Soil & Water Res., 2011, 6(4):173-189 | DOI: 10.17221/9/2010-SWR

Geostatistical analysis of soil texture fractions on the field scaleOriginal Paper

Masoomeh DELBARI1, Peyman AFRASIAB1, Willibald LOISKANDL2
1 Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
2 Institute of Hydraulics and Rural Water Management, Department of Water, Atmosphere and Environment, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria

Geostatistical estimation methods including ordinary kriging (OK), lognormal ordinary kriging (LOK), cokriging (COK), and indicator kriging (IK) are compared for the purposes of prediction and, in particular, uncertainty assessment of the soil texture fractions, i.e. sand, silt, and clay proportions, in an erosion experimental field in Lower Austria. The soil samples were taken on 136 sites, about 30-m apart. The validation technique was cross-validation, and the comparison criteria were the mean bias error (MBE) and root mean squared error (RMSE). Statistical analysis revealed that the sand content is positively skewed, thus persuading us to use LOK for the estimation. COK was also used due to a good negative correlation seen between the texture fractions. The autocorrelation analysis showed that the soil texture fractions in the study area are strongly to moderately correlated in space. Cross-validation indicated that COK is the most accurate method for estimating the silt and clay contents; RMSE equalling to 3.17% and 1.85%, respectively. For the sand content, IK with RMSE (12%) slightly smaller than COK (RMSE = 14%) was the best estimation method. However, COK maps presented the true variability of the soil texture fractions much better than the other approaches, i.e. they achieved the smallest smoothness. Regarding the local uncertainty, the estimation variance maps produced by OK, LOK, and COK methods similarly indicated that the lowest uncertainty occurred near the data locations, and that the highest uncertainty was seen in the areas of sparse sampling. The uncertainty, however, varied much less across the study area compared to conditional variance for IK. The IK conditional variance maps showed, in contrast, some relations to the data values. The estimation uncertainty needs to be evaluated for the incorporation into the risk analysis in the soil management.

Keywords: estimation uncertainty; kriging; prediction; soil texture fractions; spatial variability

Published: December 31, 2011  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
DELBARI M, AFRASIAB P, LOISKANDL W. Geostatistical analysis of soil texture fractions on the field scale. Soil & Water Res. 2011;6(4):173-189. doi: 10.17221/9/2010-SWR.
Download citation

References

  1. Bishop T.F.A., McBratney A.B. (2001): A comparison of prediction methods for the creation of field-extent soil property maps. Geoderma, 103: 149-160. Go to original source...
  2. Burgess T.M., Webster R. (1980): Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: I. The variogram and punctual kriging. Journal of Soil Science. 31: 315-331. Go to original source...
  3. Cambardella C.A., Moorman T.B., Novak J.M., Parkin T.B., Karlen D.L., Turco R.F., Konopka A.E. (1994): Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 58: 1501-1511. Go to original source...
  4. Delbari M. (2007): Estimation and stochastic simulation of soil properties for case studies in Lower Austria and Sistan plain, southeast of Iran. [PhD. Thesis.] University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna.
  5. Deutsch C.V., Journel A.G. (1998): GSLIB: Geostatistical Software Library and User's Guide. 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press, New York.
  6. Ersahin S., Brohi A.R. (2006): Spatial variation of soil water content in topsoil and subsoil of a Typic Ustifluvent. Agricultural Water Management, 83: 79-86. Go to original source...
  7. Ersahin S. (2003): Comparing ordinary kriging and cokriging to estimate infiltration rate. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 67: 1848-1855. Go to original source...
  8. Gallichand J., Marcotte D. (1993): Mapping clay content for subsurface drainage in the Nile Delta. Geoderma, 58: 165-179. Go to original source...
  9. Gaston L.A., Locke M.A., Zablotowicz R.M., Reddy K.N. (2001): Spatial variability of soil properties and weed populations in the Mississippi delta. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 65: 449-459. Go to original source...
  10. Gonzalez O.J., Zak D.R. (1994): Geostatistical analysis of soil properties in a secondary tropical dry forest, St. Lucia, West Indies. Plant and Soil, 163: 45-54. Go to original source...
  11. Goovaerts P. (1997): Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation. Oxford University Press, New York. Go to original source...
  12. Goovaerts P. (1998): Geostatistical tools for characterizing the spatial variability of microbiological and physico-chemical soil properties. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 27: 315-334. Go to original source...
  13. Goovaerts P. (1999): Geostatistics in soil science: stateof-the-art and perspectives. Geoderma, 89: 1-45. Go to original source...
  14. Goovaerts P., Webster R., Dubois J.-P. (1997): Assessing the risk of soil contamination in the Swiss Jura using indicator geostatistics. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 4: 31-48. Go to original source...
  15. Gotway C.A. Hartford A.H. (1996): Geostatistical methods for incorporating auxiliary information in the prediction of spatial variables. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, 1: 17-39. Go to original source...
  16. Gupta S.C., Larson W.E. (1979): Estimating soil water retention characteristics from particle size distribution, organic matter content, and bulk density. Water Resources Research, 15: 1633-1635. Go to original source...
  17. Isaaks E.H., Srivastava R.M. (1989): An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York.
  18. Journel A.G. (1983): Non-parametric estimation of spatial distributions. Mathematical Geology, 15: 445-468. Go to original source...
  19. Journel A.G., Huijbregts C.J. (1978): Mining Geostatistics. Academic Press, New York.
  20. Juang K.W., Lee D.Y. (1998): A comparison of three kriging methods using auxiliary variables in heavymetal contaminated soils. Journal of Environmental Quality, 27: 355-363. Go to original source...
  21. Kerry R., Oliver M. (2003): Variograms of ancillary data to aid sampling for soil surveys. Precision Agriculture, 4: 261-278. Go to original source...
  22. Lloyd C.D., Atkinson P.M. (1999): Designing optimal sampling configurations with ordinary and indicator kriging. In: 4th Int. Conf. GeoComputation 99. July 25-28, Fredericksburg.
  23. López-Granados F., Jurado-Expósito M., Atenciano S., García-Ferrer A., Sánchez de la Orden M., García-Torres L. (2002): Spatial variability of agricultural soil parameters in southern Spain. Plant Soil, 246: 97-105. Go to original source...
  24. López-Granados F., Jurado-Expósito M., PenaBarragan J.M., García-Torres L. (2005): Using geostatistical and remote sensing approaches for mapping soil properties. European Journal of Agronomy, 23: 279-289. Go to original source...
  25. Mohammadi J., Van Meirvenne M., Goovaerts P. (1997): Mapping cadmium concentration and the risk of exceeding a local sanitation threshold using indicator geostatistics. In: Soares A., Gómez-Hernández J., Froidevaux R. (eds): GeoENV I - Geostatistics for Environmental Applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 327-337. Go to original source...
  26. Morgan R.P.C., Quinton J.N., Smith R.E., Govers G., Poesen J.W.A., Auerswald K., Chisci G., Torri D., Styczen M.E. (1998): The European Soil Erosion Model (EUROSEM): A dynamic approach for predicting sediment transport from fields and small catchments. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 23: 527-544. Go to original source...
  27. Nogueira F., Couto E.G., Bernardi C.J. (2002): Geostatistics as a tool to improve sampling and statistical analysis in wetlands: A case study on dynamics of organic matter distribution in the Pantanal of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 62: 861-870. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  28. Odeh I.O.A., Todd A.J., Triantafilis J. (2003): Spatial prediction of soil particle-size fractions as compositional data. Soil Science, 168: 501-515. Go to original source...
  29. Patriarche D., Castro M.C., Goovaerts P. (2005): Estimating regional hydraulic conductivity fields-A comparative study of geostatistical methods. Mathematical Geology, 37: 587-613. Go to original source...
  30. Rawls W.J., Brakensiek D.L., Saxton K.E. (1982): Estimation of soil water properties. Transactions of ASAE, 25: 1316-1320. Go to original source...
  31. Robertson G.P. (2000): GS+: Geostatistics for the Environment Sciences. GS+ User's Guide Version 5. Gamma Design Software, Plainwell.
  32. Saito H., Goovaerts P. (2000): Geostatistical interpolation of positively skewed and censored data in a dioxin-contaminated site. Environmental Science and Technology, 34: 4228-4235. Go to original source...
  33. Trangmar B.B., Yost R.S., Uehara G. (1985): Application of geostatistics to spatial studies of soil properties. Advances in Agronomy, 38: 45-93. Go to original source...
  34. Triantafilis J., Odeh I.O.A., McBratney A.B. (2001): Five geostatistical models to predict soil salinity from electromagnetic induction data across irrigated cotton. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 65: 869-878. Go to original source...
  35. Vaughan P.J., Lesch S.M., Corwin D.L., Cone D.G. (1995): Water content effect on soil salinity prediction: A geostatistical study using cokriging. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 59: 1146-1156. Go to original source...
  36. Voltz M., Lagacherie P., Louchart X. (1997): Predicting soil properties over a region using sample information from a mapped reference area. European Journal of Soil Science, 48: 19-30. Go to original source...
  37. Yates S.R., Warrick A.W. (1987): Estimating soil water content using cokriging. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 51: 23-30. Go to original source...
  38. Zhang R., Myers D.E., Warrick A.W. (1992): Estimation of spatial distribution of soil chemicals using pseudo-cross-variograms. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 56: 1444-1452. Go to original source...
  39. Zhang R., Shouse P., Yates S. (1997): Use of pseudocrossvariograms and cokriging to improve estimates of soil solute concentrations. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 61: 1342-1347. Go to original source...
  40. Zötl J.G. (1997): The spa Deutsch-Altenburg and the hydrogeology of the Vienna basin (Austria). Environmental Geology, 29: 176-187. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.