Error in Figures
In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Figure 7 as published. The total soil loss results were not correct due to an error in the conversion of the data from Kg/m2·s to t ha−1 year−1. The corrected Figure 7 appears below.
Figure 7.
Estimation of the total soil loss (t ha−1 year−1) in the three models (1950, 2020, and AFS). The simulation indicates that replacing current agro-pastoral land management with agroforestry systems would reduce the soil loss by 40%. Images in .tiff format covering the entire study area are provided in the Supplementary Materials.
In the original publication, there was a mistake in Figure 8 as published. The total soil loss results were not correct due to an error in the conversion of the data from Kg/m2·s to t ha−1 year−1. The corrected Figure 8 appears below.
Figure 8.
Estimation of the total soil loss (t ha−1 year−1) in Model “2050LU20” and in Model “2050AFS” considering the rainfall erosivity projections for the year 2050. The simulation indicates that restoring agroforestry systems would reduce the soil loss of rural area by 36%. Images in .tiff format covering the entire study area are provided in the Supplementary Materials.
Error in Table
In the original publication, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. The total soil loss results indicated in Table 2 are not correct due to an error in the conversion of the data from Kg/m2·s to t ha−1 year−1. Furthermore, for the sake of clarity, ‘soil loss’ indicates the resulting amount of soil eroded/deposited in the area. Positive numbers indicate depositions, while negative numbers indicate erosion. The corrected Table 2 appears below.
Table 2.
Simulated soil loss (i.e., the result of erosion and deposition processes) (t ha−1 year−1) in the three models (“1950”, “2020”, and “AFS”) for each land-use type and totals. Positive numbers indicate depositions, while negative numbers indicate erosion.
General Clarification: As suggested by the developers of r.landscape.evol, the USPED equation is best suited for modeling erosion and deposition on hillslopes and small gullies. However, it tends to significantly overpredict erosion/deposition in channels and streams. Nevertheless, the research goal was to display the trend variation of erosion/deposition processes according to different Land Use/Land Cover scenarios. In this regard, the r.landscape.evol module yielded invaluable results regarding the potential benefits of restoring historic agroforestry systems in the area to mitigate soil erosion processes.
The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
Reference
- Brandolini, F.; Compostella, C.; Pelfini, M.; Turner, S. The Evolution of Historic Agroforestry Landscape in the Northern Apennines (Italy) and Its Consequences for Slope Geomorphic Processes. Land 2023, 12, 1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).