Comparing Field Sampling and Soil Survey Database for Spatial Heterogeneity in Surface Soil Granulometry: Implications for Ecosystem Services Assessment

作者: Elena A. Mikhailova , Christopher J. Post , Patrick D. Gerard , Mark A. Schlautman , Michael P. Cope

DOI: 10.3389/FENVS.2019.00128

关键词: Soil textureDatabaseSoil seriesSiltEnvironmental scienceSpatial heterogeneitySoil mapField (geography)Sampling (statistics)Soil survey

摘要: Lithospheric-derived resources such as soil texture and coarse fragments are key physical properties that contribute to ecosystem services (ES), which can be valued based on “soil” or “mineral” stocks. Soil survey data provides an inexpensive alternative detailed field measurements often labor-intensive, time-consuming, costly obtain. However, both contain heterogeneous information with a certain level of variability uncertainty in data. This study compares the potential using from Survey Geographic database (SSURGO) for (CF), sand (S), silt (Si), clay (C) class (TC) surface (Ap horizon) 147-hectare Cornell University Willsboro Research Farm, NY. Maps were created following methods: a) utilizing SSURGO individual map unit (SMU) at site representative reported values across SMU; b) averaging within specific SMU boundary averaged value c) interpolating farm boundaries cores. demonstrates important distinction between mapping “crisp” databases compared actual spatial heterogeneity interpolated CF, S, Si, C, TC derived core samples dissimilar maps by results over SMUs. Dissimilarities attributed several factors (e.g., official series being collected “type locations” outside areas). Correlation plot estimates each showed statistically significant correlations field-averaged (r = 0.823, p 0.003) field-interpolated 0.584, 0.028) estimates, but no correlation was found Si.

参考文章(43)
Kabindra Adhikari, Alfred E. Hartemink, Linking soils to ecosystem services — A global review Geoderma. ,vol. 262, pp. 101- 111 ,(2016) , 10.1016/J.GEODERMA.2015.08.009
Nicholas B. Comerford, Alan J. Franzluebbers, Mary E. Stromberger, Lawrence Morris, Daniel Markewitz, Rebecca Moore, Assessment and Evaluation of Soil Ecosystem Services Soil Horizons. ,vol. 54, pp. 1- 14 ,(2013) , 10.2136/SH12-10-0028
R. K. Turner, G. C. Daily, The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation Environmental and Resource Economics. ,vol. 39, pp. 25- 35 ,(2008) , 10.1007/S10640-007-9176-6
G.H Baker, P.J Carter, J.P Curry, O Cultreri, A Beck, Clay content of soil and its influence on the abundance of Aporrectodea trapezoides Dugès (Lumbricidae) Applied Soil Ecology. ,vol. 9, pp. 333- 337 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0929-1393(98)00085-7
Julius B. Adewopo, Christine VanZomeren, Rupesh K. Bhomia, Maya Almaraz, Allan R. Bacon, Emily Eggleston, Jonathan D. Judy, Ricky W. Lewis, Mary Lusk, Bradley Miller, Colby Moorberg, Elizabeth Hodges Snyder, Mary Tiedeman, Top-Ranked Priority Research Questions for Soil Science in the 21st Century Soil Science Society of America Journal. ,vol. 78, pp. 337- 347 ,(2014) , 10.2136/SSSAJ2013.07.0291
C.Y Jim, Urban soil characteristics and limitations for landscape planting in Hong Kong Landscape and Urban Planning. ,vol. 40, pp. 235- 249 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00117-5
Jin Li, Andrew D. Heap, Review: Spatial interpolation methods applied in the environmental sciences: A review Environmental Modelling and Software. ,vol. 53, pp. 173- 189 ,(2014) , 10.1016/J.ENVSOFT.2013.12.008