MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictive soil mapping using historic bare soil composite imagery and legacy soil survey data

2021· article· en· W3175109425 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Preston Sorenson, Steven J. Shirtliffe, Angela Bedard‐Haughn

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoderma · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsSoil carbonEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceDigital soil mappingSoil surveySatellite imageryCation-exchange capacityMean squared errorRemote sensingShortwaveSoil mapSoil testSoil organic matterSoil waterHydrology (agriculture)GeologyMathematicsStatisticsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing need for detailed soil property maps to support land use planning, soil carbon accounting, and precision agriculture. While soil maps exist in Saskatchewan, they are at coarse scales (1:100,000), which are not always suitable for detailed soil management. One emerging technique for predictive soil mapping is the use of bare soil composite imagery derived from multi-temporal satellite imagery. This study focused on using bare soil composite imagery along with legacy soil data (1958–1998) with high location uncertainty to predict soil organic carbon, clay, and cation exchange capacity. The bare soil composite images were created from Landsat 5 imagery (1985 to 1995) using Google Earth Engine. Predictive models were built using a Random Forest model for each parameter and evaluated using a 75–25 train-test split. The soil organic carbon model had an R2 value of 0.55 with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.67 percent, with the near infrared and visible light bands being the most important features in the model. The clay predictive model has an R2 of 0.44 and a RMSE of 5.0 percent, with the shortwave infrared bands being most important. The cation exchange capacity model had an R2 of 0.50 with a RMSE of 5.7 meq 100 g−1, with the shortwave and near infrared bands as the most important predictors. Based on these results, bare soil composite imagery represents a valuable covariate for predictive soil mapping in the Canadian Prairies. This work also illustrates that for regions with extensive adoption of conservation farming practices, satellite imagery should be obtained for time periods before these practices were adopted from the months of the year where crop residues have decomposed. By combining historical soil survey data with historical imagery, maps of legacy soil properties can be generated to make comparisons against with modern data for applications such as monitoring soil organic carbon change over time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeodermaSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207