HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kros, J. Articles by Finke, P. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kros, J. Articles by Finke, P. A. Agricola Articles by Kros, J. Articles by Finke, P. A.

Uncertainty Assessment in Modelling Soil Acidification at the European Scale: A Case Study

DLO Winand Staring Centre, P.O Box 125, 6700 AC Wageningen, the Netherlands;
Univ. of Amsterdam, Faculty of Environmental Science.

^* Corresponding author (j.kros{at}sc.dlo.nl).

ABSTRACT

When modelling soil acidification at the European scale, it is inevitable that both model and data have varying degrees of associated uncertainty. The present study attempted to quantify the uncertainty in long-term forecasts of soil solution concentrations of Al³⁺ and NO^–₃ concentrations resulting from the uncertainty in small resolution European-scale maps and input data, using the Netherlands as a case study. Large-scale forecasts were made with a relatively simple dynamic process-oriented model, SMART2. Model outputs were considered as block median concentrations and the block areal fractions in which concentrations exceeded a critical level. Sources of uncertainty considered included (i) uncertainty in soil and vegetation maps (categorical data), and (ii) uncertainty in soil and vegetation-related parameters (continuous data). The uncertainty in model outputs was quantified by an efficient two-step Monte Carlo simulation approach, which takes spatial correlation into account. The uncertainty in the input data at the European scale led to major uncertainties in the predicted Al³⁺ concentration. Uncertainties in the areas where the Al³⁺ concentration exceeded the maximum allowable concentration were much smaller. The uncertainties in soil-related parameters contributed most to the uncertainty in the A³⁺ concentration, whereas the uncertainty contributed by the soil and vegetation maps was negligible. For the NO^–₃ concentration, however, the uncertainty originated mainly from the soil and vegetation maps. Evaluation of the different error sources is of great practical significance, as it identifies which sources need further improvement. The present study shows that the uncertainty contribution of the different error sources depends greatly on the model output considered.

(current address: Univ. of Utrecht, P.O. Box 80115, 3508 TC Utrecht, the Netherlands)

Received for publication December 17, 1997.