An Extensive Field-Scale Dataset of Topsoil Organic Carbon Content Aimed to Assess Remote Sensed Datasets and Data-Derived Products from Modeling Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geosciences suffer from a lack of large georeferenced datasets that can be used to assess and monitor the role of soil organic carbon (SOC) in plant growth, soil fertility, and CO2 sequestration. Publicly available, large field-scale georeferenced datasets are often limited in number and design to serve these purposes. This study provides the first publicly accessible dataset of georeferenced topsoil SOC measurements (n = 840) over a 26-hectare (ha) agricultural field located in southern Ontario, Canada, with a sampling density of ~32 points per ha. As SOC is usually influenced by site topography (i.e., slope and landscape position), each point of the database is associated with a wide range of remote sensing topographic derivatives; as well as with normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) based value. The NDVI data were extracted from remote sensing Sentinel-2 imagery from over a five-year period (2017–2021). In this paper, the methodology for topsoil sampling, SOC measurement in the lab, as well as producing the suite of topographic derivatives is described. We discuss the opportunities that the database offers in terms of spatially explicit and continuous soil information to support international efforts in digital soil mapping (i.e., SoilGrids250m) as well as other potential applications detailed in the discussion section. We believe that the database with very dense point location measurements can help in conducting carbon stocks and sequestration studies. Such information can be used to help bridge the gap between ground data and remotely sensed datasets or data-derived products from modeling approaches intended to evaluate field-scale rates of agricultural carbon accumulation. The generated topsoil database in this study is archived and publicly available on the Zenodo open-access repository.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".