This forum is shutting down! Please post new discussions at


Hello everyone

I traying to recode my LULC with the codes that use RIOS ¿ Where I can find this table "RIOS_default_lulc_coefficients.csv" ?


  • Other Quiestion

    How can I calculate the "Soil Texture Index"  acoording to the manual in base flow model, if I have individual rasters for every textural classes (sand, clay, loan)  on the other hand, I have  soil class shapefile with many soil profiles in every class, with physical and chemical information per layer in every horizonts?

    Thanks for your answers
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hi @Jainer_Argeñal1981 -

    You do not need to recode your LULC to match anything in RIOS. You only need to make sure that the "lucode" values in your coefficients.csv match the "Value" integers in your LULC map. When RIOS first came out, we needed to do a special coding, but now we do not.

    Working with soil profiles is complicated, and each soil database is a little bit different. I have written some instructions for working with the Harmonized World Soil Database to create the soil inputs for the SDR and Annual Water Yield models, that you can access here. The actual soil layer that you will create is different than the ones used in SDR and AWY, but reading the instructions will give you an idea of how to use soil profiles to create input layers. 

    Since you are working with base flow, it will be important to consider the texture in the different horizons, not just the top horizon. This makes the calculations more complicated, but if you look through the examples, you'll see how to do them in Excel.

    ~ Stacie
  • I have reviewed your suggestion with my different HWSD soil database and found a couple of questions:

    1. The Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD) mentions soil fraction. ¿Does it mean different horizons within a soil type? sorry It confuse me

    2. I was trying to calculate the soil texture index, which mentions the user manual in 5 classes, (Sandy 0.2, Light 0.4, Medium 0.6, Heavy 0.8 Heavy to Rock 1.0). according to the textural classification of USDA, and taking the textural values ​​of existing profiles, I find values ​​between medium and heavy under the classification ranges

    my study area is of volcanic and tertiary origin and it could be logical, but ¿could we use values ​​of 0.3. 0.5, 0.7, 0.9 not included in the manual, assessing the percentages of the textural classes found to not only have 2 classes in the final raster?

    If I have sand, clay and silt raster modeled with SOILM and profiles observed in this area, ¿Do you have any idea if with this data, we could calculate the soil texture index like this one? some normalization analysis or something else

    see images to see textures and preliminary raster

    Thanks for your time really
    803 x 732 - 39K
    1049 x 633 - 210K
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    I'm not quite sure what you mean by "soil fraction" in the HWSD. There is a "SHARE" value, which is the percent of each soil unit (different "ID" values) within a particular mapping unit (the polygons in the soil shapefile, MU_GLOBAL.) If there are multiple soil units within a mapping unit, then you need to decide how to weight the different soil unit values, in order to calculate a single value that is applied to the mapping unit. Your soil database probably has similar data, it might just be called something different. 

    You may certainly use values of 0.3, 0.5 etc for soil texture, if that seems appropriate for your data. RIOS will simply normalize over the values that you provide, so the most important thing is to give correct relative values, so that heavier soils receive higher values (closer to 1) and lighter soils have lower values. And It is not unusual for soil maps to only end up with a few different values. Of course, in reality we know that there is probably a lot more differentiation across the area, but unfortunately soil maps usually do not have a very accurate, or fine-scale, level of detail.

    If you have sand/silt/clay information, then you can use something like this table provided in the RIOS User Guide to map the percentage of sand/silt/clay to the different categories light/medium/heavy/etc. There are some more manual tools out there that can calculate values for you, like this one from the USDA. The USDA page also shows the texture pyramid, which has similar values to what is in the RIOS table, and it might help visualize how to map the different sand/silt/clay percentages to texture types.

    ~ Stacie 

  • I am very grateful for your time and your answers, I will review it as soon as posible, I will let you know ASAP

    A question concerning the biophysical tables

    I have been collecting data on the coefficients and I have seen in the table of the pilot area "GURA" those referring to nutrients and sedimentation.

    In my database, I have taken some parallel data from a hydrological model made with SWAT, which give me certain results similar in concept to those required by the biophysical table. I have taken them from the output of hydrological response units (HRU) which are a combination of land use, slope and soil type, I have filtered a dynamic table for the variables that are similar for each LULC.

    Without a doubt, the units are different from the way they are added in the biophysical table. Do you think that this data resource could be valid for this purpose? Do you have any additional information that you can provide me?

    I attach table and sorry for English and Spanish at the same time

    Very grateful with your time
  • I can not upload the table,  appear this message

    ¿Do you Know How can I do?
    1897 x 381 - 55K
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Which RIOS objectives are you preparing data for? That would help me give more specific information.

    Yes, you can use data from SWAT to populate the biophysical table, I have done that also. Really, it's ok to use different units than what we might have used for Gura, because they will be normalized anyway. If you were running InVEST models, then it would be important to convert to the necessary units, but for RIOS it is not. 

    For uploading the table, what happens when you click on "Seleccionar archivo"? You should see a file system window where you can navigate to your table and select it. (Y hablo algo de español, así no hay problema con las lenguas, gracias por escribir en inglés!)

    ~ Stacie

  • Maybe you do not remember me, but I met you in Mexico, exactly in Tlalmanalco, it was a working meeting where RIOS took his name remember?

    I have tried several times to attach the complete table and I get the same error, I navigate to the file, when you select it, start the count and reach 100, the same error appears. I do not what to do to share my table, it is possible to be the size, which weighs 40 megabytes. ? I have summarized the table already filtered in the dynamic table with the results that in my opinion are realized with the biophysical table of RIOS.

    With my research I intend to model investment portfolios for ecosystem service of nutrients and sedimentation, operate those investment portfolios in INVEST. likewise if possible in terms of time, model only investment portfolios for base flow

    that is the idea, I have advanced a lot in all the theoretical part and in the calculation of inputs. Now I am with the operation of the tools and here you have me in many consultations.

    Thank you for your time really, I appreciate your help
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    There is probably a size limit for the attachments in the forum, sorry about that. If necessary, you can share the full table some other way, through Dropbox, Box, Google Drive, etc.

    Thanks for providing the summary table, that might be all that I need, but I don't quite understand how to interpret it. In the RESULTADOS tab it looks like Row 1 has the RIOS and InVEST coefficients, and Row 4 has the SWAT output values that you are matching to those coefficients. If that is true, then many of the SWAT values are not good matches for the RIOS/InVEST coefficients. For example, the RIOS sed_exp (sediment export) is given values for SWAT's PET (potential evapotranspiration) and sed_ret (sediment retention) is given values for ET (actual evapotranspiration.) But PET and ET are not related to sediment, they are related to plant water use. sed_exp can be given the same values for usle_c, and I believe that the USLE C parameter is used as input to the SWAT model, so you could use those input values instead.

    It would be worth reading through the RIOS and InVEST User Guides, and reviewing the SWAT definitions, to get a better idea of what each coefficient represents, and whether SWAT provides an appropriate match or not. Sometimes SWAT doesn't (I don't think that it uses USLE P, for example), and you will need to find values for those elsewhere, like through a literature search.

    ~ Stacie

  • I really regret the lack of clarity in the table, it was my fault, but here I explain a little the idea:

    Tab 1, contain all the SWAT output definition for HRU 


    Row 1, I only put it for other purposes, not to relate them directly to the values of SWAT in row 4 (sorry)

    if you see row 18, column "A" represents the values of the biophysical table of RIOS and INVEST and column "B" (POTENTIAL EQUIVALENCE) represents what in my opinion is related to the outputs of SWAT, whose definitions are in the same row in column "C", which are the conceptual definitions that SWAT says for the outputs of HRU.

    from row 8 to 13, the selected values are found, filtered on average for each SWAT output in HRU, whose total results I could not attach. (Here are the some values that in my opinion I could use, but I do not know if that corresponds to the requirements of RIOS and INVEST.

    apologies again for the lack of explanation
  • comment:
     It would be worth reading through the RIOS and InVEST User Guides, and reviewing the SWAT definitions, to get a better idea of what each coefficient represents, and whether SWAT provides an appropriate match or not. Sometimes SWAT doesn't (I don't think that it uses USLE P, for example), and you will need to find values for those elsewhere, like through a literature search


    Of course, I have read the manuals and there are values that I have already completed with additional bibliography, but there are others that I want to complete with other sources and they are difficult to find, so I asked if you had a table that could help me based on the objectives that I mentioned to you. 

    best regard
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Thanks for the explanation. I did see the mapping between Biophysical Table and EQUIVALENCIA POTENCIAL, and it appeared to be similar to the mapping between rows 1 and 4. Looking at the mapping between these two columns, and my previous observation still applies: it would not be correct to map sed_exp to Kc or PET. It would be correct to map sed_exp to the USLE C input to SWAT. (Or maybe the table isn't displaying correctly for me? Let me know if what I've written isn't the correct mapping.) 

    For another example, we would not map rough_rank to sed_exp or SYLD, but could map rough_rank to something like the OV_N input parameter in SWAT (Manning's N for overland flow.)  I have never run SWAT and am not at all an expert in which inputs and outputs it has, so can't really provide an exhaustive mapping.

    However, you can use the SYLD output from SWAT to compare the InVEST SDR sediment export results to your SWAT results, or the ET output from SWAT to compare to the InVEST water yield AET results. You could also use the PET output from SWAT as input to the InVEST water yield models. 

    ~ Stacie
  • Good morning Stacy Swolny

    1. I remember that I intend to run the objectives of sedimentation retention, nutrient retention and base flow. For the first two investment portfolios and I intend to calculate ROI, and for base flow only generate the portfolios if the time favors me.

    2. The parameters of the table of coefficients for the mentioned objectives (attached table "RIOS_lulc_biophysical_table_Gura_nutrients"), which I show in the attached table in sheet # 1 ¿Has this table the correct way for my objectives of sedimentation retention, nutrient retention and flow base? I see that, in the GURA format, other coefficients appear that do not appear in the RIOS manual, but yes in the INVEST manual. ¿Is that what it should be like if the goal is to model ROI for my first two objectives in INVEST? That generates confusion to me

    3. In the table I mentioned in paragraph 2, on the sheet "RIOS_lulc_biophysical_table_Gur", from row 1 to 10, there are the coefficients and land use for "GURA", from row 15 to 33 are the land use of my study area "Sub-basin Guacerique and Concepción in Tegucigalpa Honduras". I have detailed the land use and coverage a lot, ¿Do you think I should reclassify it, or ¿Do you suggest keeping it with those details (19 classes)?

    4. Regarding your previous answer, I clarify some details for better understanding, which are in the table "SWAT DATA TABLE BT_RES_2", tab "RESULTS SELECTED" HRU. I believe that the content of column" A ", of the previous table has confused my query and I apologize again, reviewing the definitions of SWAT, in blue, the variables (column C, row 17-33), in green the definitions of the selected SWAT variables, what I intend to standardize on the basis to the definitions of both manuals, both SWAT and RIOS, are the coefficients that appear in column "B", row 18-27 with the outputs of SWAT in blue, whose historical average values ​​by use and land cover are in row 3- 12 ... Example: N_ret = NUP, P_ret = PUP, Sed_Exp = SYLD, Kc = ET or PET ¿Do you think it is logical to do so?

    My thanks for your time and kindness
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hi Janier -

    2/ You're correct that the Gura sample table does include coefficients for both RIOS and InVEST. Sorry that it's confusing, but it is often easier to have all of the coefficients in one table, and we were using this data for trainings too, where we ran both RIOS and InVEST. When you're running RIOS, you only need the columns that are required for your objectives, and when you're running InVEST, you only need the columns required for your models. And they do not need to be in the same table, you can keep them separate if you like.

    3/ No, you do not need to reclassify your land use map, keep it with those details. Each land cover map will have different classes, some will have a lot, others a few, and that's fine. The most important thing is that you have the land cover classes that are important for your particular analysis.

    4/ Thank you for sending the latest table, it is more clear now. But I still don't think that most of the mappings between SWAT and RIOS are appropriate. Some more specific examples:

    Kc is often used, along with PET, to calculate ET. Kc is not the same at PET or AET, and they should not be used interchangeably. Kc represents the crop's use of water, where PET includes climate information, not crop characteristics.

    sed_exp is the same as the cropping factor (C factor) input to the USLE. It represents the amount of erosion likely to happen on a pixel of a particular land cover type. I believe that SYLD uses USLE as part of its calculation, and it represents how much sediment actually makes it to the stream, but also includes soil, climate, etc, along with the crop characteristics.

    usle_p is one of several inputs to the USLE model. It represents any soil conservation practices that might be done on the land (such as contour farming.) The SWAT USLE variable is the result of running the USLE model on an HRU.

    And I'm sorry, but I don't know enough about SWAT's NUP/PUP/ORGN/ORGP to say how well they would match. Maybe someone else with more SWAT experience can comment on those.

    ~ Stacie
  • Thank you very much Stacie

    I will review your suggestions and I will let you know as soon as possible.

    A question regarding "Cover Rank"

    According to the manual says "cover_rank: For calculating the likelihood for a given land cover type to produce runoff, we need a simple way to reflect each LULC class's vegetative cover. This is a value between 0 (no cover) and 1 (100% cover) One way to calculate this (if field studies are not available) is using Leaf Area Index information (calculated using remote sensing data) and taking an average over each LULC class.

    ¿it is runoff coefficient  or the curve number value (CN)?  Firts the definition says production of runoff per LULC, then leaf area index.  Sorry It confuse a bit

    Best regards

  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Cover_rank is not a runoff coefficient or a curve number. It is an indication of how much of a pixel is covered in vegetation. So a dense forest would have a high cover_rank value, barren land would have a value of 0, and something like a shrubland might have a value in between, since there is some soil surface covered in vegetation, and some bare ground also. So leaf area index would be a good value to use.

    ~ Stacie

  • Good morning Stacie:

    I have been making progress in finalizing my table of coefficients and I found  some doubts which I commented to you:

    What is the conceptual difference between the following values ​​in the biophysical table "n_ret and eff_n, and also" p_ret and eff_p "? I know that" n_ret and p_ret "are from RIOS and the others from the INVEST table. they are the same in concepts for me, and when I see the values ​​of the GURA exercise, I see them very similar.

    ¿Could you give me ideas on how to complete the "eff_n, eff_p, crit_len_n, and sed_ret fields? see in yellow in table attached

    For the field "Load_n and Load_p", I have calculated based on the dynamics of the agricultural and urban sector of my study area, which is very excessive in nutrients. I have calculated the kg of all the agricultural use in a normal year of cultivation and urban contributions, I have divided the number of pixels of agricultural use, among the total kg of all agricultural use, the same for urban use, which would be the total kg / pixel to my understanding ¿Is this reasoning correct? I put those values in yhe table under this idea

    In one of your messages you mentioned the similarity of the Sed_export field with Usle_c, in fact in the GURA table they appear with the same value for each LULC.   I Have  found in additional data in another order of values, ¿those values ​​should be the same or if they differ, could we have model errors? see table attached in final sheet, column C and D

    ¿Do you see someting weird in this table? I has been time consuming to find those values but I conserve some incertenty

    best regards
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hi Jainer -

    Yes, n_ret and eff_n are the same thing, and you can use the same value for both. Same with p_ret and eff_p. These are harder values to find, and they usually require a literature search. crit_len_n and sed_ret are similar, we always do a literature search to try and find values that others have measured or derived for land cover types and ecosystem types that are as close to our area of interest as possible. To get you started, we provide a database of values for sediment and nutrient, and the literature references that they come from. (These are hidden on the InVEST web page, near the bottom.)

    And yes, you can use the same values for sed_exp and usle_c. When we are using RIOS output as input to InVEST, we use the same value for both, to be consistent between the rankings used in each of these tools.

    Your reasoning seems fine for load_n and load_p for agricultural and urban areas, just make sure that the units are kg/hectare/year (not just kg/pixel.) If your Pastos are grazed, they probably have higher N and/or P loading than your natural vegetation types,and I would expect Suelo Desnudo to be lower than vegetated areas, since there is less nutrient being cycled.

    Taking a quick look at your other values, just a few things of note. N_ret and P_ret should be values from 0-1, and I see at least one that is greater than 1. the root_depth of Suelo Desnudo is rather high, if there's actually nothing growing there. The Kc values are much too large, they're usually in the range of approximately 1 - 1.5.

    And I love that you have a whole land cover class for areas plagued by weevils. :-) 

    ~ STacie

  • TThank you for every answer Stacie.

    I was thinking about the spatial and numerical relation of Sed_exp and Sed_ret,¿if we have homologated values ​​of Sed_exp with Usle_c, the value of Sed_ret could be the difference until reaching value of 1?

    When I see the values ​​of Gura example, follow more or less that order of ideas.

    With respect to root depth value for bare soil, you are right, but this class includes those areas where there was a forest harvest after the weevil infestation and bare soil around 2 reservoirs. I take that depth, of the existence of roots in the different soil profiles located in that class. they are areas of high regeneration due to bioclimatic conditions, therefore bare soil will be a temporary condition for about 5 years and I put it that way because of the high need to invest in sedimentation control in those areas at present.

    in the last observation on values ​​above 1 and values ​​in kc out of range, these appear with those values ​​in my database that I have approximated SWAT. ¿If the process normalizes it to the range of values ​​required for RIOS or INVEST, should it be corrected manually?

    about the weevil, this was very terrible, we lost almost 65% of the pine forest in the study area that provide 65% of water to tegucigalpa and 51% of the entire pine forest in the whole country and in areas of high biophysical sensitivity .... But it is curious and I agree ...

    best regards
  • Hello again Stacie

    I have tried to run the preprocessing toolbox  again with the sample data, to get familiar with this part, and then run my data and I get this error. I have reviewed other responses from you and Adrian in this forum and mention the ArcGIS version and compatibility with the original design of the toolbox. In my case I use ArcGIS 10.5. ¿What do you recommend to me to proceed?  ¿Use other version of Arcgis or do you have a new version of toolbox now?

    I changed the name, and I tried in other formats like "txt" and excel, but it doest works...

    Error found below

    Processing Erosion Control objective ...

    Mapping coefficients to landcover ...

    Error processing Erosion Control objective: Failed to execute. Parameters are not valid.
    ERROR 001000: Lookup field: Field Sed_Exp does not exist
    Failed to execute (Lookup).

    Running script error
    Failed script RIOS-Pre-Processing ...

    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "C: \ TOOLKIT \ RIOS_1.1.16_arcgis_preprocessor \", line 1276, in <module>
        raise Exception

    Failed to execute (RIOS-Pre-Processing).
    Failed at Mon Sep 17 08:31:39 2018 (Elapsed Time: 1.87 second)

    Best regards
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    It is likely a problem with the ArcGIS version, since ESRI breaks scripts with every update. Try this version of the pre-processor that I made for ArcGIS 10.4.1 (attached) and see if it works for you.

    ~ Stacie

  • Thank you very much Stacie:

    It was possible to run with this preprocessor, thank you very much.

    ¿Can you help me with my previous question? I am sorry for many questions, but I would like to make good decisions in the rest of the procees.

    again, thank you very much for all your time

  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Sed_exp and sed_ret aren't quite related such that sed_ret = 1-sed_exp. Sed_exp (or usle_c) is related more to the amount of sediment that might be generated by a pixel, while sed_ret is related to how much of the sediment that comes at the pixel from upslope is retained by the pixel. 

    Very interesting (and sad!) to hear about the weevil infestation, and how you translated that into root depth. This is why it's so important to know the place you're working! It would also be interesting for people to study the area and see if/how the loss of forest changes sediment and water provision.

    For Kc, are you actually using Kc values from SWAT, or some other SWAT parameter? Kc is not used by RIOS, but is by InVEST. In InVEST the values are not normalized, so it does matter which units they're in.

    ~ Stacie

  • Thank you very much for your response, Thanks to you I have advanced very much.

    After running the preprocessing tool I get 2 questions for now:

    The raster of "erosion_upslope_source" appears with values of MIN and MAX = 0, ¿what do you think it could be, I have tested with several flow accumulation thresholds and it appears the same?

    2. Once I get the outputs of the toolbox, this generates a water network, I have digitized analogously for my study area and I have seen that a threshold of 1000 of accumulation of flow is 90% similar, but I have densified the network for areas of interest for restoration and recharging ....¿How can I generate the riparian continuity index with my water network? Is it possible to burn the rivers to do this?

    my best considerations Stacie

  • For Kc, are you actually using Kc values from SWAT, or some other SWAT parameter? Kc is not used by RIOS, but is by InVEST. In InVEST the values are not normalized, so it does matter which units they're in.


    I have decided to homologate some values of the table of values that appears in the NATCAP page for kc, because I do not have another reference, in addition to the SWAT outputs, and those SWAT values I can not understand very well.

    Best regards

  • Hi dear Stacie.  

    See the image first 

    This is the metropolitan area of Tegucigalpa (yellow box), 1.3 million people living there and 67% of its population is supplied with water from both reservoirs, which look blue in the image. how to analyze the raster of beneficiaries if the largest number of these are outside the basins.

    I consult this, in case the investment of the established budget is reoriented to the areas of greater population within the study area (graduated colors and blank labels), if so, in this case they are not so critical areas as a source of nutrients and sedimentation if it is valued in this case the population values ... ¿how should I interpret that?

    Muchas gracias de nuevo
    1211 x 695 - 80K
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Are you thinking about the Beneficiaries input to RIOS? For that, we usually use something more like population information, or poverty information, or something about livelihoods that would indicate where people across the landscape would benefit more from having watershed management activities done on that pixel. For example, if you know where farms are in the basins, you could give a higher weight to those areas, if you think that erosion control activities would benefit their farm production. Then, RIOS would prioritize doing activities where farms are (or where poor people live, etc.) 

    Another way of weighting could be if you know the percentage of Tegucigalpa's water that comes from each reservoir. Then, you could weight the basins flowing into each reservoir differently, which would prioritize doing management activities in the basins that provide the most water to the city.

    And if you do not want to include a Beneficiaries input, you can also set the whole raster to a value of 1, so beneficiaries won't influence the results at all.

    ~ Stacie

  • Thank you very much for your response, Thanks to you I have advanced very much.

    After running the preprocessing tool I get 2 questions for now:

    The raster of "erosion_upslope_source" appears with values of MIN and MAX = 0, ¿what do you think it could be, I have tested with several flow accumulation thresholds and it appears the same?

    2. Once I get the outputs of the toolbox, this generates a water network, I have digitized analogously for my study area and I have seen that a threshold of 1000 of accumulation of flow is 90% similar, but I have densified the network for areas of interest for restoration and recharging ....¿How can I generate the riparian continuity index with my water network? Is it possible to burn the rivers to do this?

    my best considerations Stacie
  • Hello again Stacie
    I have solved my doubts to build several investment portfolios with all my data, sorry if I seem insistent, but I want to make good decisions in my runs. I have some doubts that I can not solve with the manuals:

    1. The table of activities in each land use, can be weighted according to the order of importance between 0-1 (0.2, 0.4, 0.3 and so on), or only with values ​​of "1" for where I want the activity and "0" where it is not required (I did not see this in manual, apologies)

    2. For other activities other than the manual, example (adequate Fertilization, adequate Irrigation, regulation), can these be added to the portfolio as long as they comply with the respective parametrization? in the examples I did not see activities different from the manual

    3. The RIOS version on the website, does not have "Benefit estimator" once installed, ¿how should I proceed in this part? when seeing SDR in INVEST the inputs are different and it generates confusion for the tables and other inputs generated in the Traslator Portfolio.

    Portafolio de prueba adjunto para mostrar avance

    1126 x 714 - 224K
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hi Jainer -

    For the activity/land use table, we only use values of 1 where an activity is allowed and 0 where it is not, we don't use any values in between.

    You can use any activities that fit into the categories of "keep native vegetation", "fertilizer management", "pasture management" etc. RIOS does not model activities, it models those general categories, so restoration practices are treated differently than keeping native vegetation, for example.

    The Benefits Estimator no longer exists, unfortunately. It is up to you run InVEST (or a different hydrologic model) using the outputs from RIOS. The Portfolio Translator can help with the translation from RIOS to InVEST, but you will still have some work to do determining the correct values for the biophysical table for InVEST models.

    ~ Stacie
  • Hello Stacie

    When I try to load my runs from the "portfolio advisor" to the portfolio translator, I get that error in the console  related to CSV as it shows. (see attached image).  I use the same table format of Gura( se atacched) , it does not load

    I had to convert the tabel to excel file to upload here, because I culdnot upload, but my original used in portafolios  is in CSV .

    ¿Do you have any suggestion?

  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Are you sure that your CSV has values that are comma-separated? Sometimes they get saved with values separated by semicolons or something different, but RIOS requires commas. You can see this if you look at the CSV in a text editor. If they seem to be comma-separated, please send me the CSV and I'll take a look.

    ~ Stacie

  • edited October 2018
    Hello Stacie

    I have reviewed the files and edit them from the beginning of creation of my portfolios to delimited by commas. (see attached)

    I try saving the files in the same location and it does not work!

    Post edited by Jainer_Argeñal1981 on
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Thanks for sending the tables, I don't see anything obviously wrong with them, but RIOS might have a problem with the blank line at the end of the CSV (which you can remove in a text editor.) Try doing that and see if it helps. 

    If that doesn't help, is it hard to package up your RIOS workspace so I can try your data with the Portfolio Translator? It might actually be easier to send the original inputs for the Investment Portfolio Advisor, so then I can run both parts. Honestly, I have hardly used the Portfolio Translator, so I'm not very familiar with how it works, I generally do the translation manually. So if I can't figure it out I might have the software team check it out.

    ~ Stacie

  • Hello Stacie

    I have put in a single folder the entries and results of one of the runs (base flow in this case), in the folder are the raster, the biophysical tables and activities, and the parameterization used in it. I have run again and I do not load my workspace in a portfolio translator and it conserve the same error (see attached)

    please give it a look and let me know where my error is.

    in this link you can download the data:

    Very thankful

    993 x 237 - 50K
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hello Jainer -

    Thank you for the data. I can replicate your problem, but do not know why it's happening. So I've asked our software team to look at it too.

    ~ Stacie

  • RichRich Administrator, NatCap Staff
    Hi @Jainer_Argeñal1981, I'm just getting back to this, but I see the link you shared no longer links to your data. Do you think you could update it again? I can't promise I can get this working, but I'd like to take a look.

  • Hello Rich 
    Thank you for answering, until now I have solved the problem by managing the scenarios with a step-by-step guide provided by Stacie. I have created my three analysis scenarios and I am interpreting the results of SDR / INVEST.

    I appreciate your response
  • Hi Jainer, 

    I am currently doing a study in Paraguay using RIOS and InVEST and am putting together the biophysical table. Here we don't have the resources to do on the site analysis and the entire study is relying entirely upon preexisting data. The tables you created for the RIOS Default LULC coefficients I am curious as to where you managed to get the data? and if the data was generated from an on the ground study if that study is publicly available. Specifically I am interested in rough rank, cover rank, and Kc. Attached are the sources I have managed to acquire so far. 

    Thank you for your time, 
    Thomas Price
  • swolnyswolny Member, NatCap Staff
    Hi Thomas -

    Our studies also usually rely on preexisting data, so you are not alone. For each project, we do a literature search to look for coefficient values. If we're lucky, someone has published a paper providing values in or near our area of interest. If not, then we look for papers in areas that are similar in terms of LULC, topography, climate, etc. Other sources include reports from the state or country's government agencies. If you can't find anything that is relatively local, then you can use more global values. These are provided by groups like FAO. 

    On the specific coefficients you are interested in. As noted in the RIOS User Guide, Rough rank is similar to "Manning's N", which is relatively easy to search for, and I know that I've seen government road/highway departments sometimes provide values that they use for calculating runoff for their projects. Cover rank can come from Leaf Area Index, which is pretty easy to download or create from satellite data (while being aware of possible issues if you're in a place with big differences in vegetation cover seasonally.) For Kc, look at the InVEST Annual Water Yield model Data Sources section, which provides some information on obtaining or calculating general values.

    ~ Stacie
  • Thanks Stacie, 

    Will try calculating the values and a literature search. Good to know I am not alone in relying on preexisting data.


  • Hello Thomas

    I attach two tables, one for you to see the equivalences of the values ​​that I use for my biophysical table and the source, and a second table of raw data for a hydrological model.
    I have used several sources of data and expert criteria in some cases for the loads of nutrients in agricultural uses and the data that appear in the page of the natural capital project.
    For the most part I have used hydrological model data from SWAT for my study area, in the output of HRU (hydrological response unit), that can give you an idea with very good about the behavior of certain variables by land use and their equivalencies as required by RIOS and INVEST as well. Filter the raw table by land use in a dynamic table and maybe some land use could be similar to yours and you get an idea.

    Do not worry if you do not have pre-existing data, you are part of a big family ... Good luck and if you have doubts about the tables, it will be a pleasure

    +504 96687911 is my cellphone, from Honduras

Sign In or Register to comment.