Quantitatively Verifying the Results' Rationality for Farmland Quality Evaluation with Crop Yield, a Case Study in the Northwest Henan Province, China

PLoS One. 2016 Aug 4;11(8):e0160204. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160204. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

Evaluating the assessing results' rationality for farmland quality (FQ) is usually qualitative and based on farmers and experts' perceptions of soil quality and crop yield. Its quantitative checking still remains difficult and is likely ignored. In this paper, FQ in Xiuwu County, the Northwest Henan Province, China was evaluated by the gray relational analysis (GRA) method and the traditional analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. The consistency rate of two results was analysed. Research focused on proposing one method of testing the evaluation results' rationality for FQ based on the crop yield. Firstly generating a grade map of crop yield and overlying it with the FQ evaluation maps. Then analysing their consistency rate for each grade in the same spatial position. Finally examining the consistency effects and allowing for a decision on adopting the results. The results showed that the area rate consistency and matching evaluation unit numbers between the two methods were 84.68% and 87.29%, respectively, and the space distribution was approximately equal. The area consistency rates between crop yield level and FQ evaluation levels by GRA and AHP were 78.15% and 74.29%, respectively. Therefore, the verifying effects of GRA and AHP were near, good and acceptable, and the FQ results from both could reflect the crop yield levels. The evaluation results by GCA, as a whole, were slightly more rational than that by AHP.

MeSH terms

  • China
  • Crops, Agricultural*
  • Phosphorus / analysis
  • Potassium / analysis
  • Salinity
  • Soil / chemistry*

Substances

  • Soil
  • Phosphorus
  • Potassium

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the key project of three major on the philosophy and social science of higher education in Henan Province (2014-szzd-27); Funding institution: Education Department of Henan Province; YLZ received the funding. This work was also supported by the National Nature Science Fund of China (40801102); Funding institution: National Natural Science Foundation of China; YLZ received the funding. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.