Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, 78:649 | Cite as

Identification of soil erosion-susceptible areas using fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process modeling in an agricultural watershed of Burdwan district, India

  • Sunil Saha
  • Amiya Gayen
  • Hamid Reza PourghasemiEmail author
  • John P. Tiefenbacher
Original Article

Abstract

Soil erosion is a natural process; it adversely impacts natural resources, agricultural activities, ecological systems, and environmental quality as it degrades landscapes and water quality, disrupts ecosystems, and intensifies hazards. Management strategies are needed that protect soil erosion in agricultural watersheds to achieve the sustainable land-use planning. This study maps soil erosion susceptibility using two GIS-based machine-learning approaches—analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy logic modeling in the Kunur River Basin, West Bengal, India. Fifteen soil erosion conditioning variables were integrated with the modeling methods, remote sensing data, and GIS analysis. The relative importance of the conditioning variables was assessed for their capacities to predict susceptibility of locations to soil erosion. The soil erosion susceptibility maps generated from the two models used 70% of surveyed soil erosion sites. These models’ maps were validated with the characteristics of the remaining 30% of the soil erosion sites to produce a receiver operating characteristics curve. The results indicated that the fuzzy logic model has the higher prediction accuracy; the area under the curve (AUC) value was 91.4%. The AUC value of the AHP model was 89.7%. Both models indicated that study area contains regions of high to severe soil erosion susceptibility. Logistic regression was used to discern the variables’ importance in the assessment. Relief, NDVI, distance from a river, rainfall erosivity, and soil types were the most important variables. TWI, SPI, aspect, and a sediment transportation index were of least importance. Fuzzy-logic-generated SESMs can be effective tools to guide protective actions and land managers’ measures during the primary stages of soil erosion to control the development of soil degradation.

Keywords

Analytical hierarchy process Fuzzy logic Logistic regression Soil erosion susceptibility mapping 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Amiya Gayen would like to give sincere thanks to the assistant professor Dr. Swades Pal for his fair cooperation and cordial support to precede his research work. Dr. Hamid Reza Pourghasemi would like to thank the Shiraz University for providing Grant no. 96GRD1M271143 in the current study.

References

  1. Akgun A, Sezer EA, Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Pradhan B (2012) An easy-to-use MATLAB program (MamLand) for the assessment of landslide susceptibility using a Mamdani fuzzy algorithm. Comput Geosci 38(1):23–34Google Scholar
  2. Amiri M, Pourghasemi HR, Ghanbarian GA, Afzali SF (2019) Assessment of the importance of gully erosion effective factors using Boruta algorithm and its spatial modelling and mapping using three machine learning algorithms. Geoderma 340:55–69Google Scholar
  3. Anderson JG (1971) Rocket measurement of OH in the mesosphere. J Geophys Res 76(31):7820–7824Google Scholar
  4. Aniya M (1985) Landslide-susceptibility mapping in the Amahata river basin, Japan. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 75(1):102–114Google Scholar
  5. Arabameri A, Pradhan B, Rezaei K, Yamani M, Pourghasemi HR, Lombardo L (2018a) Spatial modelling of gully erosion using evidential belief function, logistic regression, and a new ensemble of evidential belief function–logistic regression algorithm. Land Degrad Dev 29(11):4035–4049Google Scholar
  6. Arabameri A, Rezaei K, Pourghasemi HR, Lee S, Yamani M (2018b) GIS-based gully erosion susceptibility mapping: a comparison among three data-driven models and AHP knowledge-based technique. Environ Earth Sci 77:628Google Scholar
  7. Arabameri A, Pradha B, Rezaei K (2019) Gully erosion zonation mapping using integrated geographically weighted regression with certainty factor and random forest models in GIS. J Environ Manag 232:928–942Google Scholar
  8. Arekhi S, Niazi Y, Kalteh AM (2012) Soil erosion and sediment yield modelling using RS and GIS techniques: a case study, Iran. Arab J Geosci 5:285–296.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-010-0220-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Arnoldus HMJ (1980) An approximation of the rainfall factor in the Universal Soil Loss Equation. In: De Boodt M, Gabriels D (eds) Assessment of Erosion. Wiley, New York, pp 127–132Google Scholar
  10. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65(1/2):15–31Google Scholar
  11. Banerjee R, Srivastava PK, Pike AWG, Petropoulos GP (2018) Identification of painted rock-shelter sites using GIS integrated with a decision support system and fuzzy logic. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7080326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bharath HA, Vinay S, Ramachandra TV (2014) Landscape dynamics modelling through integrated Markov, Fuzzy-AHP and cellular automata. In: The proceeding of international geoscience and remote sensing symposium (IEEE IGARSS 2014), July 13th–July 19th 2014, Quebec City convention centre, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  13. Camilo DC, Lombardo L, Mai PM, Dou J, Huser R (2017) Handling high predictor dimensionality in slope-unit-based landslide susceptibility models through LASSO-penalized Generalized Linear Model. Environ Model Softw 97:145–156Google Scholar
  14. Carlson TN, Ripley DA (1997) On the relation between NDVI, fractional vegetation cover, and leaf area index. Remote Sens Environ 62(3):241–252Google Scholar
  15. Cerdà A, Keesstra SD, Rodrigo-Comino J, Novara A, Pereira P, Brevik E, Giménez-Morera A, Fernández-Raga M, Pulido M, di Prima S, Jordán A (2017a) Runoff initiation, soil detachment and connectivity are enhanced as a consequence of vineyards plantations. J Environ Manag 202:268–275Google Scholar
  16. Cerdà A, Rodrigo-Comino J, Giménez-Morera A, Novara A, Pulido M, Kapović-Solomun M, Keesstra SD (2017b) Policies can help to apply successful strategies to control soil and water losses. The case of chipped pruned branches (CPB) in Mediterranean citrus plantations. Land Use Policy 75:734–745Google Scholar
  17. Chen L, Wang J, Fu B, Qiu Y (2001) Land use change in a small catchment of northern Loess Plateau, China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 86:163–172Google Scholar
  18. Conoscenti C, Maggio CD, Rotigliano E (2008) Soil erosion susceptibility assessment and validation using a geostatistical multivariate approach: a test in Southern Sicily. Nat Hazards 46(3):287–305Google Scholar
  19. Conoscenti C, Agnesi V, Cama M, Caraballo-Arias NA, Rotigliano E (2018) Assessment of gully erosion susceptibility using multivariate adaptive regression splines and accounting for terrain connectivity. Land Degrad Dev 29:724–736Google Scholar
  20. Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2002) Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (North of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Environ Geol 41:720–730Google Scholar
  21. García-Díaz A, Bienes R, Sastre B, Novara A, Gristina L, Cerdà A (2017) Nitrogen losses in vineyards under different types of soil groundcover. A field runoff simulator approach in central Spain. Agric Ecosyst Environ 236:256–267Google Scholar
  22. Gayen A, Pourghasemi HR (2019) Spatial modeling of gully erosion: a new ensemble of CART and GLM data-mining algorithms. In: Spatial modeling in GIS and R for earth and environmental science, pp 653–669Google Scholar
  23. Gayen A, Saha S (2017) Application of weights-of-evidence (WoE) and evidential belief function (EBF) models for the delineation of soil erosion vulnerable zones: a study on Pathro river basin, Jharkhand, India. Model Earth Syst Environ 3(3):1123–1139Google Scholar
  24. Gayen A, Saha S (2018) Deforestation probable area predicted by logistic regression in Pathro river basin: a tributary of Ajay River. Spat Inf Res 26(1):1–9Google Scholar
  25. Gayen A, Saha S, Pourghasemi HR (2019) Soil erosion assessment using RUSLE model and its validation by FR probability model. Geocarto Int.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2019.1581272 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ghose DK, Samantaray S (2019) Sedimentation process and its assessment through integrated sensor networks and machine learning process. In Computational intelligence in sensor networks, pp 473–488Google Scholar
  27. Hembram TK, Saha S (2018) Prioritization of sub-watersheds for soil erosion based on morphometric attributes using fuzzy AHP and compound factor in Jainti River basin, Jharkhand, Eastern India. Environ Dev Sustain.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0247-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol A J Royal Meteorol Soc 25(15):1965–1978Google Scholar
  29. Hongchun ZHU, Guoan T, Kejian Q, Haiying L (2014) Extraction and analysis of gully head of loess plateau in china based on digital elevation model. China Geogr Sci 24(3):328–338Google Scholar
  30. Horton R (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56: 275–370Google Scholar
  31. Kayastha P, Dhital MR, DeSmedt F (2013) Application of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study from the Tinau watershed, west Nepal. Comput Geosci 52:398–408Google Scholar
  32. Keesstra S, Pereira P, Novara A, Brevik EC, Azorin-Molina C, Parras-Alcántara L, Jordán A, Cerdà A (2016) Effects of soil management techniques on soil water erosion in apricot orchards. Sci Total Environ 551–552:357–366Google Scholar
  33. Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using the analytical hierarchy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74(1–4):17–28Google Scholar
  34. Kosmas C, Gerontidis ST, Marathianou M (2000) The effect of land use change on soils and vegetation over various lithological formations on Lesvos (Greece). CATENA 40:51–68Google Scholar
  35. Kropacek J, Schillaci C, Salvini R, Marker M (2016) Assessment of gully erosion in the Upper Awash, Central Ethiopian highlands based on a comparison of archived aerial photographs and very high resolution satellite images. GeografiaFisica e Dinamica Quaternaria 39:161–170Google Scholar
  36. Lal R (2001) Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degrad Dev 12(6):519–539Google Scholar
  37. Lee S, Min K (2001) Statistical analysis of landslide susceptibility at Yongin, Korea. Environ Geol 40(9):1095–1113Google Scholar
  38. Lisetskii FN (2008) Agrogenic transformation of soils in the dry steppe zone under the impact of antique and recent land management practices. Eurasian Soil Sci 41(8):805–817Google Scholar
  39. Lombardo L, Mai PM (2018) Presenting logistic regression-based landslide susceptibility results. Eng Geol 244:14–24Google Scholar
  40. Malczewski J (1999) A GIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision making. Int J Geograph Inf Syst 10:955–971Google Scholar
  41. Mendicino G (1999) Sensitivity analysis on GIS procedures for the estimate of soil erosion risk. Nat Hazards 20(2–3):231–253Google Scholar
  42. Mhazo N, Chivenge P, Chaplot V (2016) Tillage impact on soil erosion by water: discrepancies due to climate and soil characteristics. Agric Ecosyst Environ 230:231–241Google Scholar
  43. Mirmousavi SH (2016) Regional modeling of wind erosion in the North West and South West of Iran. Eurasian Soil Sci 49(8):942–953Google Scholar
  44. Moore ID, Burch GJ (1986) Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the universal soil Loss equation. Soil Science Soc Am J 50:1294–1298Google Scholar
  45. Moore ID, Wilson JP (1991) Length-slope factors for the revised universal soil loss equation: simplified method of estimation. J Soil Water Conserv 47(5):423–428Google Scholar
  46. Moore ID, Grayson RB, Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modeling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrol Process 5:3–30Google Scholar
  47. Morgan RPC (1996) Soil erosion and conservation, 2nd edn. Longman, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  48. Morgan RPC, Quinton JN, Smith RE, Govers G, Poesen JWA, Auerswald K, Chisci G, Torri D, Styczen ME (1998) The European soil erosion model (EUROSEM): a process based approach for predicting soil loss from fields and small catchments. Earth Surf Process Landf 23:527–544Google Scholar
  49. Nagarajan R, Roy A, Kumar RV, Mukherjee A, Khire MV (2000) Landslide hazard susceptibility mapping based on terrain and climatic factors for tropical monsoon regions. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58(4):275–287Google Scholar
  50. Oh JH, Jung SG (2005) Potential soil prediction for land resource management in the Nakdong River basin. J Korean Soc Rural Plan 11(2):9–19Google Scholar
  51. Park S, Oh S, Jeon S, Jung H, Choi C (2011) Soil erosion risk in Korean watersheds, assessed using the revised universal soil loss equation. J Hydrol 399(3–4):263–273Google Scholar
  52. Pavelsky TM, Smit LC (2008) RivWidth: a software tool for the calculation of river widths from remotely sensed imagery. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 5(1):70–73Google Scholar
  53. Pimentel D (2006) Soil erosion: a food and environmental threat. Environ Dev Sustain 8:119–137Google Scholar
  54. Poesen J, Nachtergaele J, Verstraeten G, Valentin C (2003) Gully erosion and environmental change: importance and research needs. CATENA 50(2–4):91–133Google Scholar
  55. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Mohammadi M, Moradi HR (2012) Application of weights-of-evidence and certainty factor models and their comparison in landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Arab J Geosci.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-012-0532-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pradhan B (2010) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide hazard analysis and cross-validation using multivariate logistic regression model on three test areas in Malaysia. Adv Sp Res 45:1244–1256Google Scholar
  57. Pradhan B, Pirasteh S (2010) Comparison between prediction capabilities of neural network and fuzzy logic techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping. Disaster Adv 3(2):26–34Google Scholar
  58. Rahmati O, Haghizadeh A, Pourghasemi HR, Noormohamadi F (2016) Gully erosion susceptibility mapping: the role of GIS-based bivariate statistical models and their comparison. Nat Hazards 82(2):1231–1258Google Scholar
  59. Rahmati O, Tahmasebipour N, Haghizadeh A, Pourghasemi HR, Feizizadeh B (2017) Evaluating the influence of geo-environmental factors on gully erosion in a semi-arid region of Iran: an integrated framework. Sci Total Environ 579:913–927Google Scholar
  60. Rashid T, Agrafiotis I, Nurse JR (2016) A new take on detecting insider threats: exploring the use of hidden markov models. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM CCS International workshop on managing insider security threats, pp 47–56Google Scholar
  61. Ren L, Huang J, Huang Q, Liang Y (2018) A fractal and entropy-based model for selecting the optimum spatial scale of soil erosion. Arab J Geosci 11(8):161Google Scholar
  62. Renard KG, Foster GR, Weesies GA, Porter JP (1991) RUSLE, revised universal soil loss equation. J Soil Water Conserv 46(1):30–33Google Scholar
  63. Rodrigo-Comino J, Cerdà A (2018) Improving stock unearthing method to measure soil erosion rates in vineyards. Ecol Indicator 85:509–517Google Scholar
  64. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281Google Scholar
  65. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York, p 287Google Scholar
  66. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2001) Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Kluwer, Dordrecht, p 333Google Scholar
  67. Saha AK, Gupta RP, Arora MK (2002) GIS-based landslide hazard zonation in the Bhagirathi (Ganga) valey, Himalayas. Int J Remote Sens 23(2):357–369Google Scholar
  68. Shahabi H, Khezri S, Ahmad BB, Hashim M (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping at central Zab basin, Iran: a comparison between analytical hierarchy process, frequency ratio and logistic regression models. CATENA 115:55–70Google Scholar
  69. Siriwardena L, Finlayson BL, McMahon TA (2006) The impact of land use change on catchment hydrology in large catchment: the Comet River, Central Queensland, Australia. J Hydrol 326:199–214Google Scholar
  70. Süzen ML, Doyuran V (2004) A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate. Environ Geol 45(5):665–679Google Scholar
  71. Svoray T, Michailov E, Cohen A, Rokah L, Sturm A (2012) Predicting gully initiation: comparing data mining techniques, analytical hierarchy processes and the topographic threshold. Earth Surf Process Landf 37:607–619Google Scholar
  72. Thornes JB (1985) The ecology of erosion. Geography 70:222–235Google Scholar
  73. Thornes JB (1990) Vegetation and erosion: processes and environments. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  74. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping at HoaBinh province (Vietnam) using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and GIS. Comput Geosci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.10.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012) Spatial prediction of landslide hazards in HoaBinh province (Vietnam): a comparative assessment of the efficacy of evidential belief functions and fuzzy logic models. CATENA 96:28–40Google Scholar
  76. Valentin C, Poesen J, Li Y (2005) Gully erosion: impacts, factors and control. CATENA 63(2–3):132–153Google Scholar
  77. Wei W, Chen L, Fu B, Huang Z, Wu D, Gui L (2007) The effect of land uses and rainfall regimes on runoff and soil erosion in the semi-arid loess hilly area, China. J Hydrol 335:247–258Google Scholar
  78. Wentworth CK (1930) A simplified method of determining the average slope of land surface. Am J Sci 117:184–194Google Scholar
  79. Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. Agriculture handbook, vol 282. USDA-ARS, USAGoogle Scholar
  80. Yanar TA (2003) The enhancement of the cell-based GIS Analysis with fuzzy processing Capabilities. MS thesis. The Middle East Technical UniversityGoogle Scholar
  81. Wu Q, Wang M (2007) A framework for risk assessment on soil erosion by water using an integrated and systematic approach. J Hydrol 337(1–2):11–21Google Scholar
  82. Zabihi M, Mirchooli F, Motevalli A, Darvishan AK, Pourghasemi HR, Zakeri MA, Sadighi F (2018) Spatial modelling of gully erosion in Mazandaran Province, northern Iran. CATENA 161:1–13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of Gour BangaMaldaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Geography, Ballygunge Science CollegeUniversity of CalcuttaKolkataIndia
  3. 3.Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Engineering, College of AgricultureShiraz UniversityShirazIran
  4. 4.Department of GeographyTexas State UniversitySan MarcosUSA

Personalised recommendations