| Abstract: | One of the important methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of soil erosion models is to compare the predictions given by the model to measured data from soil loss collected on plots taken under natural rainfall conditions. While it is recognized that plot data contain natural variability, this factor is not quantitatively considered during such evaluations because our knowledge of natural variability between plots which have the same treatments is very limited. The goal of this study was to analyse sufficient replicated plot data and present methodology to allow the model evaluator to take natural, within‐treatment variability of erosion plots into account when models are tested. A large amount of data from pairs of replicated erosion plots was evaluated and quantified. The basis for the evaluation method presented is that if the difference between the model prediction and a measured plot data value lies within the population of differences between pairs of measured values, then the prediction is considered ‘acceptable’. A model ‘effectiveness’ coefficient was defined for studies undertaken on large numbers of prediction versus measured data comparisons. This method provides a quantitative criterion for taking into account natural variability and uncertainty in measured erosion plot data when those data are used to evaluate erosion models. Published in 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
