MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416334559 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-24353-5

Impact of soil erosion on agricultural sustainability based on crop water productivity in semi-arid Iran

2025· article· en· W4416334559 on OpenAlexaff
Elham Rafiei-Sardooi, Fahimeh Mirchooli, Ali Azareh, John J. Clague

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedProductivityErosionLand useAgricultureAgricultural productivityHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffPopulationSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Soil erosion is a significant threat to global food production, reducing the productivity of natural ecosystems and agricultural lands. In this study, we examine the loss of crop water productivity in the Halil River agricultural watershed, Iran. Areas within this watershed that are prone to soil erosion were delineated using two machine learning algorithms viz. Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Multivariate Discriminant Analysis (MDA), and 11 geo-environmental factors including elevation, lithology, land use, hydrologic soil group, soil depth, drainage density, soil available water capacity (SAWC), population density, slope (degrees), R factor, and distance to road. Finally, the loss of blue, green, and total crop water productivity of some main cultivated crops (wheat, dates, citrus, and tomatoes) in the study watershed was assessed under pessimistic (20%), optimistic (10%), and normal (15%) scenarios of crop water productivity loss. The results indicate that hydrologic soil group, elevation, and land use are the most important factors for soil erosion susceptibility. In addition, validation results of machine learning algorithms showed that the SVM model (AUC = 94%, TSS = 0.85) outperformed MDA (AUC = 92.3%, TSS = 0.81), and was therefore selected for further analysis. According to the SVM model, 14.3% of the watershed falls within the very high erosion susceptibility class. Agricultural lands are mostly located in areas of moderate to very high erosion risk. Production of wheat, citrus, dates, and tomatoes in moderate, high, and very high areas of erosion susceptibility map are estimated to be 2.4, 5.3, 13.3, and 10.7 million tons, respectively. In the optimistic scenario, total productivity losses per unit of water consumed water by wheat, dates, citrus, and tomatoes are 0.22, 1.24, 2.15, and 2.35 kg m −3 . and total economic loss will be 14,371, 93,675, 83,247 and 51,893(×10 4 ) US$. In the more realistic scenario, these losses are, respectively, 0.32, 1.86, 3.23, and 3.53 kg per unit of consumed water and the economic loss are 21,557, 140,517, 124,872 and 77,841(×10 4 ) US$. The total productivity losses per unit of water consumed in the pessimistic scenario are, respectively, 0.43, 2.47, 4.30, and 4.70 kg m −3 and total economic loss are 28,743, 187,353, 166,494 and 103,782 (×10 4 ) US$. The results underscore the urgent need for site-specific erosion mitigation strategies to safeguard agricultural productivity and water efficiency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207