اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات282
تعداد نشریات سازمان80
تعداد شماره‌ها3,242
تعداد مقالات35,855
تعداد مشاهده مقاله54,150,658
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله93,342,745
بامری, ابوالفضل, خرمالی, فرهاد, کیانی, فرشاد, شهریاری, علی, پهلوان راد, محمدرضا. (1405). مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری خاک با استفاده از روش یادگیری ماشین و داده‌های مکانی چندمنبعی در دشت سیستان. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 40(2), 235-261. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2026.372940.820
ابوالفضل بامری; فرهاد خرمالی; فرشاد کیانی; علی شهریاری; محمدرضا پهلوان راد. "مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری خاک با استفاده از روش یادگیری ماشین و داده‌های مکانی چندمنبعی در دشت سیستان". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 40, 2, 1405, 235-261. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2026.372940.820
بامری, ابوالفضل, خرمالی, فرهاد, کیانی, فرشاد, شهریاری, علی, پهلوان راد, محمدرضا. (1405). 'مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری خاک با استفاده از روش یادگیری ماشین و داده‌های مکانی چندمنبعی در دشت سیستان', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 40(2), pp. 235-261. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2026.372940.820
بامری, ابوالفضل, خرمالی, فرهاد, کیانی, فرشاد, شهریاری, علی, پهلوان راد, محمدرضا. مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری خاک با استفاده از روش یادگیری ماشین و داده‌های مکانی چندمنبعی در دشت سیستان. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1405; 40(2): 235-261. doi: 10.22092/ijsr.2026.372940.820

مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری خاک با استفاده از روش یادگیری ماشین و داده‌های مکانی چندمنبعی در دشت سیستان

پژوهش های خاک
مقاله 7، دوره 40، شماره 2، شهریور 1405، صفحه 235-261    اصل مقاله (2.32 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/ijsr.2026.372940.820
نویسندگان
ابوالفضل بامری1؛ فرهاد خرمالی1؛ فرشاد کیانی1؛ علی شهریاری* 2؛ محمدرضا پهلوان راد3
1گروه علوم مهندسی خاک، دانشکده مهندسی آب و خاک، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران.
2گروه علوم مهندسی خاک، دانشکده مهندسی آب و خاک، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران.
3بخش تحقیقات خاک و آب، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان گلستان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، گرگان، ایران.
چکیده
ارزیابی مخاطرات محیطی و مدیریت پایدار سرزمین، مستلزم شناخت دقیق فرسایش‌پذیری خاک است که این امر، بهره‌گیری از رویکردهای نوین در چارچوب نقشه‌برداری رقومی خاک را می‌طلبد. در این پژوهش، هدف مدل‌سازی مکانی شاخص‌های فرسایش‌پذیری آبی (K) و بادی (EF) در دشت سیستان با به‌کارگیری الگوریتم‌های یادگیری ماشین و سه گروه متغیر محیطی (خصوصیات خاک، شاخص‌های ژئومورفومتریک و داده‌های سنجش ‌از دور) بوده است. بدین منظور، ۱۲۰۰ نمونه خاک سطحی گردآوری شد. در حالی که ضریب فرسایش‌پذیری آبی (K) بر اساس سه معادله تجربی متداول محاسبه شد، شاخص فرسایش‌پذیری بادی (EF) با استفاده از روش استاندارد تعیین گردید. سپس، این مقادیر نقطه‌ای با به‌کارگیری چهار الگوریتم یادگیری ماشین شامل جنگل تصادفی، کیوبیست، ماشین بردار پشتیبان و درخت رگرسیون، به نقشه‌های پیوسته مکانی تبدیل شدند. نتایج، نشان‌دهنده همبستگی منفی و معنی‌دار میان ضرایب K و شاخص EF است. همچنین، همبستگی منفی مشاهده‌شده میان شاخص‌های طیفی و درصد رس، برخلاف فرضیات اولیه، ناشی از تخریب پوشش گیاهی تحت تأثیر انباشت شوری در خاک‌های ریزبافت منطقه ارزیابی شد. حساسیت بالای معادلات KEPIC و KShSm به متغیرهای بافتی در شرایط این منطقه، ضمن ایجاد سوگیری آماری، ضرورت واسنجی مجدد آن‌ها را آشکار ساخت. در پیش‌بینی مکانی EF، KEPIC و KShSm، مدل کیوبیست برتری داشت و برای KUSLE، مدل جنگل تصادفی عملکرد بهتری نشان داد. در نهایت، یافته‌های این مطالعه بیانگر کارآمدی الگوریتم‌های یادگیری ماشین در نقشه‌برداری رقومی خاک برای مدل‌سازی مکانی فرسایش‌پذیری در مناطق خشک و کم‌ارتفاع نظیر دشت سیستان بوده و مبنایی برای توسعه روش‌های مشابه در مناطق همگون فراهم می‌آورد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
الگوریتم بوروتا؛ جنگل تصادفی؛ دشت سیلابی؛ فرسایش خاک؛ کیوبیست؛ نقشه‌برداری رقومی خاک
عنوان مقاله [English]
Spatial Modeling of Soil Erodibility Indices Using Machine Learning and Multi-Source Geospatial Data in the Sistan Plain
نویسندگان [English]
Abolfazl Bameri1؛ Farhad Khormali1؛ Farshad Kiani1؛ Ali Shahriari2؛ Mohammad Reza Pahlavan-Rad3
1Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Water and Soil Engineering, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran.
2Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Water and Soil, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran.
3Soil and Water Research Department, Golestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Gorgan, Iran.
چکیده [English]
Background and Objectives: Soil erosion is currently recognized as a critical global challenge with severe social, economic, and environmental consequences. Accurate estimation of soil erodibility is a pivotal factor in the precise simulation of erosion processes and sustainable land management. In recent years, Digital Soil Mapping (DSM) coupled with Machine Learning (ML) algorithms has emerged as a powerful approach for handling complex environmental datasets. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of three groups of environmental covariates—soil properties, geomorphometric indices derived from a Digital Elevation Model (DEM), and multi-sensor remote sensing data (Landsat 8 and Sentinel-2)—on the spatial modeling of water erodibility (Factor K) and wind erodibility (Erodible Fraction - EF) in the Sistan Plain. Specifically, four widely used ML algorithms, including Regression Tree (rpart), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Cubist, and Random Forest (RF), were employed. Water erodibility (K) was calculated using three distinct equations: USLE, EPIC, and Sharpley and Smith, while wind erodibility was determined using the Fryrear method.
Materials and Methods: To achieve the research objectives, 1200 surface soil samples were collected from agricultural lands in the study area, and relevant physicochemical properties for the K factor and EF index were measured. Remote sensing variables were extracted from Landsat 8 (OLI sensor) and Sentinel-2 (MSI sensor) imagery. Landsat 8 data with a spatial resolution of 30 m were acquired from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) archive, while Sentinel-2 data (10, 20, and 60 m resolution) were obtained from the Copernicus Open Access Hub to enhance analysis accuracy. The dataset comprised six main spectral bands, four soil-related spectral indices (Clay, Carbonate, Salinity, and Gypsum), five vegetation indices (NDVI, EVI, PVI, RVI, SAVI), and one innovative index (KfactorRS Index). To mitigate the risk of overfitting and reduce dimensionality, the Boruta algorithm was implemented for precise feature selection for each target variable. Subsequently, the dataset was randomly split into training (80%) and testing (20%) subsets. The predictive performance and accuracy of the ML models were evaluated using seven statistical metrics: Mean Error (ME), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Normalized RMSE (NRMSE), Pearson correlation coefficient (r), Coefficient of Determination (R²), Ratio of Performance to Deviation (RPD), and Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC).
Results: The results indicated a significant negative correlation (p < 0.01) between water erodibility coefficients (K) and the wind erodibility index (EF). A justifiable behavioral pattern observed in this study was the emergence of a negative correlation between spectral vegetation indices and clay content; a phenomenon that, contrary to initial assumptions, stems from vegetation degradation driven by salinity accumulation in fine-grained soils. Furthermore, the unexpected direct relationships of the KEPIC and KShSm equations with organic carbon, and clay, alongside an inverse relationship with very fine sand, indicate a high sensitivity to textural variables that introduces statistical bias under the region's specific conditions. Consequently, applying these indices is not recommended without recalibration tailored to the local geomorphic setting. Regarding model performance, the Cubist algorithm demonstrated superior predictive capability for most variables (EF, KEPIC, KShSm), while the Random Forest (RF) model outperformed others in predicting KUSLE. Both Cubist and RF, as ensemble-based decision tree methods, showed high competence in modeling soil erosion complexities. Although the SVM model yielded reasonable performance across all variables, it never ranked as the superior model. Conversely, the rpart model exhibited the weakest performance, particularly for KEPIC and KShSm, indicating the inability of simple single-tree models to capture the non-linear complexities of soil erosion in this region.
Conclusion: Although Random Forest is widely recognized as one of the most proven and practical algorithms in DSM, this study demonstrated that rule-based models such as Cubist—which offer greater flexibility in modeling local non-linear relationships—can outperform RF in specific scenarios. Nevertheless, the consistency and stability of RF across all variables (consistently ranking first or second) and its absence of poor performance establish it as a safe and robust choice for predicting soil properties and erosion parameters in digital soil mapping studies.

 
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Boruta Algorithm, Cubist, Digital Soil Mapping, Flood Plain, Random Forest, Soil Erosion
مراجع
  1. Abiye, W. and Dengiz, O., 2025. Digital mapping of soil erodibility factor in response to land use change using machine learning models. Environmental Systems Research, 14(14). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-025-00402-w
  2. Allbed, A. and Kumar, L., 2013. Soil salinity mapping and monitoring in arid and semi-arid regions using remote sensing technology: A review. Advances in Remote Sensing, 2(4), pp.373–385. https://doi.org/10.4236/ars.2013.24040
  3. Asadi, H., Besharati, H. and Gorji, M., 2022. Challenges and limitations of soil and land resources in Iran. Land Management, 1 (1), pp. 111-135. https://doi.org/10.22092/lmj.2022.358760.309 (In Persian)
  4. Auerswald, K., Fiener, P., Martin, W. and Elhaus, D., 2014. Use and misuse of the K factor equation in soil erosion modeling. Catena, 118, pp.220–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.01.008
  5. Auerswald, K., Fiener, P., Martin, W. and Elhaus, D., 2016. Corrigendum to “Use and misuse of the K factor equation in soil erosion modeling” [CATENA 118 (2014) 220–225]. Catena, 139, p.271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2015.05.026
  6. Avizhgan, A., Asadi, H., Arabkhedri, M., Noor, H., Nazari Samani, A. A., 2025. The challenges of measuring and estimating the soil erodibility factor (K) of the (R)USLE model in rangelands of arid regions. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 56(2), 351-371. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijswr.2024.386195.669845 (In Persian)
  7. Barbut, M. and Alexander, S., 2016. Land degradation as a security threat amplifier: The new global frontline. In: Chabay, I., Frick, M. and Helgeson, J., eds. Land Restoration. Academic Press, pp.3–12. ISBN 9780128012314.
  8. Bameri, A., Khormali, F., Kiani, F. and Dehghani, A.A., 2015. Spatial variability of soil organic carbon in different hillslope positions in Toshan area, Golestan Province, Iran: Geostatistical approaches. Journal of Mountain Science, 12(6), pp.1422–1433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-014-3213-z
  9. Bonilla, C.A. and Johnson, O.I. 2012. Soil erodibility mapping and its correlation with soil properties in Central Chile. Geoderma, 189–190, pp. 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.05.005
  10. Borrelli, P., Robinson, D., Fleischer, L.R., Lugato, E., Ballabio, C., Alewell, C., Meusburger, K., Modugno, S., Schütt, B., Ferro, V., Bagarello, V., Van Oost, K., Montanarella, L. and Panagos, P. 2017. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02142-7
  11. Bulmer, M.G., 1979. Principles of Statistics. Dover Publications, Mineola, NY.
  12. Fenta, A.A., Tsunekawa, A., Haregeweyn, N., Poesen, J., Tsubo, M., Borrelli, P., Panagos, P., Vanmaercke, M., Broeckx, J., Yasuda, H., Kawai, T. and Kurosaki, Y., 2019. Land susceptibility to water and wind erosion risks in the East Africa region. The Science of the Total Environment, 703, 135016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135016
  13. Fryrear, D.W., Saleh, A., Bilbro, J.D., Schomberg, H.M., Stout, J.E. and Zobeck, T.M., 1998. Revised Wind Erosion Equation (RWEQ). USDA-ARS Wind Erosion and Water Conservation Research Unit, Technical Bulletin No.1.
  14. Ghosh, A. and Maiti, R., 2021. Soil erosion susceptibility assessment using logistic regression, decision tree and random forest: Study on the Mayurakshi river basin of Eastern India. Environmental Earth Sciences, 80, 328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09631-5
  15. Gholami, H., Mohammadifar, A., Golzari, S., Kaskaoutis, D.G. and Collins, A.L., 2021. Using the Boruta algorithm and deep learning models for mapping land susceptibility to atmospheric dust emissions in Iran. Aeolian Research, 50, 100682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2021.100682
  16. Guerra, C.A., Rosa, E., Valentini, F., Wolf, F., Filipponi, F., Karger, D.N., Xuan, A.N., Mathieu, J., Lavelle, P. and Eisenhauer, N., 2020. Global vulnerability of soil ecosystems to erosion. Landscape Ecology, 35(6), pp.823–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-00984-z
  17. Han, Y., Zhao, W., Ding, J. and Ferreira, C.S.S., 2023. Soil erodibility for water and wind erosion and its relationship to vegetation and soil properties in China’s drylands. Science of the Total Environment, 903, 166639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166639
  18. Huete, A.R., Liu, H.Q., Batchily, K. and Van Leeuwen, W., 1997. A comparison of vegetation indices over a global set of TM images for EOS-MODIS. Remote Sensing of Environment, 59, pp.440–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00112-5
  19. Husson, O., Bruneta, A., Babrec, D., Charpentierd, H., Durande, M. and Sarthouf, J.P., 2018. Conservation agriculture systems alter the electrical characteristics (Eh, pH and EC) of four soil types in France. Soil & Tillage Research, 176, pp.57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2017.11.005
  20. Jafari, M., Tahmoures, M., Ehteram, M., Ghorbani, M. and Panahi, F., 2022. Soil erosion: Factors, processes and effects. In: Soil Erosion Control in Drylands. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04859-3_1
  21. Kanianska, R., Kizeková, M., Jančová, L., Cunderlík, J. and Dugátová, Z., 2024. Effect of soil erosion on soil and plant properties with a consequence on related ecosystem services. Sustainability, 16(16), 7037. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167037
  22. Kjelland, M.E., Woodley, C.M., Swannack, T.M. and Smith, D.L., 2015. A review of the potential effects of suspended sediment on fishes: Potential dredging-related physiological, behavioral, and transgenerational implications. Environmental Systems and Decisions, 35, pp.334–350.
  23. Khosravi, K., Rezaie, F., Cooper, J.R., Kalantari, Z., Abolfathi, S. and Hatamiafkoueieh, J., 2023. Soil water erosion susceptibility assessment using deep learning algorithms. Journal of Hydrology, 618, 129229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129229
  • Kulmatiski, A., Ozturk, M., Bladen, K.K., Brahney, J. and Duniway, M.C., 2025. Season, wind speed, and seasonal rain are major drivers of a regional aeolian sediment transport model. PLoS One, 20(9), e0333166. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0333166
  1. Kursa, M.B. and Rudnicki, W.R., 2010. Feature selection with the Boruta package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(11), pp.1–13.
  2. Lucieer, A., Malenovský, Z., Veness, T. and Wallace, L., 2014. HyperUAS imaging spectroscopy from a multirotor unmanned aircraft system. Journal of Field Robotics, 31(4), pp.571–590.
  3. Ma, R., Zhu, X., Tian, Z., Qu, L., He, Y. and Liang, Y., 2022. Spatial distribution and scale-specific controls of soil water-stable aggregates in southeastern China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 369, 133305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133305
  4. Mallick, J., Al-Wadi, H., Rahman, A., Ahmed, M. and Khan, R.A., 2015. Spatial variability of soil erodibility and its correlation with soil properties in semi-arid mountainous watershed, Saudi Arabia. Geocarto International, 31(6). 661-681. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2015.1073368.
  5. Mazarei, A., Sousa, R., Mendes-Moreira, J., Molchanov, S. and Ferreira, H.M., 2025. Online boxplot derived outlier detection. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics, 19, pp.83–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-024-00559-0
  6. McBratney, A.B., Mendonça Santos, M.L. and Minasny, B., 2003. On digital soil mapping. Geoderma, 117(1–2), pp.3–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00223-4
  7. Mirakzehi, K., Pahlavan-Rad, M.R., Shahriari, A. and Bameri, A., 2018. Digital soil mapping of deltaic soils: A case study from Hirmand (Helmand) river delta. Geoderma, 313, pp.233–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.048
  8. Morgan, R., 2005. Soil Erosion and Conservation. 3rd ed. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Carlton.
  9. Mosleh, Z., Salehi, M.H., Jafari, A., Borujeni, I.E. and Mehnatkesh, A., 2016. The effectiveness of digital soil mapping to predict soil properties over low-relief areas. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 188, pp.1–13.
  10. Nourafar, A., Pahlavanravi, A., Nohtani, M., and Rahdari, V., 2022. Investigation of Wind Erosion Threshold in Different Land Cover and the Effect of Soil Properties on It (Case Study: Niatak Region of Sistan). Jwss, 26 (1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.47176/jwss.26.1.6212
  11. Olmstead, L.B., Alexander, L.T. and Middleton, H.E., 1930. A pipette method of mechanical analysis of soils based on improved dispersion procedure. Technical Bulletin, No.170, USDA, Washington, DC.
  12. Otto, S.A., Kadin, M., Casini, M., Torres, M.A. and Blenckner, T., 2018. A quantitative framework for selecting and validating food web indicators. Ecological Indicators, 84, pp.619–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.05.045
  13. Ouri, A., Golshan, M., Janizadeh, S., Cerdà, A. and Melesse, A.M., 2020. Soil erosion susceptibility mapping in Kozetopraghi catchment, Iran: A mixed approach using rainfall simulator and data mining techniques. Land, 9(10), 368. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9100368
  14. Pahlavan-Rad, M.R. and Akbarimoghaddam, A., 2018. Spatial variability of soil texture fractions and pH in a flood plain (case study from eastern Iran). Catena, 160, pp.275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2017.10.002
  15. Parajuli, M., Cristan, R., Daniel, M.J., Rijal, A., Mitchell, D., McDonald, T. and Gallagher, T., 2025. Integrating high-resolution imagery, deep learning, and GIS to estimate soil erosion following timber harvesting. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 37, 101498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2025.101498
  16. Planchon, O. and Darboux, F., 2001. A fast, simple and versatile algorithm to fill the depressions of digital elevation models. Catena, 46, pp.159–176.
  17. Rahmati, O., Ahmadi Dehrshid, F., Soleimanpour, S.M. and Choubin, B., 2025. A review of some studies, methods and estimates of soil erosion and sediment yield in Iran. Iranian Journal of Water and Soil Research, 56 (5), pp. 1119-1145. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijswr.2025.388015.669866 (In Persian)
  18. Rezaei, M., Mohammadifar, A., Gholami, H., Mina, M., Riksen, M. and Ritsema, C., 2023. Mapping of the wind erodible fraction of soil by bidirectional gated recurrent unit (BiGRU) and bidirectional recurrent neural network (BiRNN) deep learning models. Catena, 223, 106953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2023.106953
  19. Salcedo, F.P., Cutillas, P.P., Cabañero, J.J.A. and Vivaldi, A.G. 2021. Use of remote sensing to evaluate the effects of environmental factors on soil salinity in a semi-arid area. The Science of the Total Environment, 794, 152524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152524
  20. Santos, A.d.S., Silva Júnior, J.F.d., Santos, L.d.S., Alencar Sobrinho, R.J., Amorim, E.C., Fernandes, G.S.T., Silva, E.F.d., Silva, T.G.F.d., de Lima, J.L.M.P. and Jardim, A.M.d.R.F., 2025. Identification of priority areas for the control of soil erosion and the influence of terrain factors using RUSLE and GIS in the Caeté River Basin, Brazilian Amazon. Earth, 6, 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/earth6020035
  21. Sharpley, A.N. and Smith, S.J., 1990. Phosphorus transport in agricultural runoff: The role of soil erosion. In: Soil Erosion on Agricultural Land. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp.351–366.
  22. Sparks, D.L., Page, A.L., Helmke, P.A., Loeppert, R.H., Soltanpour, P.N., Tabatabai, M.A., Johnston, C.T. and Sumner, M.E., 1996. Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 3, Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3
  23. Sun, L., Liu, F., Zhu, X. and Zhang, G., 2024. High-resolution digital mapping of soil erodibility in China. Geoderma, 444, 116853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.116853
  24. Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R., Minasny, B., Sarmadian, F. and Malone, B.P., 2014. Digital mapping of soil salinity in Ardakan region, central Iran. Geoderma, 213, pp.15–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2013.07.020
  25. Tian, Z., Liu, F., Liang, Y. and Zhu, X., 2022. Mapping soil erodibility in Southeast China at 250 m resolution: Using environmental variables and random forest regression with limited samples. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 10(1), pp.62–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2021.06.005
  26. Torkamani, F., Piri Sahragard, H., Pahlavan Rad, M.R. and Nohtani, M., 2026. Digital mapping of soil erodibility: A case study of the Ravang watershed, southern Iran. Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment, 9(1), e70285. https://doi.org/10.1002/agg2.70285
  27. Usta, A., 2022. Prediction of soil water contents and erodibility indices based on artificial neural networks: Using topography and remote sensing. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 194, 794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10465-2
  28. Wang, J.J., Huang, Y.F. and Long, H.Y., 2016. Water and salt movement in different soil textures under various negative irrigating pressures. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 15(8), pp.1874–1882. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61209-6
  29. Wilding, L.P., Smeck, N.E. and Hall, G.F., 1983. Pedogenesis and Soil Taxonomy. I. Concepts and Interactions. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 303 p.
  30. Williams, J.R., Renard, K.G. and Dyke, P.T., 1983. EPIC: A new method for assessing erosion's effect on soil productivity. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 38(5), pp.381–383.
  31. Wischmeier, W.H. and Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses: A Guide to Conservation Planning. USDA, Agriculture Handbook No.537.
  32. Zeraatpisheh, M., White, A., Darby, H., Neher, D.A., Faulkner, J., Hancock, L. and Galford, G.L., 2025. Spatial mapping and predictive modeling of soil organic carbon stocks in Vermont agricultural lands using machine learning and environmental variables. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 237, 110727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2025.110727
  33. Zheng, F.L., Huang, C.H. and Norton, L.D., 2000. Vertical hydraulic gradient and run-on water and sediment effects on erosion processes and sediment regimes. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64(1), pp.4–11. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.6414
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 142
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 57


counter
سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. طراحی و پیاده سازی از سیناوب