Modeling the Impact of Climate Change and Land Use Change Scenarios on Soil Erosion at the Minab Dam Watershed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate and land use change can influence susceptibility to erosion and consequently land degradation. The aim of this study was to investigate in the baseline and a future period, the land use and climate change effects on soil erosion at an important dam watershed occupying a strategic position on the narrow Strait of Hormuz. The future climate change at the study area was inferred using statistical downscaling and validated by the Canadian earth system model (CanESM2). The future land use change was also simulated using the Markov chain and artificial neural network, and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation was adopted to estimate soil loss under climate and land use change scenarios. Results show that rainfall erosivity (R factor) will increase under all Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. The highest amount of R was 40.6 MJ mm ha−1 h−1y−1 in 2030 under RPC 2.6. Future land use/land cover showed rangelands turning into agricultural lands, vegetation cover degradation and an increased soil cover among others. The change of C and R factors represented most of the increase of soil erosion and sediment production in the study area during the future period. The highest erosion during the future period was predicted to reach 14.5 t ha−1 y−1, which will generate 5.52 t ha−1 y−1 sediment. The difference between estimated and observed sediment was 1.42 t ha−1 year−1 at the baseline period. Among the soil erosion factors, soil cover (C factor) is the one that watershed managers could influence most in order to reduce soil loss and alleviate the negative effects of climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".