2018
DOI: 10.1590/18069657rbcs20170183
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mapping Soil Cation Exchange Capacity in a Semiarid Region through Predictive Models and Covariates from Remote Sensing Data

Abstract: Mapping soil cation exchange capacity in a semiarid region through predictive models and covariates from remote sensing data. Rev Bras Cienc Solo. 2018;42:e0170183.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[20] reported lower correlation (<−0.38) between DEM and soil attributes including CEC, and moderate to strong correlation (<0.60) between satellite bands of synthetic soil image and soil attributes. The legacy soil map showed better correlation (0.5) with CEC compared to Landsat 5 TM derived attributes (<0.44) in the flat landscape of a semiarid region of Brazil [14]. Similar to [17], we found that based on the whole dataset, SOM has a strong correlation with CEC (0.73).…”
Section: Spatial Trend Modelingmentioning
confidence: 53%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[20] reported lower correlation (<−0.38) between DEM and soil attributes including CEC, and moderate to strong correlation (<0.60) between satellite bands of synthetic soil image and soil attributes. The legacy soil map showed better correlation (0.5) with CEC compared to Landsat 5 TM derived attributes (<0.44) in the flat landscape of a semiarid region of Brazil [14]. Similar to [17], we found that based on the whole dataset, SOM has a strong correlation with CEC (0.73).…”
Section: Spatial Trend Modelingmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…Linear and multiple linear regressions (MLR) models have been widely used for spatial prediction of soil organic carbon due to their simplicity in application and ease of interpretation [7,10]. For example, [13] applied regression kriging (MLR and kinging of residuals) to predict and map field-scale variability of soil organic carbon using terrain attributes as covariates while [14] utilized legacy soil map and Landsat 5 TM variables for predicting CEC in a flat landscape based on random forest and geostatistical (i.e., Cokriging) models. Other studies used generalized linear models [15], and machine learning algorithms such as artificial neural networks [15][16][17][18], random forest [11,19,20], and Cubist [8,17,19,20] for predicting SOM and CEC.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, combining the micro-dam potential map by the AHP+RF method generates better spatial results, reducing the effect of underestimating areas for micro-dam allocation in restricted areas when applying the methods in isolation. Notably, the advantage of ML is the inclusion of covariates in prediction studies (KUHN E JOHNSON, 2013;CHAGAS et al, 2018;SOUZA et al, 2018;GOMES et al, 2019). The insertion of covariates opens up vast possibilities for future studies on areas for micro-dam allocation, especially by inserting covariates of hydrological and climatic factors, which are important factors in micro-dam allocation (SCHIETTECATTE et al, 2005;HIPÓLITO et al, 2019;MESHRAM et al, 2020).…”
Section: Prediction Of Potential Areas For Dams (Ahp and Rf)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model also provides statistical data that shows accuracy (coeffi cient of determination R 2 ) and error (root mean squared error RMSE, and mean absolute error MAE), usual procedures in ML (KUHN & JOHNSON, 2013;CHAGAS et al, 2018;SOUZA et al, 2018;GOMES et al, 2019). The values of R 2 RMSE and MAE are obtained with equations 6, 7 and 8, respectively.…”
Section: Spatial Prediction Sl and K Sn Indicesmentioning
confidence: 99%