Estimating the Soil Loss Tolerable (T-value) Using Linear and Regression Tree Methods

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• Y. Ostovari ¹
• S.A.A. Mousavi ¹
• H. Mozaffari ²

¹ Shiraz University

² Shiraz University,

https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.v34i1.82129

Abstract

Introduction: Soil erosion is one of the most important and serious threats to food security and as a consequence of human life. In order to perform soil protection activities against soil erosion, knowledge about the amount of soil loss tolerable is very important. In fact, the soil loss tolerable is the potential for soil erosion, loss of productivity and lost production, and the final criterion for controlling soil erosion and degradation of land. Soil thickness methods, particularly Skidmore equation, based on their ability to estimate the tolerable amount of soil loss have been widely used. In the mathematical function developed by Skidmore based on soil thickness, the soil loss tolerable is calculated based on the soil's current depth, the lowest and maximum soil depth for sustained growth of crops, and the upper limit of tolerable erosion in accordance with the environment. Since the determination of soil loss tolerance by soil thickness method and the Skidmore equation requires time, cost and energy, the researchers have tried to estimate the soil tolerance is supported by regression methods using pedotransfer functions and easily available soil properties. Therefore, the present study was carried out with the aims of determining the tolerable tolerance of soil loss by thickness method and the development of regression pedotransfer functions for estimating this property in the upstream of the dam.
Materials and Methods: The study is place on Kamfiruz Watershed with an area of 422 km2, an average annual precipitation of 443 mm and an average annual temperature of 14 °C. It is closed to the Dorudzan Dam sub-basins and is considered as one of the five parts of Marvdasht plain in Fars province. For this work, 60 soil profiles were excavated by excavating machine. In addition to measuring the depth of soil, some physico-chemical soil properties were measured from the surface layer (0-30 cm) including; soil texture, organic matter, salinity, percentage calcium carbonate, mean weight diameter in the laboratory and filed. In order to develop regression models for estimating the tolerable soil loss, information from 60 soil profiles was divided into two data-sets. One set of the data with 42 samples (70% of whole samples) was used for developing the models and another set of the data with 18 soil samples (30% of whole samples) was used for validation. Multiple linear regression was used to develop the linear models. The same soil properties used in the multiple regression method were considered as inputs in the tree regression method to estimate the tolerable amount of loss.
Results and Discussion: The results showed that the minimum and maximum Z1 parameters (the lowest soil depth for stable growth of crops in the study area) were considered as 0.25 and 0.51 m based on the current depth of soil. Organic matter of the soils with the highest standardized coefficient (Beta = 0.44) and the highest correlation (-0.77) with soil loss tolerance was the most important soil properties for estimating the soil loss tolerance. In the regression model, only the coefficients of four characteristics of permeability, soil aggregate stability, pH and organic matter appeared among the soil grazing characteristics and entered into the model. Based on the evaluation statistic, tree regression method with the highest determination coefficient in both calibration data sets (R2 = 0.96) and validation (R2 = 0.78) and the lowest error value in the validation data (RMSE= 0.29 ton ha-1 year-1) and validation (RMSE = 0.125 ton ha-1 year-1) were more efficient than the multiple regression method in estimating the tolerable soil loss.
Conclusion: Soil loss tolerance was estimated using regression methods (multiple linear regression and regression tree) in Doroudzan Watershed, Fars province. The soil loss tolerable determined using Skidmore method, was 1.04 tons per hectare per year ranging from 0.29 to 2.25 ton ha-1 year-1. The soils of this area are slightly deep and their depth varies from 0.4 m in the marginal areas in the upstream parts of the catchment area of the dam and the slope of mountain up to 2 meters in the center of the plain with agricultural lands uses. In general, the tree regression method had a better performance than linear regression method for estimating the soil loss tolerance based on the statistical indices.

Keywords

• Calcareous soils
• Erosion
• Multiple regression
• Skidmore method
• Soil erodibility
• Transfer functions
• Tree regression

References

1- Abbasi Y., Ghanbarian-Alavijeh B., Liaghat A.M., and Shorafa M. 2011. Evaluation of pedotransfer functions for estimating soil water retention curve of saline and saline-alkali soils of Iran. Pedosphere 21(2) :230–237.

2- Ball D.F. 1964. Loss-on-ignition as an estimate of organic matter and organic carbon in non-calcareous soils. Journal of Soil Science 15: 84–92.

3- Bazargan Lari A. 2012. Applied Statistics. Shiraz University press, Shiraz, Iran. (in Persian)

4- Carlos B., Reyes J., and Magri A. 2012. Water erosion prediction using the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE) in a GIS framework, central Chile. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 70(1): 159-169.

5- Chandel S., and Hada M.S. 2017. Assessment of soil loss tolerance. International Journal of Farm Sciences 7(1): 101-109.

6- Dehghani S., Ghorbani-Dashtaki S., and Khodaverdilu H. 2012. Comparing the Performance of Multiple Linear Regression and Regression Tree to Predict Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity and the Inverse of Macroscopic Capillary Length. Iranian Water Rresearch Journal 9: 199-210.

7- Duan X., Shi X., Li Y., Rong L., and Fen D. 2017. A new method to calculate soil loss tolerance for sustainable soil productivity in farmland. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 37(2): 2-13.

8- FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2015. Soil erosion: the greatest challenge for sustainable soil management. Edition, Design & Publication Leadell Pennock (University of Saskatchewan, Canada). 104 pages.

9- Ghafari H., Gorji M., ArabKhedri M., Rooshani Gh., and Heidari A. 2018. Evaluation of soil loss tolerance via soil productivity and quality at a watershed scale: Haji-Ghushan watershed, Golestan province. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research 48: 985-994. (In Persian)

10- Ghorbani-Dashtaki S., and Homaee M. 2004. Using geometric mean particle diameter to derive point and continuous pedotransfer functions. In N. Whrle and M. Scheurer (Eds.). International Conference, 4-12 Sep. 2004. EuroSoil, Freiburg, Germany.

11- Gohardoust A., Saad-o-din A., Onagh M., and Najafinejad A. 2011. Application of Geographic informations system and Skidmore equation in determination of soil erosion limit for programming soil conservation actions in Chehel Chai- Golestan province. 1st National Conference on Modern Agricultural Science and Technologies, 10-12 Sep. 2011. Zanjan University, Zanjan, Iran. (In Persian)

12- Khajehpour M.R. 2014. Principles and Fundamentals of Crop Production. Jahad Daneshgahi press, Isfehan, Iran. (In Persian)

13- Kuznetsov M.S., and Abdulkhanova D.R. 2013. Soil loss tolerance in the central chernozemic region of the European part of Russia. Eurasian Soil Science 46(7): 802-809.

14- Lakaria B.L., Biswas H., and Mandal D. 2008. Soil loss tolerance values for different physiographic region of Central India. Soil Use and Management 24: 192–198.

15- McKenzie N.J., Jacquier D.W.1997. Improving the Field Estimation of SaturatedHydraulic Conductivity in Soil Survey. Aust. Journal Soil Research 35: 803-825.

16- Ostovari Y., Asgari K., and Motaghian H.R. 2015. Assessment of tree and multiple linear regressions in estimation of cation exchange capacity. Journal of Water and Soil 29: 683-694. (In Persian)

17- Ostovari Y., Ghorbani-Dashtaki S., Bahrami H., Naderi M., Dematte J., and Kerry R. 2016. Modification of the USLE K factor for soil erodibility assessment on calcareous soils in Iran. Geomorphology 273: 385-395.

18- Pachepsky Y., and Rawls W.J. 2006. Hydropedology and pedotransfer functions. Geoderma 131(3–4): 308-316.

19- Pimental D. 2006. Soil erosion: A food and environmental threat. Environment, Development and Sustainability 8: 119-137.

20- Rawls W.J., and Pachepsky Y. 2002. Data mining and exploration techniques, p. 21-31. In Y. Pachepsky, and M.G. Schaap (eds.). Developments in Soil Science. Chap. 2. Vol. 30. Development of pedotransfer functions in soil hydrology, Elsevier Science.

21- Refahi H.Gh. 2006. Water Erosion and Conservation. University of Tehran Press, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)

22- Rusanov A.M. 2006. The integrated assessment of soil erosion resistance. Eurasian Soil Science 39(8): 879-884.

23- Sadeghi S.H.R. 2017. Soil erosion in Iran: state of the art, tendency, and solutions. Agriculture and Forestry 63(3): 33-37.

24- Sadeghi S.H.R., Moatamednia M., and Behzadfar M. 2011. Spatial and temporal variations in the rainfall erosivity factor in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 13: 451-464.

25- Santos F.L., Reis J.L., Martins O.C., Castanheira N.L., and Serralheiro R.P. 2003. Comparative assessment of infiltration, runoff and erosion of sprinkler irrigated soils. Biosystems Engineering 86: 355–364.

26- Skidmore E.L. 1984. Soil loss tolerance. p. 87–93. In M.K. David (ed.), Determinants of soil loss tolerance. ASA Spec. Publication., vol. 45. ASA, Madison.

27- Stamey W.L., and Smith R.M. 1964. A conservation definition of erosion tolerance. Soil Science 97: 183–186.

28- Stine R. 1995. Graphical Interpretation of Variance Inflation Factors. The American Statistician 49(1): 53-56

29- Tejada M., and Gonzalez J.L. 2006. The relationships between erodibility and erosion in a soil tratedwith two organic amendments. Soil and Tillage Research 91: 186–198.

30- Vaezi A.R., Bahrami H.A., Sadeghi S.H.R., and Mahdian M.H. 2010. Spatial variability of soil erodibility factor (K) of the USLE in North West of Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 12: 241–252.

31- Vaezi A.R., Sadeghi S.H.R., Bahrami H.A., and Mahdian M.H. 2008. Spatial variations of runoff in a part of calcareous soils of semi-arid region in North West of Iran. Agriculture and Natural Resources 15: 213–225.

32- Wischmeier W.H., and Mannering J.V.1969. Relation of soil properties to its erodibility. Proceedings. Soil Science Society of America 33: 131–137.

33- Xingwu D., Xie Y., Liu B., Liu G., Feng Y., and Gao X. 2012. Soil loss tolerance in the black soil region of northeast China. Journal of Geographical Sciences 22(4): 737-751.

34- Yu D.S., Shi X.Z., and Weindorf D.C. 2006. Relationship between permeability and erodibility of cultivated Acrisols and Cambisols in subtropical China. Pedosphere 16: 304-311.