Predictive Mapping of Soil Properties for Precision Agriculture Using Geographic Information System (GIS) Based Geostatistics Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In precision Agriculture, geostatistical methods as a predictive tool have been extensively utilized. The approach estimates soil properties spatial variability and dependency. This study was carried out in Ovia north east Local Government Area of Edo State of Nigeria in order to map soil properties (Sand, Clay, pH, OC, P, N and CEC) and redict their spatial variability. Twenty-nine (29) soil samples were collected randomly from Typic Kandiudults soil type under three different land use, teak forest plantation, shrub, and arable farm. The soil samples were air-dried and passed through a 2 mm sieve before being analyzed for pH(CaCl2), SOC, Sand, Clay, Phosphorus, Nitrogen, and CEC. Generated data were statistically and geostatistically computed to explain the spatial variability of soil properties. The traditional method of soil analysis and interpretation are tedious, time-consuming with escalating budgets thus geostatical approach. Available phosphorus yielded large variability with CV=57.08% followed by clay content with CV=49.03%. Spherical, Gaussian, Hole Effect model, Stable, Exponential and Circular models were fitted for all the soil parameters. The result revealed that soil pH, Sand content, TN and CEC were moderate spatially autocorrelated with nugget/sill value of 0.32, 0.21, 0.49 and 0.30 respectively. SOC also gave a moderate spatially autocorrelated with nugget/sill value of 0.44. And Clay and Available phosphorus were strong spatially autocorrelated with nugget/sill value of 0.15 and 0.13 respectively. Cross-validation of the output maps using the semivariogram showed that the interpolation models are superior to assuming mean for any unsampled area. The output maps will help soil users within the area to proffer best management technology to improve crop, fiber and water production.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".