1999
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2389.1999.00255.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mapping soil texture classes using field textuing, particle size distribution and local knowledge by both conventional and geostatisical methods

Abstract: Summary We investigated the utility of three interpolation techniques that ignored descriptive `soft' information and one that used it for mapping topsoil texture classes: re‐coding of soil map units within Geographical Information Systems (GIS), Thiessen polygons, and classifcation of probability vectors estimated by ordinary indicator kriging and simple indicator kriging with local prior means. The results were compared with texture maps based on a classifcation of kriged maps of particle size distribution. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
(23 reference statements)
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 2 illustrates the data abundance of the five model variables. The data for soil sand content is a 10 km by 10 km raster data set constructed from soil profiles via spatial interpolation (Oberthür et al, 1999;Shi et al, 2004Shi et al, , 2006. Although a certain proportion of the immense spatial variation in soil properties may be lost after spatial interpolation (Goovaerts, 2001;van Bodegom et al, 2002), the gridded soil data are still the most detailed of the five model inputs.…”
Section: Pdfs Of the Model Input Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 2 illustrates the data abundance of the five model variables. The data for soil sand content is a 10 km by 10 km raster data set constructed from soil profiles via spatial interpolation (Oberthür et al, 1999;Shi et al, 2004Shi et al, , 2006. Although a certain proportion of the immense spatial variation in soil properties may be lost after spatial interpolation (Goovaerts, 2001;van Bodegom et al, 2002), the gridded soil data are still the most detailed of the five model inputs.…”
Section: Pdfs Of the Model Input Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various geostatistical approaches have been employed to estimate spatial variation in topsoil clay content. These include, ordinary- (Voltz and Webster, 1990;Kalivas and Kollias, 1999), block- (Mapa and Kumaragamage, 1996), intrinsic random function of order k- (McBratney et al, 1991), indicator- (Oberthur et al, 1999), co- (Vauclin et al, 1983;Zhang et al, 1992), universal- (Odeh et al, 1995), regression- (Odeh and McBratney, 2000), and compositional-kriging (Odeh et al, 2003). Several studies have compared methods (Gallichand and Marcotte, 1993;Odeh et al, 1995) to map subsurface clay.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the detailed analysis in the Mun˜oz area we used an extensive data set of soil properties, crop management and yields compiled by Oberthu¨r et al (1996Oberthu¨r et al ( , 1999. Soil data in this area were based on a detailed, quasi-systematic soil survey, made in 1993.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%