Spatial information of soil hydraulic conductivity and performance of cokriging over kriging in a semi-arid basin scale

Unlike the studies in small parcels by systematic measurements, the spatial variability of soil properties is expected to increase in those over relatively large areas or scales. Spatial variability of soil hydraulic conductivity (Kh) is of significance for the environmental processes, such as soil erosion, plant growth, transport of the plant nutrients in a soil profile and ground water levels. However, its variability is not much and sufficiently known at basin scale. A study of testing the performance of cokriging of Kh compared with that of kriging was conducted in the catchment area of Sarayköy II Irrigation Dam in Cankırı, Turkey. A total of 300 soil surface samples (0–10 cm) were collected from the catchment with irregular intervals. Of the selected soil properties, because the water-stable aggregates (WSA) indicated the highest relationship with the hydraulic conductivity by the Pearson correlation analysis, it is used as an auxiliary variable to predict Kh by the cokriging procedure. In addition, the sampling density was reduced randomly to n = 175, n = 150, n = 75 and n = 50 for Kh to determine if the superiority of cokriging over kriging would exist. Statistically, the results showed that all reduced Kh was as good as the complete Kh when its auxiliary relations with WSA were used in cokriging. Particularly, the results of the “Relative Reduction in MSE” (RMSE) revealed that the reduced data set of n = 75 produced the most accurate map than the others. In this basin-scaled study, there was a clear superiority of the cokriging procedure by the reduction in data although a very undulating topography and topographically different aspects, two different land uses with non-uniform vegetation density, different parent materials and soil textures were present in the area. Hence, using the statistically significant auxiliary relationship between Kh and WSA might bring about a very useful data set for watershed hydrological researches.

[1]  A. Warrick,et al.  Estimating Soil Water Content Using Cokriging1 , 1987 .

[2]  W. B. Russell,et al.  SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF SOIL PARTICLE SIZE AND AGGREGATE STABILITY INDEX IN A CLAY SOIL , 1990 .

[3]  D. Brus,et al.  A comparison of kriging, co-kriging and kriging combined with regression for spatial interpolation of horizon depth with censored observations , 1995 .

[4]  S. Yates,et al.  Use of pseudo-crossvariograms and cokriging to improve estimates of soil solute concentrations , 1997 .

[5]  J. Bouma,et al.  Soil Structure and Hydraulic Conductivity of Adjacent Virgin and Cultivated Pedons at two Sites: A Typic Argiudoll (silt loam) and a Typic Eutrochrept (clay) 1 , 1971 .

[6]  B. Mohanty,et al.  A Robust-Resistant Approach to Interpret Spatial Behavior of Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity of a Glacial Till Soil Under No-Tillage System , 1991 .

[7]  W. Reynolds,et al.  Hydraulic Conductivity in a Clay Soil: Two Measurement Techniques and Spatial Characterization , 1996 .

[8]  S. Erşahin,et al.  Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Variation in Cultivated and Virgin Soils , 2006 .

[9]  G. Matheron.  Principles of geostatistics , 1963 .

[10]  Donald E. Myers,et al.  Estimation of the Spatial Distribution of Soil Chemicals Using Pseudo-Cross-Variograms , 1992 .

[11]  Daniel Hillel,et al.  Introduction to soil physics , 1982 .

[12]  S. Erşahin.  Comparing Ordinary Kriging and Cokriging to Estimate Infiltration Rate , 2003 .

[13]  Hydraulic Conductivity as Related to Certain Soil Properties in a Number of Great Soil Groups—Sampling Errors Involved1 , 1957 .

[14]  L. García,et al.  Comparison of Regression Kriging and Cokriging Techniques to Esti- mate Soil Salinity Using Landsat Images , 2009 .

[15]  Orhan Dengiz,et al.  Comparing the efficiency of ordinary kriging and cokriging to estimate the Atterberg limits spatially using some soil physical properties , 2009, Clay Minerals.

[16]  Geoffrey M. Laslett,et al.  Kriging and Splines: An Empirical Comparison of their Predictive Performance in Some Applications , 1994 .

[17]  John Triantafilis,et al.  Five Geostatistical Models to Predict Soil Salinity from Electromagnetic Induction Data Across Irrigated Cotton , 2001 .

[18]  R. Mapa,et al.  Variability of soil properties in a tropical Alfisol used for shifting cultivation , 1996 .

[19]  Marc Voltz,et al.  A comparison of kriging, cubic splines and classification for predicting soil properties from sample information , 1990 .

[20]  D. R. Nielsen,et al.  The Use of Cokriging with Limited Field Soil Observations 1 , 1983 .

[21]  Horng-Yuh Guo,et al.  Geostatistical Analysis of Soil Properties of Mid-West Taiwan Soils , 1997 .

[22]  C. Gotway,et al.  Comparison of kriging and inverse-distance methods for mapping soil parameters , 1996 .

[23]  R. Webster,et al.  Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: I The semi‐variogram and punctual kriging , 1980, European Journal of Soil Science.

[24]  P. Goovaerts.  Geostatistics in soil science: state-of-the-art and perspectives , 1999 .

[25]  Chun-Chih Tsui,et al.  Relationships between soil properties and slope position in a lowland rain forest of southern Taiwan , 2004 .

[26]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Spatial Statistics: Ripley/Spatial Statistics , 2005 .

[27]  D. V. Griffiths,et al.  Risk Assessment in Geotechnical Engineering , 2008 .

[28]  Jennifer A. Miller,et al.  Incorporating spatial dependence in predictive vegetation models , 2007 .

[29]  R. Amundson,et al.  Soil development along an elevational transect in the western Sierra Nevada, California , 1997 .

[30]  R. Yost,et al.  Spatial Variation of Soil Properties and Rice Yield on Recently Cleared Land , 1987 .

[31]  A. McBratney,et al.  Further results on prediction of soil properties from terrain attributes: heterotopic cokriging and regression-kriging , 1995 .

[32]  D. Corwin,et al.  Water Content Effect on Soil Salinity Prediction: A Geostatistical Study Using Cokriging , 1995 .

[33]  A. Martínez-cob,et al.  Multivariate geostatistical analysis of evapotranspiration and precipitation in mountainous terrain , 1996 .

[34]  K. Paustian,et al.  Assessment of soil property spatial variation in an Amazon pasture: basis for selecting an agronomic experimental area , 2004 .

[35]  D. W. Nelson,et al.  Total Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Organic Matter 1 , 1982 .

[36]  Alan L. Flint,et al.  Multivariate Geostatistïcal Analysis of Ground‐Water Contamination: A Case History , 1993 .

[37]  Thomas M. Smith,et al.  Elements of ecology , 1980 .

[38]  W. D. Kemper,et al.  Aggregate Stability and Size Distribution , 2018, SSSA Book Series.

[39]  W. V. Dooremolen,et al.  Cokriging Point Data on Moisture Deficit , 1988 .

[40]  J. Chilès,et al.  Geostatistics: Modeling Spatial Uncertainty , 1999 .

[41]  R. Webster,et al.  Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties. II. Block kriging. , 1980 .

[42]  D. W. Nelson,et al.  Total Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Organic Matter , 1983, SSSA Book Series.

[43]  G. Uehara,et al.  Application of Geostatistics to Spatial Studies of Soil Properties , 1986 .