{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027900146842878122, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010279001468428781, 'mean_word_length': 4.662049861495845, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EFFECTS OF WETTING BY SPRAY ON CONCENTRATED FLOW EROSION AND INTAKE RATE

When water flows in dry rills (or furrows), fast wetting and aggregates slaking occur. Conversely, when rain wets the surface of the soil before applying concentrated flow, slow wetting precedes the concentrated flow, and less aggregate disintegration occurs. It is hypothesized that slow wetting by tap water results in less concentrated flow erosion, and less effect of interrupted flow on erosion and intake rate (IR). The objectives of this study were to (i) investigate the effects of wetting rate (WR) by spray and type of flow (continuous and interrupted flow) on IR and soil loss in concentrated flow, and (ii) compare the impact of wetting by spray with that of wetting the soil by concentrated flow on IR and soil loss in subsequent concentrated flow. Two soils, silt loam and clay, were packed in 0.5-m-long, 0.047-m-wide, and 0.12-m-deep flumes, and exposed to 3 and 4 WR by tap water spray (electrical conductivity of 0.95 dS m−1 and mist size drops ranging in intensity between 2.5 and 300 mm h−1) before the application of concentrated flow. Increasing spray WR decreased IR in the clay and had no effect in the silt loam. Soil erosion in continuous flow increased steeply with the increase in WR in both soils. Interrupted flow in the clay tended to yield higher cumulative infiltration compared with continuous flow. Conversely, in the silt loam, interrupted flow had no effect on cumulative intake. Interrupted flow was not effective in reducing erosion in both soils wet by spray. Comparing spray wetting with concentrated flow wetting, wetting of the dry soil with concentrated flow resulted in much higher soil loss. In addition, the effect of interrupted flow on soil loss was more pronounced in the concentrated flow wetting. The relation between WR, flow type, and soil properties with respect to their effects on erosion and IR was explained by the effect of clay content on aggregate stability and the effect of WR on aggregate disintegration.