Assessment of Two Methods for Predicting Soil Retention Relationship from Basic Soil Properties
			
	
 
Więcej
Ukryj
	
	
									
				1
				Department of Soil Sciences and Water Resources, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
				 
			 
										
				
				
		
		 
			
			
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
							
					    		
    			 
    			
    				    					Autor do korespondencji
    					    				    				
    					Zahraa M. Mohammed   
    					Department of Soil Sciences and Water Resources, College of Agricultural Engineering Sciences, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
    				
 
    			
				 
    			 
    		 		
			
												 
		
	 
		
 
 
Ecol. Eng. Environ. Technol. 2023; 6:61-69
		
 
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
STRESZCZENIE
The purpose of this study was to develop the best transfer functions for estimating the soil water retention curve (SWRC) for Iraqi soils using multiple regression methods. Soil samples were collected from 30 different sites in Iraq at two depths (0-0.3 m and 0.3-0.6 m) to create a database for the development of predictive transfer functions. The database included information on soil particle size distribution, carbonate minerals, mass density, particle density, organic matter, saturated hydraulic conductivity, capillary height, and available water limits. Explanatory variables (EV) were the measured characteristics, while response variables (RV) were the volumetric water content measured at different potentials (0, 5, 10, 33, 500, 1000, 1500 kPa).  Two methods were used to develop predictive transfer functions: the logit model and beta model. Prediction accuracy was assessed using mean bias error (MBE), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), and coefficient of determination (R2). The results showed that the variables included in the derivation of the two models for predicting θ(Ψ) were similar, except at θ(0). The variables w1(w1=2P_(sand°)-P_(silt°)-P_(caly°)-P_carbonate), capillary height, available water, and porosity were found to be included in most of the logit and beta models. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences between the MAE, RMSE, and R2 values of the two models. However, the beta model performed better in terms of MBE compared to the logit model. The models also demonstrated highly significant R2 values (0.9819 -1.00) for a linear relationship between the measured and predicted water content values.