Assessment of soil organic carbon stocks in Alberta using 2-scale sampling and 3D predictive soil mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A three-dimensional predictive soil mapping approach for predicting soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks (t/ha) at high spatial resolution (30 m) for Alberta for 2020–2021 is described. A remote sensing data stack was first prepared covering Alberta’s agricultural lands. A total of 404 sampling locations were distributed across Alberta using 2-scale sampling: (1) 22 pilot farms representing main climatic zones and (2) conditioned Latin hypercube sampling at each farm. Soil samples were taken at four standard depths (0–15, 15–30, 30–60, 60–100 cm) using soil probes and analyzed for SOC. Predictive models for SOC content and bulk density were built separately and then used to predict at 0, 15, 30, 60, and 100 cm and calculate aggregated SOC stocks per pixel. The SOC content and bulk density models had R squares of 0.61 and 0.68, respectively. Based on these mapping results, grassland soils were consistently associated with higher SOC stocks across all soil types as compared to croplands. The average SOC stock increase for grassland soils compared to cropland soils was 2.1 Mg per hectare, ranging from 2.17 to 6.09 Mg per hectare depending on soil type. Results also showed that >15 % of total SOC stocks were located in subsoil, which was higher than expected.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".