Plant Soil Environ., 2022, 68(7):338-346 | DOI: 10.17221/123/2022-PSE

A comparison of measured and estimated saturated hydraulic conductivity of various soils in the Czech RepublicOriginal Paper

Kamila Bá»ková ORCID...*, Svatopluk Matula, Eva Hrúzová, Markéta Miháliková, Recep Serdar Kara, Cansu Almaz
Department of Water Resources, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

The study aims to indirectly determine the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks). The applicability of recently-published pedotransfer functions (PTFs) based on a machine learning approach has been tested, and their performance has been compared with well-known hierarchical PTFs (computer software Rosetta) for 126 soil data sets in the Czech Republic. The quality of estimates has been statistically evaluated in comparison with the measured Ks values; the root mean squared error (RMSE), the mean error (ME) and the coefficient of determination (R2) were considered. The eight tested models of PTFs were ranked according to the RMSE values. The measured results reflected high Ks variability between and within the study areas, especially for those areas where preferential flow occurred. In most cases, the tested PTFs overestimated the measured Ks values, which is documented by positive ME values. The RMSE values of the Ks estimate ranged on average from 0.5 (coarse-textured soils) to 1.3 (medium to fine-textured soils) for log-transformed Ks in cm/day. Generally, the models based on Random Forest performed better than those based on Boosted Regression Trees. However, the best estimates were obtained by Neural Network analysis PTFs in Rosetta, which scored for four best rankings out of five.

Keywords: soil parameter; soil texture; soil property; prediction; comparative assessment

Published: July 15, 2022  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Bá»ková K, Matula S, Hrúzová E, Miháliková M, Kara RS, Almaz C. A comparison of measured and estimated saturated hydraulic conductivity of various soils in the Czech Republic. Plant Soil Environ. 2022;68(7):338-346. doi: 10.17221/123/2022-PSE.
Download citation

References

  1. Araya S.N., Ghezzehei T.A. (2019): Using machine learning for prediction of saturated hydraulic conductivity and its sensitivity to soil structural perturbations. Water Resources Research, 55: 5715-5737. Go to original source...
  2. Arshad R.R., Sayyad G., Mosaddeghi M., Gharabaghi B. (2013): Predicting saturated hydraulic conductivity by artificial intelligence and regression models. ISRN Soil Science, 2013: 308159. Go to original source...
  3. Bouma J. (1989): Using soil survey data for quantitative land evaluation. Advances in Soil Sciences, 9: 177-213. Go to original source...
  4. Friedman J.H. (2002): Stochastic gradient boosting. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 38: 367-378. Go to original source...
  5. Gamie R., De Smedt F. (2018): Experimental and statistical study of saturated hydraulic conductivity and relations with other soil properties of a desert soil. European Journal of Soil Science, 69: 256-264. Go to original source...
  6. Gunarathna M.H.J.P., Sakai K., Nakandakari T., Momii K., Kumari M.K.N. (2019): Machine learning approaches to develop pedotransfer functions for tropical Sri Lankan soils. Water, 11: 1940. Go to original source...
  7. Klute A.E. (1986): Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Monograph 9. Madison, ASA and SSSA. Go to original source...
  8. Lilly A., Nemes A., Rawls W.J., Pachepsky Y.A. (2008): Probabilistic approach to the identification of input variables to estimate hydraulic conductivity. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 72: 16-24. Go to original source...
  9. Matula S., Kozáková H. (1997): A simple pressure infiltrometer for determination of soil hydraulic properties by in situ infiltration measurements. Rostlinná výroba, 43: 405-413.
  10. Mbonimpa M., Aubertin M., Chapuis R.P., Bussière B. (2002): Practical pedotransfer functions for estimating the saturated hydraulic conductivity. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 20: 235-259. Go to original source...
  11. Miháliková M., Matula S., Doleľal F. (2013): HYPRESCZ - database of soil hydrophysical properties in the Czech Republic. Soil and Water Research, 8: 34-41. Go to original source...
  12. Minasny B., McBratney A.B., Bristow K.Y. (1999): Comparison of different approaches to the development of pedotransfer functions for water retention curves. Geoderma, 93: 225-253. Go to original source...
  13. Němeček J., Macků J., Vokoun J., Vavříček D., Novák P. (2001): The Taxonmic Classification System of Soils in the Czech Republic. Prague, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation. ISBN 80-238-8061-6 (In Czech)
  14. Pachepsky Y.A., Rawls W.J. (2004): Development of Pedotransfer Functions in Soil Hydrology. Developments in Soil Science. Amsterodam, Elsevier.
  15. Parasuraman K., Elshorbagy A., Si B. (2006): Estimating saturated hydraulic conductivity in spatially variable fields using neural network ensembles. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 70: 1851-1859. Go to original source...
  16. Schaap M.G., Leij F.J. (2000): Improved prediction of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity with the Mualem-van Genuchten model. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64: 843-851. Go to original source...
  17. Schaap M.G., Leij F.J., van Genuchten M.T. (1998): Neural network analysis for hierarchical prediction of soil hydraulic properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 62: 847-855. Go to original source...
  18. Schaap M.G., Leij F.J., van Genuchten M.T. (2001): Rosetta: a computer program for estimating soil hydraulic parameters with hierarchical pedotransfer functions. Journal of Hydrology, 251: 163-176. Go to original source...
  19. Tóth B., Weynants M., Nemes A., Makó A., Bilas G., Tóth G. (2015): New generation of hydraulic pedotransfer functions for Europe. European Journal of Soil Science, 66: 226-238. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Tuffour H., Abubakari A., Agbeshie A., Khalid A., Tetteh E., Keshavarzi A., Bonsu M., Quansah C., Oppong J., Danso L. (2019): Pedotransfer functions for estimating saturated hydraulic conductivity of selected benchmark soils in Ghana. Asian Soil Research Journal, 2: 1-11. Go to original source...
  21. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 (accessed 4 March 2022).
  22. Vereecken H., Weynants M., Javaux M., Pachepsky Y., Schaap M.G., van Genuchten M.T. (2010): Using pedotransfer functions to estimate the van Genuchten-Mualem soil hydraulic properties: a review. Vadose Zone Journal, 9: 795-820. Go to original source...
  23. Wösten J.H.M., Finke P.A., Jansen M.J.W. (1995): Comparison of class and continuous pedotransfer functions to generate soil hydraulic characteristics. Geoderma, 66: 227-237. Go to original source...
  24. Wösten J.H.M., Pachepsky Y., Rawls W.J. (2001): Pedotransfer functions: bridging the gap between available basic soil data and missing soil hydraulic characteristics. Journal of Hydrology, 251: 123-150. Go to original source...
  25. Zhang Y., Schaap M.G. (2019): Estimation of saturated hydraulic conductivity with pedotransfer functions: a review. Journal of Hydrology, 575: 1011-1030. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.