4.7 Article

Proportional allocation with soil depth improved mapping soil organic carbon stocks

期刊

SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH
卷 224, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2022.105519

关键词

Soil organic carbon density; Equal-area spline function; Log -ratio transformation; Random forest; Generalized linear model; Proportional allocation

资金

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA23100202]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41930647, 41671219]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental In- formation System

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil organic carbon (SOC) plays a vital role in assessing land quality, managing farmland and ecological environment, and understanding carbon cycle. Accurate spatial prediction of multilayer SOC density (SOCD) is important for interpreting changes in SOC stocks and dynamics. Previous mapping techniques have limitations, but the two proposed methods for multilayer mapping based on proportional allocation of soil depth showed better accuracy and interpretability. Among the methods compared, the proportional allocation methods combined with random forest (RF) performed the best. The findings provide valuable insights for SOCD mapping and land management.
Soil organic carbon (SOC) is vital to the assessment of land quality, management of farmland and ecological envi-ronment, and carbon cycle. A more accurate spatial prediction of multilayer soil organic carbon density (SOCD) can contribute to a better interpretation of the changes in multilayer SOC stocks and carbon dynamics. However, previous mapping techniques still have limitations, such as ignoring the relationship of profile depths, not further taking advantage of vertical distribution and surface categorical information. In addition, it is unclear whether it is better to model each depth interval of SOC separately or to model the total layer and then allocate it. Here, we propose two new methods based on the proportional allocation of soil depth for multilayer mapping: vertical log-ratio method (VLR) of SOCD by applying the percentage of SOCD data and isometric log-ratio (ILR) transformation, and vertical distribution method (VD) of SOCD by considering different land-use types. We compared five methods, including the two new methods, the exponential and equal-area spline functions, and independent modeling without depth in-formation. We combined these five methods with the generalized linear model (GLM) and random forest (RF) to produce predictions of the Sanjiang Plain, northeastern China. The results demonstrated that SOCD did not always decrease with increasing soil depth, and classification of SOCD vertical distribution features needs to be considered by combining with soil depths. For accuracy assessment, the exponential mode with both GLM and RF over-calculated the predicted values and performed poorly, indicating that the blind use of depth information increased the prediction error. The spline function prediction was scarcely better than that of independent modeling. The proportional allo-cation methods performed better than other separate modeling methods for accuracy and interpretability with GLM or RF, especially for the middle and surface layers. The GLM generated more aggregated predictions than the RF, losing the distribution pattern of the original data. Therefore, we recommend RF combined with proportional allo-cation methods for spatial SOCD prediction in large-scale study areas. We calculated the SOC stocks in the Sanjiang Plain using our new methods, which were more reasonable compared with those of previous studies and had the advantages of in-depth information, environmental variable selection, and model optimization. Our findings provide not only other perspectives for SOCD mapping, with more fully integrated depth information and more accurate assessment of multilayer SOC stocks, but also provide guidance for the evaluation of land quality, farmland, and ecological environmental management.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据