, J.M. (Eds.),
Conservacion de Suelos y Aguas en la Zona Andina. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Cali,
Colombia, pp. 9 20.
Nearing, M.A., 1997. A single, continuous function for slope steepness influence on soil erosion. Soil Science
Society of America Journal 61, 917 919.
Oldeman, L.R., Hakkeling, R.T.A., Sombroek, W.G., 1991. World Map of the Status of Human-Induced Soil
Degradation. International Soil Reference and Information CenterUnited Nations Environmental
Programme, Wageningen, Netherlands.
Perfecto, I., Rice, R.A., Greenberg, R., Van der Voort, M.E., 1996. Shade coffee: a disappearing refuge for
biodiversity. Bioscience 46, 598 608.
Quinn, P.F., Beven, K.J., Chevallier, P., Planchon, O., 1991. The prediction of hillslope flow paths for distributed
hydrologic modelling using digital terrain models. Hydrological Processes 5, 59 79.
Renard, K.G., Foster, G.R., Weesies, G.A., McCool, D.K., Yoder, D.C., 1997. Predicting soil erosion by water: a
guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). USDA Handbook, vol.
703. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Restrepo, J.D., Kjerfve, B., 2000. Magdalena river: interannual variability (19751995) and revised water
discharge and sediment load estimates. Journal of Hydrology 235, 137 149.
Rivera, J.H., Lal, R., Amezquita, E., Mesa, O., Chaves, B., 1998. Erodabilidad de cinco suelos de la zona cafetera
central Colombiana mediante simulacion de lluvias. Cenicafe 49, 197 210.
Roose, E.J., 1977. Use of the universal soil loss equation to predict erosion in West Africa. In: Foster, G.R. (Ed.),
Soil Erosion: Prediction and Control. Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, IA, pp. 60 74.
Roose, E.J., Sarrailh, M., 1989. Erodibilite de quelques sols tropicaux. Cahiers ORSTOM. Serie Pedologie 25,
7 30.
Santos, N., Azevedo, M., 2001. A new procedure to estimate the RUSLE EI30 index, based on monthly rainfall
data and applied to the Algarve region, Portugal. Journal of Hydrology 250, 12 18.
Suarez de Castro, F., 1953. Perdidas de suelo y agua en un cafetal y en un potrero. Boletn Tecnico Federacion
Nacional de Cafeteros 1, 1 13.
Suarez de Castro, F., Rodrguez, A., 1962. Investigaciones sobre la erosion y la conservacion de suelos en
Colombia. Federacion Nacional de Cafeteros, Bogota, Colombia.
Toro, G., Hermelin, M., Poupeau, G., 2001. Depositos de los ultimos 40,000 A B.P en el Departamento de
Risaralda, Colombia. UTP Universidad Tecnologica de Pereira and GTZ Cooperacion Alemana al Desarrollo,
Suelos del eje cafetero. Fondo Editorial, Pereira, Colombia, pp. 26 31.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1999. Soil quality test kit guide. Web Site: http://
soils.usda.gov/sqi/soil_quality/assessment/kit2.html. Accessed in March 2002.
Veloz, R.A., Logan, T.J., 1988. Steepland erosion research in the Dominican Republic. In: Rimwanich, S. (Ed.),
Land Conservation for Future Generations Proceedings of the 5th International Soil Conservation Conference,
Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 991 1000.
108 N. Hoyos / Catena 63 (2005) 85108

Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1965. Predicting rainfall-erosion losses from cropland east of the Rocky
Mountainsguide for selection of practices for soil and water conservation. USDA Handbook, vol. 282. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. USDA
Handbook, vol. 537. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Yu, B., 1998. Rainfall erosivity and its estimation for Australias tropics. Australian Journal of Soil Research 36,
143 165.