Spatial modelling of soil salinity: deep or shallow learning models?

Mohammadifar, A., Gholami, H., Golzari, S. and Collins, AdrianORCID logo (2021) Spatial modelling of soil salinity: deep or shallow learning models? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28. pp. 39432-39450. 10.1007/s11356-021-13503-7
Copy

Understanding the spatial distribution of soil salinity is required to conserve land against degradation and desertification. Against this background, this study is the first attempt to predict soil salinity in the Jaghin basin, in southern Iran, by applying and comparing the performance of four deep learning (DL) models (deep convolutional neural networks—DCNNs, dense connected deep neural networks—DenseDNNs, recurrent neural networks-long short-term memory—RNN-LSTM and recurrent neural networks-gated recurrent unit—RNN-GRU) and six shallow machine learning (ML) models (bagged classification and regression tree—BCART, cforest, cubist, quantile regression with LASSO penalty—QR-LASSO, ridge regression—RR and support vectore machine—SVM). To do this, 49 environmental landsat8-derived variables including digital elevation model (DEM)-extracted covariates, soil-salinity indices, and other variables (e.g., soil order, lithology, land use) were mapped spatially. For assessing the relationships between soil salinity (EC) and factors controlling EC, we collected 319 surficial (0–5 cm depth) soil samples for measuring soil salinity on the basis of electrical conductivity (EC). We then selected the most important features (covariates) controlling soil salinity by applying a MARS model. The performance of the DL and shallow ML models for generating soil salinity spatial maps (SSSMs) was assessed using a Taylor diagram and the Nash Sutcliff coefficient (NSE). Among all 10 predictive models, DL models with NSE ≥ 0.9 (DCNNs was the most accurate model with NSE = 0.96) were selected as the four best models, and performed better than the six shallow ML models with NSE ≤ 0.83 (QR-LASSO was the weakest predictive model with NSE = 0.50). Based on DCNNs-, the values of the EC ranged between 0.67 and 14.73 dS/m, whereas for QR-LASSO the corresponding EC values were 0.37 to 19.6 dS/m. Overall, DL models performed better than shallow ML models for production of the SSSMs and therefore we recommend applying DL models for prediction purposes in environmental sciences.

visibility_off picture_as_pdf

picture_as_pdf
Mohammadifar et al. 21-ESPR .pdf
subject
Published Version
lock
Restricted to Repository staff only
Available under Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0


Atom BibTeX OpenURL ContextObject in Span OpenURL ContextObject Dublin Core MPEG-21 DIDL Data Cite XML EndNote HTML Citation METS MODS RIOXX2 XML Reference Manager Refer ASCII Citation
Export

Downloads