MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159035850 · doi:10.3390/rs13091682

Modeling the Spatial Dynamics of Soil Organic Carbon Using Remotely-Sensed Predictors in Fuzhou City, China

2021· article· en· W3159035850 on OpenAlexaff
Terefe Hanchiso Sodango, Jinming Sha, Xiaomei Li, Tomasz Noszczyk, Jiali Shang, Abreham Berta Aneseyee, Zhongcong Bao

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersWolkite UniversityFujian Normal UniversityErasmus+Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsSoil carbonEnvironmental scienceSoil waterSoil scienceSpatial distributionTopsoilLithologyLandformSpatial variabilityPartial least squares regressionKrigingRemote sensingGeologyMathematicsStatisticsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessing the spatial dynamics of soil organic carbon (SOC) is essential for carbon monitoring. Since variability of SOC is mainly attributed to biophysical land surface variables, integrating a compressive set of such indices may support the pursuit of an optimum set of predictor variables. Therefore, this study was aimed at predicting the spatial distribution of SOC in relation to remotely sensed variables and other covariates. Hence, the land surface variables were combined from remote sensing, topographic, and soil spectral sources. Moreover, the most influential variables for prediction were selected using the random forest (RF) and classification and regression tree (CART). The results indicated that the RF model has good prediction performance with corresponding R2 and root-mean-square error (RMSE) values of 0.96 and 0.91 mg·g−1, respectively. The distribution of SOC content showed variability across landforms (CV = 78.67%), land use (CV = 93%), and lithology (CV = 64.67%). Forestland had the highest SOC (13.60 mg·g−1) followed by agriculture (10.43 mg·g−1), urban (9.74 mg·g−1), and water body (4.55 mg·g−1) land uses. Furthermore, soils developed in bauxite and laterite lithology had the highest SOC content (14.69 mg·g−1). The SOC content was remarkably lower in soils developed in sandstones; however, the values obtained in soils from the rest of the lithologies could not be significantly differentiated. The mean SOC concentration was 11.70 mg·g−1, where the majority of soils in the study area were classified as highly humus and extremely humus. The soils with the highest SOC content (extremely humus) were distributed in the mountainous regions of the study area. The biophysical land surface indices, brightness removed vegetation indices, topographic indices, and soil spectral bands were the most influential predictors of SOC in the study area. The spatial variability of SOC may be influenced by landform, land use, and lithology of the study area. Remotely sensed predictors including land moisture, land surface temperature, and built-up indices added valuable information for the prediction of SOC. Hence, the land surface indices may provide new insights into SOC modeling in complex landscapes of warm subtropical urban regions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207