Plant Soil Environ., 2006, 52(9):424-430 | DOI: 10.17221/3461-PSE

Soil depth prediction supported by primary terrain attributes: a comparison of methods

V. Penížek, L. Borůvka
Czech University of Agriculture in Prague, Czech Republic

The objective of this study was to investigate the benefits of methods that incorporate terrain attributes as covariates into the prediction of soil depth. Three primary terrain attributes - elevation, slope and aspect - were tested to improve the depth prediction from conventional soil survey dataset. Different methods were compared: 1) ordinary kriging (OK), 2) co-kriging (COK), 3) regression-kriging (REK), and 4) linear regression (RE). The evaluation of predicted results was based on comparison with real validation data. With respect to means, OK and COK provided the best prediction (both 110 cm), RE and REK gave the worst results, their means were significantly lower (79 and 108 cm, respectively) than the mean of real data (111 cm). F-test showed that COK with slope as covariate gave the best result with respect to variances. COK also reproduced best the range of values. The use of auxiliary terrain data improved the prediction of soil depth. However, the improvement was relatively small due to the low correlation of the primary variable with used terrain attributes.

Keywords: soil depth; geostatistics; terrain; ordinary kriging; co-kriging; regression-kriging

Published: September 30, 2006  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Penížek V, Borůvka L. Soil depth prediction supported by primary terrain attributes: a comparison of methods. Plant Soil Environ.. 2006;52(9):424-430. doi: 10.17221/3461-PSE.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Borůvka L., Kozák J., Němeček J., Penížek V. (2003): New approaches to the exploitation of former soil survey data. Pap. No. 1692. 17 th World Congr. Soil Sci., Bangkok.
    2. Gessler P.E., Moore I.D., McKenzie N.J., Ryan P.J. (1995): Soil-landscape modeling and spatial prediction of soil attributes. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 9: 421-432. Go to original source...
    3. Hengl T., Heuvelink G.B.M., Stein A. (2003): Comparison of kriging with external drift and regression-kriging. Technical note, ITC. <http://www.itc.nl/library/Academic_output/> [cit. 2004-11-10].
    4. Kalivas D.P., Triantakonstantis D.P., Kollias V.J. (2002): Spatial prediction of two soil properties using topographic information. Global Nest: Int. J., 4: 41-49. Go to original source...
    5. LSO (2001): Fundamental Base of Geographic Data of the Czech Republic (ZABAGED). Land Survey Office, Czech Republic.
    6. McBratney A.B., Mendonca Santos M.L., Minasny B. (2003): On digital soil mapping. Geoderma, 117: 3-52. Go to original source...
    7. McKenzie N.J., Ryan P.J. (1999): Spatial prediction of soil properties using environmental correlation. Geoderma, 89: 67-94. Go to original source...
    8. Mueller T.G., Pierce F.J. (2003): Soil carbon maps: Enhancing spatial estimates with simple terrain attributes at multiple scales. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 67: 258-267. Go to original source...
    9. Němeček J., Mašát K., Kalenda M. (1964): Report of Soil Survey of Agricultural Lands in the district of Tábor. MZV, Praha. (In Czech)
    10. Odeh I.O.A., McBratney A.B., Chittleborough D.J. (1995): Further results on prediction of soil properties from terrain attributes: heterotropic cokriging and regression-kriging. Geoderma, 67: 215-225. Go to original source...
    11. Oliver M.A., Webster R. (1991): How geostatistics can help you. Soil Use Manage., 7: 206-217. Go to original source...
    12. Penížek V., Borůvka L. (2004): Processing of conventional soil survey data using geostatistical methods. Plant Soil Environ., 50: 352-357. Go to original source...
    13. Robertson G.P. (2000): GS+: Geostatistics for the Environmental Sciences. Gamma Design Software, Plainwell, Michigan, USA.
    14. Triantafilis J., Odeh I.O.A., McBratney A.B. (2001): Five geostatistical models to predict soil salinity from electromagnetic induction data across irrigated cotton. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 65: 869-878. Go to original source...
    15. Utset A., López T., Díaz M. (2000): A comparison of soil maps, kriging and combined method for spatially predicting bulk density and field capacity of ferralsols in the Havana-Matanzas Plain. Geoderma, 96: 199-213. Go to original source...
    16. Wu J., Norvell W.A., Hopkins D.G., Smith D.B., Ulmer M.G., Welch R.M. (2003): Improved prediction and mapping of soil copper by kriging with auxiliary data for cation-exchange capacity. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 67: 919-927. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content