Skip to main content

Some Challenges on Quantifying Soil Property Predictions Uncertainty for the GlobalSoilMap Using Legacy Data

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Digital Soil Mapping Across Paradigms, Scales and Boundaries

Abstract

The GlobalSoilMap project aims to create digital soil property maps in a raster format for six standard depths (0–5; 5–15; 15–30; 30–60; 60–100; 100–200 cm) and, for the first time, with estimates of uncertainty for predicted soil property maps. Data-driven methods and expert knowledge methods have been proposed, both of which present unique challenges. Initially, the majority of the predicted soil property maps will be derived from legacy soil data. The quantification of uncertainty, in particular, presents challenges due to the inherent nature of legacy data coming from different vintages (varying scales, formats, degree of completeness, differences in methods of observations, measurements, and classifications). We discuss the merits of each approach and potential practical and temporary solutions using two case studies from the USA, North America, and Llanos Orientales, Columbia, South America. Both case studies have limited data with insufficient point observations for a meaningful statistical approach for the estimation of prediction interval (PI) uncertainty. For the US case study, the available point measurements are not adequate for PI uncertainty quantification at soil map unit level and furthermore have been purposively collected to support the assignment of estimated mean, upper and lower property values to soil map units. We compared the estimated soil map unit upper and lower limits and 90 % CI from measured pedon for soil pH and found no significant differences between the two. The results suggest that the estimated upper and lower values from soil map units can be used for estimating the 90 % PI uncertainty at least initially until other independent measured point data become available. The available points in Llanos Orientales were collected for soil fertility evaluations and were independent of soil map unit polygons. However, they were surficial samples, clustered, and biased toward cultivated fields. As a result, only the 90 % CI was calculated and was found to be as wide as the range of the mean predicted soil property. These examples highlight few challenges in quantifying the 90 % PI and the need for more measured point data and flexible approaches when dealing with uncertainty quantification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ashtekar, J.M., P.R. Owens, R.A. Brown, H.E. Winzeler, M. Dorantes, Z. Libohova, M. Dasilva, A. Castro., 2013. Digital mapping of soil properties and associated uncertainties in the Llanos Orientales, South America. GlobalSoilMap Conference Proceeding, 2013. Orleans, France. Taylor & Francis group, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atehortúa, M., Sanabria, Y., Brito, J., and Rodrigues, S., 2010. LA GEOLOGÍA, GEOMORFOLOGÍA, PEDOLOGÍA Y USO DE LA TIERRA EN LAS MUNICIPALIDADES DE PUERTO LÓPEZ (COLOMBIA) Y UBERLÂNDIA (. Sci-ELO Brasil 22, 329–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • GlobalSoilMap Science Committee. 2013. Specifications: Tiered GlobalSoilMap.net Products, Release 2.3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goosen, D., 1971. Physiography and soils of the Llanos Orientales, Colombia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, A., H.I. Reuter, A. Nelson, E. Guevara, 2008, Hole-filled SRTM for the globe Version 4, available from the CGIAR-CSI SRTM 90m Database (http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org).

  • Jasiewicz, J. and T.F Stepinski (2013) Geomorphons -a pattern recognition approach to classification and mapping of lanforms. Geomorphology 182, pp. 147-156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagacherie, P., and A.B. McBratney (2007) Spatial Soil Information Systems and Spatial Soil Inference Systems: Perspectives for Digital Soil Mapping, 3-22. In Digital Soil Mapping: an Introductory perspective. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/

  • Lilburne, L., Hewitt, A.E., & Ferriss, S. 2009. Progress with the design of a soil uncertainty database, and associated tools for simulating spatial realisations of soil properties. M. Caetano & M. Painho (eds), 7th International Symposi-um on Spatial Accuracy Assessment in Natural Resources and Environmental Science. Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 510–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Libohova, Z., S. Wills, and N.P. Odgers, 2013. Legacy Data Quality and Uncertainty Estimation for United States GlobalSoilMap Products. GlobalSoilMap Conference Proceeding, Orleans, France. Edited by Dominique Arrouays, Neil McKenzie, Jon Hempel, Ann C. Richer de Forges, and Alex McBratney. CRC Press 2014, pages 63–68. Print ISBN: 978-1-138-00119-0, eBook ISBN: 978-1-315-77558-6, DOI: 10.1201/b16500-18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, B.P., McBratney, A.B., Minasny, B., 2011a. Empirical estimates of uncertainty for mapping continuous depth functions of soil attributes. Geoderma 160(3-4), 614-626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, B.P., de Gruijter, J.J., McBratney, A.B. Minasny, B., & Brus, D.J. 2011b. Using additional criteria for measuring the quality of predictions and their uncertainties in a digital soil mapping framework. Soil Science Society of America Journal 75:1032–1043.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallavan, B.B., Minasny, B., and McBratney, A.B., 2010. Homosoil, a Methodology for Quantitative Extrapolation of Soil Information Across the Globe. In J.L. Boettinger et al. (eds.), Digital Soil Mapping in Soil Science 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minasny, B. & McBratney, A.B. 2010. Methodologies for global soil mapping. In J.L. Boettinger, D.W. Howell, A.C. Moore, A.E. Hartemink & S. Kienast-Brown (eds), Digital soil mapping: bridging research, environmental application, and operation: 429–436. Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odgers, N.P., Libohova, Z., Thompson, J.A., 2012. Equal-area spline functions applied to a legacy soil database to create weighted-means maps of soil organic carbon at a continental scale. Geoderma 189–190, 153–163. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.05.026.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, R.L., Longnecker, M., 2001. An introduction to statistical methods and data analysis (5th edtition).

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA-NRCS. 2013. National Soil Survey Handbook. Available at http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/ (accessed 27 May 2013). United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service.

  • Zhu, A.X., Hudson, B., Burt, J., Lubich, K., Simonson, D., 2001. Soil Mapping Using GIS, Expert Knowledge, and Fuzzy logic. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 65(5), 1463-1472.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zamir Libohova .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Libohova, Z., Odgers, N.P., Ashtekar, J., Owens, P.R., Thompson, J.A., Hempel, J. (2016). Some Challenges on Quantifying Soil Property Predictions Uncertainty for the GlobalSoilMap Using Legacy Data. In: Zhang, GL., Brus, D., Liu, F., Song, XD., Lagacherie, P. (eds) Digital Soil Mapping Across Paradigms, Scales and Boundaries. Springer Environmental Science and Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0415-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics