| Literature DB >> 27873789 |
Alaaddin Yuksel1, Recep Gundogan2, Abdullah E Akay3.
Abstract
The soil erosion is the most serious environmental problem in watershed areas in Turkey. The main factors affecting the amount of soil erosion include vegetation cover, topography, soil, and climate. In order to describe the areas with high soil erosion risks and to develop adequate erosion prevention measures in the watersheds of dams, erosion risk maps should be generated considering these factors. Remote Sensing (RS) and Geographic Information System (GIS) technologies were used for erosion risk mapping in Kartalkaya Dam Watershed of Kahramanmaras, Turkey, based on the methodology implemented in COoRdination of INformation on the Environment (CORINE) model. ASTER imagery was used to generate a land use/cover classification in ERDAS Imagine. The digital maps of the other factors (topography, soil types, and climate) were generated in ArcGIS v9.2, and were then integrated as CORINE input files to produce erosion risk maps. The results indicate that 33.82%, 35.44%, and 30.74% of the study area were under low, moderate, and high actual erosion risks, respectively. The CORINE model integrated with RS and GIS technologies has great potential for producing accurate and inexpensive erosion risk maps in Turkey.Entities:
Keywords: CORINE; GIS; Kartalkaya Dam Watershed; RS
Year: 2008 PMID: 27873789 PMCID: PMC3705475 DOI: 10.3390/s8084851
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.The location of the study area on the topographic map of Turkey and on the ASTER image.
Figure 2.Flow diagram of CORINE method (Modified from [7]).
Figure 3.The soil erodibility layer of the study area.
Figure 4.The slope layer of the study area.
Figure 5.Land use/cover classes after supervised classification of the study area.
The results from the accuracy assessment process.
| Class Names | Reference Data | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| Forest | Irrigated Crops | Stubble | Fallow | Range Land | Water Body | Bare Land/Residential | Total | User's Accuracy | |
|
| |||||||||
| Forest | 75 | 10 | 1 | 10 | 6 | 1 | 103 | 72.82 | |
| Irrigated Crops | 15 | 15 | 100.00 | ||||||
| Stubble | 2 | 35 | 5 | 42 | 83.33 | ||||
| Fallow | 3 | 1 | 12 | 3 | 19 | 63.16 | |||
| Range Land | 2 | 3 | 39 | 1 | 45 | 86.67 | |||
| Water Body | 5 | 5 | 100.00 | ||||||
| Bare Land/Residential | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 26 | 76.92 | ||
|
| |||||||||
| Total | 83 | 26 | 39 | 26 | 49 | 5 | 27 | 256 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Producer's Accuracy | 90.36 | 57.69 | 89.74 | 46.15 | 79.59 | 100.00 | 74.07 | ||
Figure 6.The potential soil erosion risk layer of the study area.
The area of the potential and actual soil erosion risk indices for the study area.
| Index Values | Potential Erosion Risk | Actual Soil Erosion Risk | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Area (ha) | Percentage | Area (ha) | Percentage | |
| 1 | 15870 | 18.01 | 29797 | 34 |
| 2 | 30112 | 34.18 | 31221 | 35 |
| 3 | 42120 | 47.81 | 27084 | 31 |
| Total | 88102 | 100.00 | 88102 | 100 |
Figure 7.The actual soil erosion risk layer of the study area.