Digital assessments of soil organic carbon storage using digital maps provided by static and dynamic environmental covariates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding the vertical and lateral distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC) and soil organic carbon density (SOCD) is indispensable for soil use and environmental management because of their vital role in soil quality assessments. Primarily, they are needed in calculating soil organic carbon storage (SOCS). The objective of this research was to provide digital maps of SOC and SOCD variation as well as their uncertainties at multiple standardized depths (H1: 0–5, H2: 5–15, H3: 15–30, H4: 30–60 and H5: 60–100 cm) using a parsimonious model with optimized terrain‐related attributes and satellite‐derived data. SOCS were evaluated at soil subgroup levels. An area of about 808 km 2 with varying elevation, plant cover and lithology from the Miandoab region, West Azerbaijan Province, Iran was selected as a case study area. A total of 386 soil samples were collected from 104 profiles comprising various soil genetic horizons. A continuous spline function was then fitted to the target properties in advance of creating a dataset at five standard depth intervals (following the GlobalSoilMap project). These were then grouped into three classes including top (H1), middle (H2, H3 and H4) and bottom (H5) depths to ease interpretation. Static and dynamic covariates (30‐m resolution) were derived from a digital elevation model (DEM) and a suite of Landsat‐8 spectral imageries, respectively. Four candidate models including stepwise multiple linear regression (SMLR), random forest (RF), cubist (CU) and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) Tree were tested in this study. Finally, the digital maps at 30‐m resolution of SOC and SOCD and their uncertainties were prepared using the best‐fit model and the bootstrapping method, respectively. Four soil subgroups (Gypsic Haploxerepts, Typic Calcixerepts, Typic Haploxerepts and Xeric Haplocalcids) were identified across the study area. The covariates had variable contributions on the evaluated models. The XGBoost Tree model generally outperformed other models for prediction of SOC and SOCD ( R 2 = 0.60, on average). Regardless of soil subgroups, the uncertainty analysis showed that the SOCD map had a low prediction interval range value indicating high accuracy. Additionally, the highest SOCS and SOCD was observed at the top followed by middle and bottom depths in the study area. All subgroups exhibited a decreasing trend of SOCD with increasing depth. A similar trend was also observed for SOCS. The highest SOCD (on average) was observed in Gypsic Haploxerepts (4.71 kg C/m 2 ) followed by Typic Calcixerepts (4.46 kg C/m 2 ), Typic Haploxerepts (4.45 kg C/m 2 ) and Xeric Haplocalcids (4.40 kg C/m 2 ). Overall, the SOCS normalized by area within soil order boundaries was greater in Inceptisols than Aridisols across the study area. The findings of this study provide critical information for sustainable management of soil resources in the area for agricultural production and environmental health in the Miandoab region of Iran.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".