SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Gıda Tarım ve Hayvan Bilimleri Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2

Modelling of Soil Quality in Solhan Plain of Bingöl by Ordinary Kriging Method

Modeling of Soil Quality by Ordinary Kriging Method

Veysel Alp(harran üniversitesi)0000-0001-7880-9879
Pages
92–104
Publication Date
2025-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results, physical soil quality was determined as "medium" with an average score of 60, chemical quality as "low" with an average score of 54, and biological quality as "low" with an average score of 48.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, in order to evaluate the soil quality of Bingöl Solhan Plain, soil samples taken from 85 different points at 0-30 cm depth were analyzed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Physical (texture, volume weight, water content, etc.), chemical (pH, EC, lime, Na, etc.) and biological (organic matter) parameters were analyzed by creating 300 m x 300 m grid spacing with ArcGIS 10.8 software.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results, physical soil quality was determined as "medium" with an average score of 60, chemical quality as "low" with an average score of 54, and biological quality as "low" with an average score of 48.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:SMAF · Soil Quality · Modelling

Abstract

In this study, in order to evaluate the soil quality of Bingöl Solhan Plain, soil samples taken from 85 different points at 0-30 cm depth were analyzed. Physical (texture, volume weight, water content, etc.), chemical (pH, EC, lime, Na, etc.) and biological (organic matter) parameters were analyzed by creating 300 m x 300 m grid spacing with ArcGIS 10.8 software. Soil quality index was calculated using SMAF model and additive index method. According to the results, physical soil quality was determined as "medium" with an average score of 60, chemical quality as "low" with an average score of 54, and biological quality as "low" with an average score of 48. Overall soil quality was evaluated in the "medium" category with an average score of 56. In order to increase the functionality of the soils, remedial measures such as crop rotation and barnyard manure applications were recommended. It was also emphasized that the SMAF model is an effective tool for sustainable land management.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Bingöl Solhan Ovası'nın toprak kalitesini değerlendirmek amacıyla, 85 farklı noktadan alınan 0-30 cm derinlikteki toprak örnekleri analiz edilmiştir. ArcGIS 10.8 yazılımıyla 300 m x 300 m grid aralıkları oluşturularak fiziksel (tekstür, hacim ağırlığı, su içeriği vb.), kimyasal (pH, EC, kireç, Na vb.) ve biyolojik (organik madde) parametreler incelenmiştir. SMAF modeli ve eklemeli indeks yöntemi kullanılarak toprak kalite indeksi hesaplanmıştır. Sonuçlara göre, fiziksel toprak kalitesi ortalama 60 skorla "orta", kimyasal kalite ortalama 54 skorla "düşük", biyolojik kalite ise ortalama 48 skorla "düşük" olarak belirlenmiştir. Genel toprak kalitesi ortalama 56 skorla "orta" kategorisinde değerlendirilmiştir. Toprakların işlevselliğini artırmak için ekim nöbeti, ahır gübresi uygulamaları gibi iyileştirici önlemler önerilmiştir. Ayrıca, SMAF modelinin sürdürülebilir arazi yönetimi için etkili bir araç olduğu vurgulanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alp, V. (2025). Modelling of Soil Quality in Solhan Plain of Bingöl by Ordinary Kriging Method. Uluslararası Gıda Tarım ve Hayvan Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2, 92–104. https://ajindex.com/articles/1623451

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (65)

  1. Acar, M. (2023). Aşağı Seyhan Ovasında toprak kalitesinin değerlendirilmesi ve izlenmesinde amenajmana hassas indikatörlerin belirlenmesi [Doktora tezi]. Çukurova Üniversitesi.
  2. Adriano, D. C., Albright, J., Whicker, F. W., Iskandar, I. K., & Sherony, C. (1997). Remediation of soils contaminated with metals and radionuclide-contaminated soils. In Remediation of soils contaminated with metals (pp. 27-46). Science Reviews.
  3. Alaboz, P., Dengiz, O., Pacci, S., Demir, S., & Türkay, C. (2022). Determination of the effect of different organic fertilizers applications on soil quality using the SMAF model. Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 32(1), 21-32.
  4. Alloway, B. J. (1990). Heavy metals in soils. Blackie and Son Ltd.
  5. Alp, V., & Demirkıran, A. R. Determination of Productivity Status of Agricultural Lands in Solhan District of Bingöl Province. Uluslararası Gıda Tarım ve Hayvan Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 22-29.
  6. Alp, V., Aydemir, S., Bilgili, A.V., Demirkıran, A.R. & Kılıç, M. Solhan Ovası'ndaki Toprak Kalitesi Parametrelerinin Yapay Sinir Ağları Kullanılarak Modellenmesi ve Tahmin Doğruluğu İçin Farklı Algoritmaların Karşılaştırılması. Avrasya Toprak Bilimi 58, 109 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229325600745.
  7. Andrews, S., Karlen, D., & Cambardella, C. (2004). The Soil Management Assessment Framework: A quantitative soil quality evaluation method. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 68, 1945-1962.
  8. Anonim. (2024). Bingöl Meteoroloji İstasyon Müdürlüğü: Bingöl iline ait 33 yıllık iklim verileri.
  9. Anonim. (2024). www.dw.com. Erişim tarihi: 27 Ekim 2024.
  10. Askarı, M. S., & Holden, N. M. (2015). Quantitative soil quality indexing of temperate arable management systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 150, 57-67.
  11. Audsley, E., Alber, S., & Gemeinschaften, E. (1997). Harmonisation of environmental life cycle assessment for agriculture. European Commission, DG VI Agriculture.
  12. Bayram, M., Günal, H., & Özgöz, E. (2015). Sürdürülebilir toprak işleme yöntemlerinin belirlenmesinde toprak kalitesi değerlendirmelerinin önemi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 25(3), 337-346.
  13. Beare, M. H., Tian, M., Vikram, & Srivastava, S. C. (1997). Agricultural intensification, soil biodiversity, and agro-ecosystem function. Applied Soil Ecology, 6, 87-108.
  14. Black, C. A. (1965). Methods of soil analysis: Part I Physical and mineralogical properties. American Society of Agronomy.
  15. Blake, G. R., & Hartge, K. H. (1986). Bulk density. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 1 (2nd ed., pp. 363-375). ASA and SSSA.
  16. Bouyoucos, G. J. (1955). A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of the soils. Agronomy Journal, 47(9), 434-438.
  17. Budak, M., Gunal, H., Celik, I., Yildiz, H., Acir, N., & Acar, M. (2018). Soil quality assessment of upper Tigris basin. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 13, 301-316.
  18. Cameron, K., Beare, M. H., McLaren, R. P., & Di, H. (1998). Selecting physical, chemical, and biological indicators of soil quality for degraded or polluted soils. Proceedings of 16th World Congress of Soil Science, Montpellier, France.
  19. Chen, Z. S. (1998). Management of contaminated soil remediation programmes. Land Contamination & Reclamation, 6, 41-56.
  20. Chen, Z. S., Lee, D. Y., Lin, C. F., Lo, S. L., & Wang, Y. P. (1996). Contamination of rural and urban soils in Taiwan. In R. Naidu et al. (Eds.), Contaminants and the soil environment in the Australasia-Pacific region (pp. 339-365). Springer.
  21. Cherubın, M. R., Tormena, C. A., & Karlen, D. L. (2017). Soil quality evaluation using the Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF) in Brazilian Oxisols with contrasting texture. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, 41, e0160148.
  22. De Andrade Bonettı, J., Nunes, M. R., Fink, J. R., Tretto, T., & Tormena, C. A. (2023). Agricultural practices to improve near-surface soil health and crop yield in subtropical soils. Soil and Tillage Research, 234, 105835.
  23. Demirkıran, A. R., Akkaya, A., Türkmener, M. F., Türkmener, M. Ç., & Akkaya, S. (2008). Toprak verimliliğini arttırmada kullanılabilecek alternative organik bir materyal: Gidya (Gyttja), Dünya Su Forumu, Sulama-Tuzlanma Toplantısı, Bildiri Sh. Şanlıurfa, Türkiye (Turkish), 5, 159-168.
  24. Dinel, H., Mehuys, G. R., & Levesque, M. (1991). Influence of humic and fibric materials on the aggregation and aggregate stability of a lacustrine silty clay. Soil Science, 151(2), 146-158.
  25. Doran, J. W. (2002). Soil health and global sustainability: Translating science into practice. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 88, 119-127.
  26. Doran, J. W., & Parkin, T. B. (1994). Defining and assessing soil quality. In J. W. Doran et al. (Eds.), Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment (SSSA Special Publication No. 35, pp. 3-22). Soil Science Society of America.
  27. Gee, G. W., & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle-size analysis. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 1 (2nd ed., pp. 383-411). ASA and SSSA.
  28. Govaerts, B., Sayre, K. D., & Deckers, J. (2006). A minimum data set for soil quality assessment of wheat and maize in the highlands of Mexico. Soil and Tillage Research, 87, 163–174.
  29. Gugino, B. K., Abawi, G. S., Idowu, O. J., Schindelbeck, R. R., Smith, L. L., Thies, J. E., Wolfe, D. W., & van Es, H. M. (2009). Cornell soil health assessment training manual. Cornell University.
  30. Gündoğan, R., Yılmaz, K., Demirkıran, A. R., & Yakupoğlu, T. (2013). Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Avşar Kampüsü topraklarının özellikleri, oluşumu, sınıflandırılması ve kullanımı. III. Ulusal Toprak ve Su Kaynakları Kongresi, 22-24.
  31. Gyawali, A. J., Neely, H. L., Foster, J. L., Neely, C. B., Lewis, K. L., Bodine, G., & Smith, A. P. (2023). Assessing soil health in a thermic region of the southern great plains, using the soil management assessment framework (SMAF). Soil Security, 13, 100115.
  32. Hseu, Z. Y., Chen, Z. S., & Tsai, C. C. (1999). Selected indicators and conceptual framework for assessment methods of soil quality in arable soils of Taiwan. Soil and Environment, 2, 77-88.
  33. ICRCL. (1987). Guidance on the assessment and redevelopment of contaminated land (ICRCL Paper 59/83). Department of the Environment.
  34. Jacobs, L. W. (1990). Potential hazards when using organic materials as fertilizers for crop production (FFTC Extension Bulletin No. 313). Food and Fertilizer Technology Center.
  35. Jimenez, L. C. Z., Queiroz, H. M., Cherubın, M. R., & Ferreira, T. O. (2022). Applying the soil management assessment framework (SMAF) to assess mangrove soil quality. Sustainability, 14(5), 3085.
  36. Karlen, D. L., Andrews, S. S., & Zobeck, T. M. (2008). Soil quality assessment: Past, present and future. Electronic Journal of Integrative Biosciences, 6(1), 3-14.
  37. Karlen, D. L., Tomer, M. D., Neppel, J., & Cambardella, C. A. (2008). A preliminary watershed scale soil quality assessment in north central Iowa, USA. Soil and Tillage Research, 99(2), 291-299.
  38. Karlen, D. L., Cambardella, C. A., Kovar, J. L., & Colvin, T. S. (2013). Soil quality response to long-term tillage and crop rotation practices. Soil and Tillage Research, 133, 54-64.
  39. Karlen, D. L., Veum, K. S., Sudduth, K. A., Obrycki, J. F., & Nunes, M. R. (2019). Soil health assessment: Past accomplishments, current activities, and future opportunities. Soil and Tillage Research, 195, 104365. Kırda, C., & Sarıyev, A. (2002). Toprak fiziği. Çukurova Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi.
  40. Larson, W. E., & Pierce, F. J. (1991). Conservation and enhancement of soil quality. In Evaluation for sustainable land management in the developing world (Vol. 2, pp. 34-61). IBSRAM.
  41. Ministry of Housing - Netherlands. (1994). Dutch intervention values of heavy metals and organic pollutants in soils, sediments, and groundwater (Report HSE 94.021).
  42. Mirsal, I. A. (2008). Soil pollution: Origin, monitoring & remediation (2nd ed.). Springer.
  43. Moncada, M. P., Pennings, L. H., Timm, L. C., Gabriels, D., & Cornelis, W. M. (2017). Visual examination of changes in soil structural quality due to land use. Soil and Tillage Research, 173, 83-91.
  44. Mukherjee, A., & Lal, R. (2014). Comparison of soil quality index using three methods. PLoS ONE, 9(8), e105981. Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1982). Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In A. L. Page et al. (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 2 (2nd ed., pp. 539-579). ASA and SSSA.
  45. Nunes, M. R., Karlen, D. L., Veum, K. S., & Moorman, T. B. (2020). A SMAF assessment of US tillage and crop management strategies. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 8, 100072.
  46. Öztaş, T. (1997). Toprak degradasyonu. Ekoloji, 6(22), 31-33.
  47. Öztaş, T. (2002). Assessment of soil quality. In International Conference on Sustainable Land Use and Management (pp. 484-485). Çanakkale.
  48. Pacci, S., Dengiz, O., Saygın, F., & Alaboz, P. (2022). Soil quality assessment of paddy cultivation lands in the Bafra plain based on the SMAF model. Turkish Journal of Agricultural Research, 9(2), 164–174.
  49. Pacci, S., & Dengiz, O. (2023). Ayçiçeği tarımı yapılan toprakların SMAF modeli ile toprak kalite indislerinin belirlenmesi: Tokat Zile İlçesi örneği. Toprak Bilimi ve Bitki Besleme Dergisi, 11(1), 54-66.
  50. Raiesi, F. (2017). A minimum data set and soil quality index to quantify the effect of land use conversion on soil quality and degradation in native rangelands of upland arid and semiarid regions. Ecological Indicators, 75, 307-320.
  51. Rezaei, S. A., Gilkes, R. J., & Andrews, S. S. (2006). A minimum data set for assessing soil quality in rangelands. Geoderma, 136(1-2), 229–234.
  52. Rhoades, J., Chandavi, D., & Lesch, S. F. (1999). Soil salinity assessment: Methods and interpretation of electrical conductivity measurements (FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 57). FAO.
  53. Sarıyev, A., Sesveren, S., Tülün, Y., Kaman, H., & Acar, M. (2020). Determination of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity at field conditions and mathematical modeling. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 26(2), 123-135.
  54. Schachtschabel, P., Blume, H. P., Brümmer, G. B., Hartge, K. H., & Schwertmann, U. (2007). Soil science (H. Özbek, M. Gök, & H. Kaptan, Çev.). Çukurova Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi.
  55. Şeker, C., Ozaytekin, H. H., Negiş, H., Gumuş, İ., Dedeoğlu, M., Atmaca, E., & Karaca, U. (2017). Assessment of soil quality index for wheat and sugar beet cropping systems on an entisol in Central Anatolia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 189(4), 135.
  56. Şenol, H., Alaboz, P., Demir, S., & Dengiz, O. (2020). Computational intelligence applied to soil quality index using GIS and geostatistical approaches in semiarid ecosystem. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 13(23), 1-20.
  57. Shukla, M. K., Lal, R., & Ebinger, M. (2006). Determining soil quality indicators by factor analysis. Soil and Tillage Research, 87, 194-204.
  58. Stevenson, F. J. (2005). Nitrogen—Organic forms. In D. L. Sparks et al. (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 (pp. 517-550). SSSA.
  59. Summer, M. E., & Miller, W. P. (1996). Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficients. In D. L. Sparks (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 (pp. 1205-1230). SSSA.
  60. Tiller, K. G. (1992). Urban soil contamination in Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 30, 937-957.
  61. Toth, G., Stolbovoy, V., & Montanarella, L. (2007). Soil quality and sustainability evaluation: An integrated approach to support soil-related policies of the European Union (EUR 22721 EN). JRC.
  62. USEPA. (1989). Standards for the disposal of sewage sludge: Proposed rules. Federal Register, 54, 5778-5902. Veum, K. S., Sudduth, K. A., Kremer, R. J., & Kitchen, N. R. (2017). Sensor data fusion for soil health assessment. Geoderma, 305, 53-61.
  63. Viserra Rossel, R. A., Walvoort, D. J. J., McBratney, A. B., Janik, L. J., & Skjemstad, J. O. (2006). Visible, near infrared, mid infrared or combined diffuse reflectance spectroscopy for simultaneous assessment of various soil properties. Geoderma, 131(1-2), 59–75.
  64. Yılmaz, K., Gündoğan, R., & Demirkıran, A. R. (1998). Pedogenesis and classification of soils in Kahramanmaraş Province, Turkey. In International Symposium on Desertification ISD, Proceedings p (pp. 517-524).
  65. Alp, V., Aydemir, S., Bilgili, A.V., Demirkıran, A.R. & Kılıç, M. Solhan Ovası'ndaki Toprak Kalitesi Parametrelerinin Yapay Sinir Ağları Kullanılarak Modellenmesi ve Tahmin Doğruluğu İçin Farklı Algoritmaların Karşılaştırılması. Avrasya Toprak Bilimi 58, 109 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229325600745.