×

Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences

An International Peer-Reviewed Open Access Journal

Indexed in Scopus SCIE (Web of Science) Crossref GeoRef

« Back

ARTICLE IN » Volume 15, 2020 - Number 2

COMPARISON OF RUSLE AND SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATION ALGORITHMS FOR IDENTIFYING EROSION-PRONE AREAS IN A MOUNTAINOUS RURAL LANDSCAPE



Kwanele PHINZI1*, Njoya Silas NGETAR2, Osadolor EBHUOMA3 & Szilárd SZABÓ4
1Doctoral School of Earth Sciences, Department of Physical Geography and Geoinformatics, University of Debrecen, Egyetem tér 1., Debrecen H-4032, Hungary, e-mail: phinzi.kwanele@science.unideb.hu
2School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard College Campus, Durban 4041, South Africa, e-mail: njoya@ukzn.ac.za
3School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville Campus, Durban 4000, South Africa, e-mail: osadolorebhuoma@gmail.com
4Department of Physical Geography and Geoinformatics, University of Debrecen, Egyetem tér 1., Debrecen H-4032, Hungary, e-mail: Szabo.szilard@science.unideb.hu


Reading time: | words
Download PDF document Downloads: 2488

Abstract

The identification of erosion prone areas with reasonably high accuracy is a prerequisite for formulating relevant soil conservation measures especially in rural areas where there is much reliance on subsistence agriculture. The aim of this paper was to compare and exploit the complementary advantage of fusing three independent methods including the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) and two supervised image classification algorithms: Random Forest (RF) and Maximum Likelihood (ML). All analyses were conducted using a GIS proprietary software, ArcGIS. The results indicated that RF was the best with the highest overall accuracy (OA), producer’s accuracy (PA), and user’s accuracy (UA) of 87%, 78%, and 95%, respectively. RUSLE poorly performed relative to other methods, scoring the lowest PA (34%) and OA (66%), but slightly outperformed ML in terms of UA. From the user’s perspective, the performance of individual methods was satisfactory with each method achieving an UA of greater than 90% although ML and RUSLE were not satisfactory from the producer’s perspective, recording respective PAs of 56% and 34%. When the results from individual methods were fused, the accuracy increased above 90% across all accuracy indices, which is far above the 85% acceptable level for planning and management purposes.

Keywords:
  • RUSLE
  • supervised
  • classification
  • random
  • forest
  • maximum
  • likelihood
  • soil
  • erosion

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of CJEES and/or the editor(s). CJEES and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

© 2020 by the author(s). Licensee CJEES, Carpathian Association of Environment and Earth Sciences. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

How to cite

Kwanele PHINZI, Njoya Silas NGETAR, Osadolor EBHUOMA & Szilárd SZABÓ (2020). COMPARISON OF RUSLE AND SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATION ALGORITHMS FOR IDENTIFYING EROSION-PRONE AREAS IN A MOUNTAINOUS RURAL LANDSCAPE, Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, August 2020, Vol. 15, No. 2, p. 405 – 413; Doi:10.26471/cjees/2020/015/140

Google Scholar
Loading...

Checking for open citations...