Multi objective optimization of soil erosion parameters using response surface method (RSM) in the Emamzadeh watershed

Shirazi, Mojtaba; Khademalrasoul, Ataallah; Safeddin Ardebili, Seyed Mohammad

doi:10.1007/s11600-020-00404-5

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Multi objective optimization of soil erosion parameters using response surface method (RSM) in the Emamzadeh watershed

Autorzy

Shirazi Mojtaba , Khademalrasoul Ataallah , Safeddin Ardebili Seyed Mohammad

Wybrane pełne teksty z tego czasopisma

https://www.springer.com/journal/11600

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1007/s11600-020-00404-5

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Soil erosion is one of the most leading environmental and public health problems in the world which dislodges considerable volumes of soil annually. In order to control soil erosion, several soil factors should be taken into account. Regarding the importance of soil properties on erosion occurrence, it is necessary to focus on soil properties. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efect of physical parameters that consist of sand %, silt %, clay %, SP % and stone % along with hydraulic properties including theta s, theta r, alpha n and Ks (cm/day) on the amount of soil erosion in Emamzadeh watershed. The above-mentioned factors were optimized using response surface methodology. The soil texture in the study area is mostly silty clay loam, and the main soil orders are Entisols and Inceptisols. Moreover, the main land use in the study area is forest–rangeland. The results proved that both physical and hydraulic valuables illustrated a signifcant efect on all of the independent parameters. The optimized values of diferent physical parameters were 60.241 for sand, 14 for silt, 41.025 for clay, 58.729% for SP and 3.83% for stone. A theta r of 0.09, theta s of 0.457 alpha of 0.014, n of 1.3 and Ks of 46.01 were found to be optimal values. The results of this study indicated that at optimal studied parameters, the values of the soil erosion before and after application of management scenarios were found to be 11.537 and −2.253, respectively. Results show that both physical and hydraulic parameters have signifcant efects at the 1% level on the soil erosion before and after application of management scenarios. The obtained results could assist policy-makers with decisions aimed at minimizing soil erosion in this watershed. In summary, using the simulation–optimization techniques helps to evaluate the efect of management scenarios, then select and apply the best one to minimize the soil erosion outcomes.

Słowa kluczowe

D-optimal design management scenarios optimization physical parameters hydraulic parameters response surface methodology RSM

projekt D-optymalny scenariusze zarządzania optymalizacja parametry fizyczne parametry hydrauliczne metodologia powierzchni odpowiedzi RSM

Wydawca

Instytut Geofizyki PAN
Springer

Czasopismo

Acta Geophysica

Rocznik

2020

Tom

Vol. 68, no. 2

Strony

505--517

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 61 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Shirazi Mojtaba

Soil Science Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

autor

Khademalrasoul Ataallah

a.khademalrasoul@scu.ac.ir

Soil Science Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

autor

Safeddin Ardebili Seyed Mohammad

Biosystems Engineering Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

Bibliografia

1. Anache JA, Flanagan DC, Srivastava A, Wendland EC (2018) Land use and climate change impacts on runoff and soil erosion at the hillslope scale in the Brazilian Cerrado. Sci Total Environ 622:140–151
2. Ardebili SMS, Solmaz H, Mostafaei M (2019) Optimization of fuel oil–Gasoline blend ratio to enhance the performance and reduce emissions. Appl Therm Eng 148:1334–1345
3. Argent RM, Sojda RS, Giupponi C, McIntosh B, Voinov AA, Maier HR (2016) Best practices for conceptual modelling in environmental planning and management. Environ Model Softw 80:113–121
4. Arnold JG, Youssef MA, Yen H, White MJ, Sheshukov AY, Sadeghi AM, Haney EB (2015) Hydrological processes and model representation: impact of soft data on calibration. Trans ASABE 58(6):1637–1660
5. Arthur E, Tuller M, Norgaard T, Moldrup P, de Jonge LW (2019) Improved estimation of clay content from water content for soils rich in smectite and kaolinite. Geoderma 350:40–45
6. Barman B, Kumar B, Sarma AK (2019) Impact of sand mining on alluvial channel flow characteristics. Ecol Eng 135:36–44
7. Batista PV, Davies J, Silva ML, Quinton JN (2019) On the evaluation of soil erosion models: Are we doing enough? Earth Sci Rev 102898‏
8. Bezerra MA, Santelli RE, Oliveira EP, Villar LS, Escaleira LA (2008) Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta 76(5):965–977
9. Boll J, Brooks ES, Crabtree B, Dun S, Steenhuis TS (2015) Variable source area hydrology modelling with the water erosion prediction project model. JAWRA J Am Water Resources Assoc 51(2):330–342
10. Brooks ES, Dobre M, Elliot WJ, Wu JQ, Boll J (2016) Watershed-scale evaluation of the Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model in the Lake Tahoe basin. J Hydrol 533:389–402
11. Chabbi A, Yallese MA, Meddour I, Nouioua M, Mabrouki T, Girardin F (2017) Predictive modelling and multi-response optimization of technological parameters in turning of Polyoxymethylene polymer (POM C) using RSM and desirability function. Measurement 95:99–115
12. Chandramohan T, Venkatesh B, Balchand AN (2015) Evaluation of three soil erosion models for small watersheds. Aquatic Procedia 4:1227–1234
13. Chen C, Ren T, Hu K, Li B, Wang Y (2014) Estimation of soil clay content using hygroscopic water content at an arbitrary humidity. Soil Sci Soc Am J 78(1):119–124
14. Corella JP, Benito G, Wilhelm B, Montoya E, Rull V, Vegas T, Valero-Garcés BL (2019) A millennium-long perspective of flood-related seasonal sediment yield in Mediterranean watersheds. Glob Planet Change 177:127–140
15. De Oliveira Faber M, Ferreira-Leitão VS (2016) Optimization of biohydrogen yield produced by bacterial consortia using residual glycerin from biodiesel production. Biores Technol 219:365–370
16. Dinarvand M, Rezaee M, Foroughi M (2017) Optimizing culture conditions for the production of intra and extracellular inulinase and invertase from Aspergillus Niger ATCC 20611 by response surface methodology (RSM). Braz J Microbiol 48(3):427–441
17. Diodato N, Gericke A, Bellocchi G (2012) Modelling the inter-annual variability of sediment yields: a case study for the upper Lech River. Catena 97:12–19
18. Dybkjær JB, Baattrup-Pedersen A, Kronvang B, Thodsen H (2012) Diversity and distribution of riparian plant communities in relation to stream size and eutrophication. J Environ Qual 41(2):348–354
19. Feng H, Kurkalova LA, Kling CL, Gassman PW (2006) Environmental conservation in agriculture: land retirement vs. changing practices on working land. J Environ Econ Manag 52(2):600–614
20. Flanagan DC, Nearing MA (1995) USDA-Water Erosion Prediction Project: Hillslope profile and watershed model documentation, vol 10, pp 1603–1612. NSERL report
21. Flanagan DC, Frankenberger JR, Cochrane TA, Renschler CS, Elliot WJ (2013) Geospatial application of the water erosion prediction project (WEPP) model. Trans ASABE 56(2):591–601
22. Gao Y, Xu J, Luo X, Zhu J, Nie L (2016) Experiment research on mix design and early mechanical performance of alkali-activated slag using response surface methodology (RSM). Ceram Int 42(10):11666–11673
23. Giannecchini R (2006) Relationship between rainfall and shallow landslides in the southern Apuan Alps (Italy). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6(3):357–364
24. IPBES (2018) In: Scholes R, Montanarella L, Brainich A, Barger N, ten Brink B, Cantele M, Erasmus B, Fisher J, Gardner T, Holland TG, Kohler F, Kotiaho JS, Von Maltitz G, Nangendo G, Pandit R, Parrotta J, Potts MD, Prince S, Sankaran M, Willemen L (eds) Summary for policymakers of the assessment report on land degradation and restoration of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn
25. Jarzyna JA, Puskarczyk E, Motyka J (2019) Estimating porosity and hydraulic conductivity for hydrogeology on the basis of reservoir and elastic petrophysical parameters. J Appl Geophys 167:11–18
26. Johnson CW, Gebhardt KA (1982) Predicting sediment yields from sagebrush rangelands [Pacific Southwest Inter-Agency Committee prediction procedure, southwest Idaho]. Agric Rev Manuals
27. Karimifard S, Moghaddam MRA (2018) Application of response surface methodology in physicochemical removal of dyes from wastewater: a critical review. Sci Total Environ 640:772–797
28. Keshtegar B, Allawi MF, Afan HA, El-Shafie A (2016) Optimized river stream-flow forecasting model utilizing high-order response surface method. Water Resour Manag 30(11):3899–3914
29. Kinnell PIA, Wang J, Zheng F (2018) Comparison of the abilities of WEPP and the USLE-M to predict event soil loss on steep loessal slopes in China. Catena 171:99–106
30. Kirkby MJ, Irvine BJ, Jones RJ, Govers G, PESERA team (2008) The PESERA coarse scale erosion model for Europe. I.–Model rationale and implementation. Eur J Soil Sci 59(6):1293–1306
31. Kumar AK, Kalaiselvi B, Sujata K, Nair KM, Singh SK (2016) Characterization of red and lateritic soils formed under varied climates and their management. Clay Res 35(1):43–53
32. Kumar M, Singh G, Arya SK, Bhatti JS, Sharma P (2018) Artificial Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) based validation of laccase production using RSM model. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol 14:235–240
33. Laflen JM, Flanagan DC (2013) The development of US soil erosion prediction and modeling. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 1(2):1–11
34. Long X, Cai L, Li W (2019) RSM-based assessment of pavement concrete mechanical properties under joint action of corrosion, fatigue, and fiber content. Constr Build Mater 197:406–420
35. Mangalassery S, Kalaivanan D, Philip PS (2019) Effect of inorganic fertilizers and organic amendments on soil aggregation and biochemical characteristics in a weathered tropical soil. Soil Tillage Res 187:144–151
36. Meliho M, Nouira A, Benmansour M, Boulmane M, Khattabi A, Mhammdi N, Benkdad A (2019) Assessment of soil erosion rates in a Mediterranean cultivated and uncultivated soils using fallout 137Cs. J Environ Radioact 208:106021
37. Mhazo N, Chivenge P, Chaplot V (2016) Tillage impact on soil erosion by water: discrepancies due to climate and soil characteristics. Agric Ecosyst Environ 230:231–241
38. Mondal A, Khare D, Kundu S, Mukherjee S, Mukhopadhyay A, Mondal S (2017) Uncertainty of soil erosion modeling using open source high resolution and aggregated DEMs. Geosci Front 8(3):425–436
39. Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM (2009) Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Wiley, New York
40. Muthusamy S, Manickam LP, Murugesan V, Muthukumaran C, Pugazhendhi A (2019) Pectin extraction from Helianthus annuus (sunflower) heads using RSM and ANN modelling by a genetic algorithm approach. Int J Biol Macromol 124:750–758
41. Najafi G, Ghobadian B, Yusaf T, Ardebili SMS, Mamat R (2015) Optimization of performance and exhaust emission parameters of a SI (spark ignition) engine with gasoline-ethanol blended fuels using response surface methodology. Energy 90:1815–1829
42. Nasiri A, Shirokova V, Zareie S, Shojaei S (2017) Assessment of the statue and intensity of water erosion in the river basin Delichai (Iranian territory) using GIS model. In: International multidisciplinary scientific Geoconference: SGEM: surveying geology and mining ecology management, vol 17, pp 89–96
43. Park S, Oh C, 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):263–273
44. Pattanaik A, Rayasam V (2018) Analysis of reverse cationic iron ore fines flotation using RSM-D-optimal design–An approach towards sustainability. Adv Powder Technol 29(12):3404–3414
45. Podder MS, Majumder CB (2015) Modeling of optimum conditions for bioaccumulation of As (III) and As (V) by response surface methodology (RSM). J Environ Chem Eng 3(3):1986–2001
46. Pour AH, Ardebili SMS, Sheikhdavoodi MJ (2018) Multi-objective optimization of diesel engine performance and emissions fueled with diesel-biodiesel-fusel oil blends using response surface method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(35):35429–35439
47. Qian F, Cheng D, Liu J (2014) Analysis of the water and soil erosion and infiltration characteristic in Ziquejie Terrace. IERI Procedia 9:13–19
48. Rao MS, Venkaiah N (2015) Parametric optimization in machining of Nimonic-263 alloy using RSM and particle swarm optimization. Procedia Mater Sci 10:70–79
49. Schaap MG, Leij FJ (2000) Improved prediction of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity with the Mualem-van Genuchten model. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64(3):843–851
50. Schole RJ, Kanter DR, Musumba M, Wood SL, Palm C, Antle J, Balvanera P, Thornton P (2018) Evaluating agricultural trade-offs in the age of sustainable development. Agric Syst 163:73–88
51. Shaikh SM, Nasser MS, Hussein I, Benamor A, Onaizi SA, Qiblawey H (2017) Influence of polyelectrolytes and other polymer complexes on the flocculation and rheological behaviors of clay minerals: a comprehensive review. Sep Purif Technol 187:137–161
52. Sharma AK, Kaith BS, Tanwar V, Bhatia JK, Sharma N, Bajaj S, Panchal S (2019) RSM-CCD optimized sodium alginate/gelatin based ZnS-nanocomposite hydrogel for the effective removal of biebrich scarlet and crystal violet dyes. Int J Biol Macromol 129:214–226
53. Sherriff SC, Rowan JS, Fenton O, Jordan P (2018) Sediment fingerprinting as a tool to identify temporal and spatial variability of sediment sources and transport pathways in agricultural catchments. Agric Ecosyst Environ 267:188–200
54. Shojaei S, Ardakani MAH, Sodaiezadeh H (2019) Optimization of parameters affecting organic mulch test to control erosion. J Environ Manag 249:109414
55. Spagnoli G, Shimobe S (2019) A statistical reappraisal of the relationship between liquid limit and specific surface area, cation exchange capacity and activity of clays. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 11:874–881
56. Tan YH, Abdullah MO, Nolasco-Hipolito C, Zauzi NSA (2017) Application of RSM and Taguchi methods for optimizing the transesterification of waste cooking oil catalyzed by a solid ostrich and chicken-eggshell derived CaO. Renew Energy 114:437–447
57. Thomas GW (1982) Exchangeable cations. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of soil analysis, Part 2, Chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd edn. Agronomy, No. 9, Part 2. American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WL, pp 159–165
58. Tiwari AK, Risse LM, Nearing MA (2000) Evaluation of WEPP and its comparison with USLE and RUSLE. Trans ASAE 43(5):1129
59. Wee SK, Yap YJ (2019) CFD study of sand erosion in pipeline. J Petrol Sci Eng 176:269–278
60. Xiong M, Sun R, Chen L (2019) A global comparison of soil erosion associated with land use and climate type. Geoderma 343:31–39
61. Xu L, Xu X, Meng X (2013) Risk assessment of soil erosion in different rainfall scenarios by RUSLE model coupled with Information Diffusion Model: a case study of Bohai Rim, China. Catena 100:74–82

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021)

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-64b9f52c-04c1-4e13-8d37-4b38b7d746ad