Improving the information content in soil pH maps: a case study. (21st July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Robinson, N. J.; Benke, K. K.; Norng, S.; Kitching, M.; Crawford, D. M.
• Is Part Of: European journal of soil science. Volume 68:Number 5(2017:Oct.)
• Page Start: 592
• Page End: 604
• Publication Date: 2017-07-21
• Subjects: Soil science -- Periodicals; 631.4
• DOI: 10.1111/ejss.12452
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1351-0754

Abstract

Summary: Uncertainties associated with legacy data contribute to the spatial uncertainty of predictions for soil properties such as pH. Examples of potential sources of error in maps of soil pH include temporal variation and changes in land use over time. Prediction of soil pH can be improved with a linear mixed model (LMM) to analyse factors that contribute to uncertainty. Probabilities from conditional simulations in combination with agronomic critical thresholds for acid‐sensitive species can be used to identify areas that are likely, or very likely, to be below these critical thresholds for plant production. Because of rapid changes in farming systems and management practices, there is a need to be vigilant in monitoring changes in soil acidification. This is because soil acidification is an important factor in primary production and soil sustainability. In this research, legacy data from south‐western Victoria (Australia) were used with model‐based geostatistics to produce a map of soil pH that accommodates a variety of error sources, such as the time of sampling, seasonal variation, differences in analytical method, effects of changes in land use and variable soil sample depth in legacy data. Spatial covariates that are representative of soil‐forming factors were used to improve predictions. To transform spatial prediction and estimates of error in soil pH into more informative and usable maps with more information content, simulations from the conditional distribution were used to compute the probability of a soil's pH being less than critical agronomic production thresholds at each of the prediction locations. These probabilities were mapped to reveal areas of potential risk. Highlights: Can maps of soil pH be improved by accounting for temporal variation and change in land use? First example of taking account of temporal variability in sampling for pH in spatial models. Key factors for uncertainty in spatial prediction include time of sampling and sample depth. Accuracy improved by accounting for additional sources of error combined with conditional simulations.