Geoinformation analysis of the spatial distribution of soil quality indicators in terms of water erosion
More details
Hide details
1
Scientific Centre for Aerospace Research of the Earth, Institute of Geological Sciences, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Submission date: 2025-07-29
Final revision date: 2025-08-22
Acceptance date: 2025-08-25
Publication date: 2025-11-04
Corresponding author
Yulia Temna
Remote sensing instrumentation laboratory, Scientific Centre for Aerospace Research of the Earth of the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Olesia Honchara Str., 55-b, 01054, Kyiv, Ukraine
Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape 2025;(3)
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Soil organic carbon, clay content and cation exchange capacity play a key role in the productivity of agricultural soils, and are therefore fundamental parameters for environmental monitoring and modelling. However, studying these properties using traditional laboratory methods is labour-intensive and costly. An equally important factor is the steepness of slopes, which affects erosion processes and nutrient distribution in the soil. Geospatial analysis is a powerful tool for examining spatial patterns and the distribution of various indicators. When assessing soil quality indicators, GIS technologies enable the accurate and detailed monitoring of soil conditions in various areas, the assessment of their characteristics, and the identification of potential problem areas. This study presents observation and analysis of the impact of soil quality indicators, including soil organic carbon (SOC), physical clay, and cation exchange capacity (CEC), on the development of soil quality degradation using SoilGrids 250 m 2.0 data. To estimate the level of erosion, a slope steepness map was generated using the SRTM digital elevation model, which was downloaded through Google Earth Engine at a 30-m resolution. The results showed that high organic carbon content and optimal CEC values reduce soil vulnerability to the development of erosion, while steep slopes and low organic carbon content increase the risk of degradation. The vulnerability index developed based on these data allows us to effectively identify areas at high risk of soil degradation and develop protection strategies.
REFERENCES (18)
1.
Adam M., Ibrahim I., Siddig M., Zeraatpisheh M., Mishra G., Brevik E. 2021. Predicting soil cation exchange capacity in Entisols with divergent textural classes: The case of northern Sudan soils. Air Soil Water Res., 14, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1177/117862....
3.
Bajracharya R.M., Lal R. 1992. Seasonal soil loss and erodibility variation on a Miamian silt loam soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 56(5), 1560–1565.
4.
Cocco Lago B., Silva C.A., Azevedo Melo L.C., Morais E.G. 2021. Predicting biochar cation exchange capacity using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy combined with partial least square regression. Sci. Total Environ., 794, 148762.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scit....
5.
Firoozi A.A., Firoozi A.A. 2024. Water erosion processes: Mechanisms, impact, and management strategies. Results Eng., 24, 103237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rine....
6.
Hazelton P., Murphy B. 2016. Interpreting Soil Test Results: What Do All the Numbers Mean? Chemin de Baillarguet: CSIRO Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1071/978148....
7.
Kanianska R., Kizeková M., Jančová Ľ., Čunderlík J., 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/su1616....
8.
Kokhan S., Burshtynska K., Bykin A., Bilous L., Drozdivskyi O., Temna Y. 2024. Digital farming technologies: Modern state and challenges. In: Zagorodny A., Bogdanov V., Zaporozhets A. (eds.), Nexus of Sustainability. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control, 559. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
9.
Lashko S., Shelkovska I., Halchenko N., Klyuka O., 2021. Cartographic analysis of the distribution of degraded lands (on the example of the Poltava region). Collected Scientific Works of Ukrainian State University of Railway Transport, 74–81.
https://doi.org/10.18664/1994-....
10.
Mishra G., Sulieman M.M., Kaya F., Francaviglia R., Keshavarzi A., Bakhshandeh E., Loum M., Jangir A., Ahmed I., Elmobarak A., Basher A., Rawat D., 2022. Machine learning for cation exchange capacity prediction in different land uses. Catena, 216 (Part A), 106404.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cate....
11.
Mukherjee A., Zimmerman A.R. 2013. Organic carbon and nutrient release from a range of laboratory-produced biochars and biochar–soil mixtures. Geoderma, 122–130, 193–194.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geod....
13.
Samuel A., Dines L. (eds.). 2023. Soil health and management. In: Lockhart and Wiseman’s Crop Husbandry Including Grassland. 10th ed. Woodhead Publishing, 49–79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0....
14.
Siswanto S.Y., Sule M.I.S. 2019. The impact of slope steepness and land use type on soil properties in Cirandu Sub-Sub Catchment, Citarum Watershed. IOP Conf. Ser., Earth Environ. Sci., 393(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1....
15.
Temna Y., Kokhan S. 2024. Nexus soil organic carbon and water erosion. In: Int. Conf. of Young Professionals ‘GeoTerrace 2024’, European Assoc. of Geoscientists & Engineers, October 2024.
https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4....
16.
Thompson A.L., Giri G.S., Baffaut C., Sadler E.J., Lerch R.N., Veum K.S. 2020. The development of a Soil Vulnerability Index for use in precision conservation. J. Soil Water Conserv., 75(1), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.7....
17.
Yang R., Yang S., Chen L.-l., Yang Z., Xu L., Zhang X., Liu G., Zhang X., Jiao C., Bai R., Zhang X., Zhai B., Wang Z., Zheng W., Li Z., Zamanian K. 2023. Effect of vegetation restoration on soil erosion control and soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics: A meta-analysis. Soil Tillage Res., 230, 105705.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stil....
18.
Zhang Y., Qin X., Qiu Q., Yu R., Yao Y., Li H., Shao M., Wei X. 2023. Soil and water conservation measures reduce erosion but result in carbon and nitrogen accumulation of red soil in Southern China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 346, 108346.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee....