SSSAJ Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 18:195-199 (1954)
© 1954 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Arkley, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, H. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Arkley, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, H. C.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Arkley, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, H. C.

The Origin of Mima Mound (Hogwallow) Microrelief in the Far Western States1

Rodney J. Arkley and Herrick C. Brown2

ABSTRACT

The origin of the mound microrelief known by such names as "hogwallows," "pimple mounds" or "mima mounds" has long been a mystery; although many solutions have been proposed, none has yet received widespread acceptance.

During the course of the soil surveys of eastern Merced and Stanislaus Counties of California, where mound microrelief is widespread, the phenomenon was studied over a period of eight years. All known theories were evaluated and compared with the evidence which could be observed in the field. The evidence includes the nature of the mounds such as shape, size, internal structure, distribution of gravel, the burrows of ants and rodents; the distribution of the microrelief with respect to soil types and the pattern of occurrence of mounds under various conditions.

The theories of origin which were tested included erosional theories based on wind action and water action, fluviatile, submarine and sub-lacustrine currents; eruptional theories suggesting gas-vents, sand boils and hydrostatic pressure; and biological theories based upon the activity of ants, ground squirrels and pocket gophers.

It is concluded that the evidence points clearly to a biological explanation, and that the pocket gopher is responsible for Mima mound microrelief.


NOTES

1 Contribution from Soils Department, University of California, Berkeley. Presented before Division V, Soil Science Society of America, Nov. 18, 1953, Dallas, Tex.

2 Assistant Specialist, U. of Calif., and Assoc. Manager, Prudential Ins. Co. of America, Oakland, Calif.

Received for publication December 2, 1953.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1954 by the Soil Science Society of America.