| Literature DB >> 21909308 |
Yongnian Gao1, Junfeng Gao, Jiongfeng Chen.
Abstract
The study presented in this paper attempts to evaluate the spatial pattern of soil available phosphorus, as well as the relation between soil available phosphorus and environment factors including elevation, slope, precipitation, percentage of cultivated land, percentage of forest land, percentage of construction land and NDVI using statistical methods and GIS spatial analysis techniques. The results showed that the Spline Tension method performed the best in the prediction of soil available phosphorus in the Chaohu Lake watershed. The spatial variation of surface soil available phosphorus was high in Chaohu Lake watershed and the upstream regions around Chaohu Lake, including the west of Chaohu lake (e.g., southwest of Feixi county, east of Shucheng county and north of Lujiang county) and to the north of Chaohu Lake (e.g., south of Hefei city, south of Feidong county, southwest of Juchao district), had the highest soil available phosphorus content. The mean and standard deviation of soil available phosphorus content gradually decreased as the elevation or slope increased. The cultivated land comprised 60.11% of the watershed and of that land 65.63% belonged to the medium to very high SAP level classes, and it played a major role in SAP availability within the watershed and a potential source of phosphorus to Chaohu Lake resulting in eutrophication. Among the land use types, paddy fields have some of the highest maximum values and variation of coefficients. Subwatershed scale soil available phosphorus was significantly affected by elevation, slope, precipitation, percentage of cultivated land and percentage of forest land and was decided by not only these environmental factors but also some other factors such as artificial phosphorus fertilizer application.Entities:
Keywords: Chaohu Lake watershed; environmental factor; soil available phosphorous; spatial distribution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21909308 PMCID: PMC3166744 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph8083299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1.Location of the Chaohu Lake watershed in Anhui Province, China and the sampling sites of surface soil available phosphorous and subwatersheds in the Chaohu Lake watershed.
), the mean difference (MD), the mean absolute difference (MAD), and the mean absolute percent difference (MAPD) [21,22] as shown in Table 1, from the measured and predicted values.
Description of the statistics used in assessing the model performance.
| < | Mean of the observed variable | |
| < | Mean of the model-predicted variable | |
| MD | Mean difference | |
| MAD | Mean absolute difference | |
| MAPD | Mean absolute percent difference |
n represents the number of observations, and n = 10.
Figure 2.Predicted soil available phosphorus using (a) Kriging Ordinary Exponential (b) Kriging Ordinary Gaussian (c) Kriging Ordinary Spherical (d) IDW (e) Spline Regularized (f) Spline Tension methods.
Pearson correlation coefficient and statistical significance between the observed and predicted soil available phosphorus values using different interpolation methods.
| 0.738 | 0.835 | 0.267 | 0.738 | 0.809 | 0.906 | |
| 0.015 | 0.003 | 0.456 | 0.015 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (Two-tailed);
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (Two-tailed).
Figure 3.Predicted using (a) Kriging Ordinary Exponential (b) Kriging Ordinary Gaussian (c) Kriging Ordinary Spherical (d) IDW (e) Spline Regularized (f) Spline Tension methods versus observed soil available phosphorus.
Statistics of model performance for predicting soil available phosphorus.
| 13.25 | 20.77 | 7.52 | 9.12 | 68.78 | |
| 13.25 | 20.04 | 6.78 | 8.32 | 62.80 | |
| 13.25 | 20.81 | 7.55 | 12.05 | 90.92 | |
| 13.25 | 20.34 | 7.09 | 8.62 | 65.04 | |
| 13.25 | 18.46 | 5.21 | 8.32 | 62.77 | |
| 13.25 | 15.74 | 2.48 | 8.16 | 61.56 |
Summary statistics of soil available phosphorus of soil samples and predicted watershed-scale.
| 18.14 | 1.90 | 116.88 | 114.98 | 24.20 | 133.41 | |
| 22.55 | 0.00 | 135.97 | 135.97 | 26.98 | 119.65 |
Figure 4.Spatial distribution of surface soil available phosphorus (SSAP) in the Chaohu Lake watershed.
Summary statistics of soil available phosphorus of different nutrient levels.
| 1 | <3 | Extremely low | 6.72 | 1.71 | 0.87 | 50.88 |
| 2 | 3–5 | Very low | 7.46 | 4.01 | 0.59 | 14.71 |
| 3 | 5–10 | Low | 23.88 | 7.49 | 1.45 | 19.36 |
| 4 | 10–20 | Medium | 30.60 | 14.22 | 2.84 | 19.97 |
| 5 | 20–40 | High | 17.16 | 27.15 | 5.50 | 20.26 |
| 6 | >40 | Very high | 14.18 | 79.96 | 28.75 | 35.96 |
The level was delineated according to the classification standard of soil fertility of second soil survey of China [23].
Summary statistics of soil available phosphorus of different elevation levels.
| 1 | 0–10 | 28.57 | 0.00 | 135.97 | 32.64 | 36.92 | 113.11 |
| 2 | 10–50 | 43.61 | 0.00 | 135.97 | 21.76 | 22.99 | 105.65 |
| 3 | 50–100 | 13.53 | 0.00 | 118.88 | 17.32 | 15.25 | 88.05 |
| 4 | 100–500 | 12.03 | 0.00 | 112.33 | 9.57 | 12.35 | 129.05 |
| 5 | 500–1480 | 2.26 | 0.00 | 18.16 | 9.92 | 5.70 | 57.46 |
Summary statistics of soil available phosphorus of different slope levels.
| 1 | 0–3 | 78.47 | 0.00 | 135.97 | 25.46 | 28.77 | 113.00 |
| 2 | 3–5 | 4.77 | 0.00 | 135.52 | 15.23 | 17.52 | 115.09 |
| 3 | 5–8 | 3.76 | 0.00 | 133.17 | 13.17 | 15.85 | 120.35 |
| 4 | 8–15 | 6.25 | 0.00 | 119.53 | 11.58 | 14.94 | 128.93 |
| 5 | 15–25 | 5.21 | 0.00 | 119.43 | 9.53 | 12.15 | 127.45 |
| 6 | 25–49.75 | 1.54 | 0.00 | 106.53 | 8.41 | 7.06 | 83.94 |
Summary statistics of soil available phosphorus of different land use types.
| 112 | 16.14 | 0.00 | 130.75 | 130.75 | 21.97 | 25.27 | 115.02 |
| 113 | 32.39 | 0.00 | 135.97 | 135.97 | 21.97 | 28.03 | 127.58 |
| 122 | 7.14 | 0.00 | 100.22 | 100.22 | 11.75 | 12.88 | 109.62 |
| 123 | 4.44 | 1.32 | 96.27 | 94.95 | 13.94 | 10.35 | 74.25 |
| 21 | 19.60 | 0.00 | 130.67 | 130.67 | 10.63 | 12.95 | 121.83 |
| 22 | 2.06 | 0.00 | 108.13 | 108.13 | 15.75 | 11.99 | 76.13 |
| 23 | 0.03 | 22.71 | 85.02 | 62.32 | 46.84 | 27.37 | 58.43 |
| 24 | 0.03 | 5.28 | 57.54 | 52.26 | 31.59 | 14.59 | 46.19 |
| 31 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 104.81 | 104.78 | 17.45 | 17.06 | 97.77 |
| 32 | 0.01 | 10.43 | 32.07 | 21.65 | 18.44 | 9.08 | 49.24 |
| 65 | 0.001 | 19.95 | 23.18 | 3.23 | 21.51 | 1.23 | 5.72 |
Notes: 112—Paddy fields in hilly area, 113—Paddy fields in plain area, 122—Dry land in hilly area, 123—Dry land in plain area, 21—Dense woodland, 22—Shrub land, 23—Sparse woodland, 24—Other forest land, 31—High coverage grassland, 32—Medium coverage grassland, 65—Bare land.
Figure 5.Spatial distribution of soil available phosphorus levels in different land use types. In the legend, the number before the symbol “-” represents the land use types and the 1, 2, 3 and 65 represents cultivated land, forest land, grassland, and bare land respectively, the number after the symbol “-” represents the soil available phosphorus levels as shown in Table 5.
Figure 6.Area percentage of different soil available phosphorus levels in different cultivated land types.
Correlation coefficient of subwatershed scale soil available phosphorus content and environmental factors.
| 1 | −0.180 | −0.216 | −0.192 | 0.213 | −0.256 | 0.008 | −0.021 | |
| −0.180 | 1 | 0.898 | 0.345 | −0.640 | 0.747 | −0.177 | 0.568 | |
| −0.216 | 0.898 | 1 | 0.393 | −0.748 | 0.872 | −0.202 | 0.630 | |
| −0.192 | 0.345 | 0.393 | 1 | −0.195 | 0.386 | −0.430 | 0.401 | |
| 0.213 | −0.640 | −0.748 | −0.195 | 1 | −0.863 | −0.108 | −0.252 | |
| −0.256 | 0.747 | 0.872 | 0.386 | −0.863 | 1 | −0.248 | 0.580 | |
| 0.008 | −0.177 | −0.202 | −0.430 | −0.108 | −0.248 | 1 | −0.463 | |
| −0.021 | 0.568 | 0.630 | 0.401 | −0.252 | 0.580 | −0.463 | 1 |
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (Two-tailed).
Effect of different environment factors on soil available phosphorus in subwatershed scale (mg/kg).
| 29.64a | 24.63a | 23.76a | 11.38a | 27.11a | |
| 22.48b | 15.38b | 33.49b | 15.64ab | 20.00b | |
| 16.46c | 12.41b | 19.07ac | 13.22a | 14.38bc | |
| 9.63d | 9.70b | 15.31c | 22.72bc | 11.11c | |
| 10.86bcde | 8.26b | 10.70c | 26.27c | 11.16c | |
| 12.049 | 10.749 | 18.253 | 12.098 | 18.033 | |
| 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
The difference is significant (P < 0.05): values in each column with the same letter are not significantly different among environment factors. The five levels for P was <1100 mm, 1100–1200 mm, 1200–1300 mm, 1300–1400 mm and >1400 mm, the five levels for PCL1 was <20%, 20–40%, 40–60%, 60–80% and >80%, the five levels for PFL was <5%, 5–15%, 15–25%, 25–55% and >55%.