Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Vegetation-based slope stabilisation depends on coupled mechanical and hydraulic processes that vary with soil texture and depth. This study linked a five-month long, 0.5 m column experiment to annual two-dimensional transient seepage and analytical infinite-slope modelling to quantify how alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and a mycorrhiza-containing formulation affect shallow root-zone stability in silty clay (SC) and silty sand (SS). Eighteen columns (n = 3 per soil–treatment combination) received unplanted control (C), alfalfa (A), or alfalfa plus mycorrhiza formulation (A + MF). Biomass, saturated hydraulic conductivity (ks), and saturated direct-shear response at six depths were measured. Relative to A, A + MF increased recovered root dry mass by 24.5% in SC and 53.2% in SS, and ks by 46.6% and 47.4%. Factorial ANOVA detected a soil × treatment interaction for ks (p = 0.00052), but not biomass. Exponential apparent-cohesion profiles separated reinforcement amplitude from depth persistence; fitted decay depths for A/A + MF were 0.167/0.176 m in SC and 0.064/0.22 m in SS. The measured mechanical and hydraulic parameters were applied to a 365-day model of a representative 1V:3H natural infinite slope. All planted cases retained higher annual minimum root-zone factors of safety than their controls, but retention, uptake and storm-timing sensitivities changed the A versus A + MF ranking. Reinforcement magnitude, depth persistence, and soil-specific hydrology should therefore be represented together when evaluating biologically treated shallow slopes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: