Rescue and renewal of legacy soil inventories, a case study: semi-detailed soil surveys in some parts of Isfahan and Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari provinces

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

1 student

2 Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University

3 Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Chaharmahal-Va-Bakhtiari province

4 Research Assistant Prof., Soil and Water Research Department, Kermanshah Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Kermanshah, Iran,

Abstract

Background and objectives: Soils play an important role in environmental issues and sustainable management and development programs. Then there is a growing need for the preparation of soil maps with high reliability and accuracy. Taking into account the decreasing the chance of conducting new soil surveys due to the limitation of resources, legacy soil data have been receiving a great deal of attention. These data, which carry important information about the state and properties of soil over time and place, can create a perspective for better management of different resources. Considering these issues and also the dependence of better soil management on this legacy information and the importance of using it in environmental management, serious efforts should be made to maintain and reuse these legacy soil data. Then performing some preprocesses in order to maintain and renew this information is obviously necessary, in which rescue and renewal of soil legacy inventories are the most important ones. These preprocess have to be performed before any reusing of them. In spite of global efforts in this regard, no important effort has been made to renew this valuable information so far. However, it has a good history of soil science and is full of legacy soil information inherited from pioneer soil scientists. Therefore, this study aims at rescue, renewal and evaluate available legacy soil surveys as prerequisite processes for reusing them in the framework of digital mapping.
Materials and methods: The 10480 km2 study area is located in the border of Isfahan and Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari provinces. Due to the existence of Zayandehrud river in this region, it has been surveyed a lot so far. However, because of the lack of access to all these studies, three legacy soil studies covering the whole study area were selected and examined. After recording of the information of these studies in computer and georeferencing the maps, the boundaries of soil map units were digitized. The quality of the maps was afterward evaluated according to the Cornell adequacy criteria. The spatial accuracy of soil map units was then checked and their probable dislocation was finally corrected using available axillary maps and information. Also, the weighted Tau index and overall accuracy were calculated to quantitatively evaluate the quality of the maps.
Results: The information of selected legacy soil maps and profile was successfully recorded in computer in order to keep them from destruction, and a table filled with the information of their soil profiles. The results indicate that the georeferencing of soil maps was done with relatively good quality. The results of quality and efficiency of soil map units’ assessment showed that the map scale is larger than the scale provided on the maps, however, the map legends provide enough information to the users of the map. The investigation of the boundary displacement of the map units showed that the maps had a high-level of spatial accuracy. The results of statistical evaluation of soil map units’ accuracy showed that in all studies as well as their total, the weighted overall accuracy and Tau index of the map at all levels of classification is more than 70% and 50%, respectively, which indicates a good accuracy of the maps.
Conclusion: Despite the public belief about the quality of legacy soil maps, the results of this study indicate well that the studied legacy soil maps have a good quality in terms of their general characteristics. It is also proved that the legacy information and maps can be used with a good degree of confidence in the digital mapping process. Thus, the cost of new soil studies can be saved using this legacy information.

Keywords

References

1.Balkovic, J., Rampasekova, Z., Hutar, V., Sobocka, J., and Skalsky, R. 2013. Digital soil mapping from conventional field soil observations. Soil and Water Research.8: 1. 13-25.
2.Cambule, A.H., Rossiter, D.G., Stoorvogel, J.J., and Smaling, E.M.A. 2015. Rescue and renewal of legacy soil resource inventories: A case study of the Limpopo National Park, Mozambique. Catena. 125: 169-182.
3.Dewitte, O., Jones, A., Spaargaren, O., Breuning-Madsen, H., Brossard, M., Dampha, A., et al. 2013. Harmonisation of the soil map of Africa at the continental scale. Geoderma. 211-212. 138-153.
4.Farshad, A., Mohammadi, M., Masihabadi, M.H., Farzaneh, A., 2015. Geopedology: Application of RS and GIS in soils studies. Published by Soil and Water Research Institute, 313p. (In Persian)
5.Forbes, T., Rossiter, D., and van Wambeke, A. 1987. Guidelines for evaluating the adequacy of soil resource inventories. (SMSS: Technical Monograph: Soil management support services;Vol. 4). Ithaca; Washington, D.C.: Cornell University, Department of Agronomy, New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Management Support Service (SMSS).
6.Forbes, T.R., Rossiter, D.G., and VanWambeke, A. 1982. Guidelines for evaluating the adequacy of soil resource inventories. Other. Soil Management Support Services, Ithaca, New York, USA. 56p.
7.Goodchild, M.F., and Hunter, G.J. 1997. A simple positional accuracy measure for linear features. Inter. J. Geograph. Inf. Sci. 11: 299-306.
8.Hughes, M.L., McDowell, P.F., and Marcus, W.A. 2006. Accuracy assessment of georectified aerial photographs: implications for measuring lateral channel movement in a GIS. Geomorphology. 74: 1-16.
9.Iliffe, J., and Lott, R. 2008. Datums and Map Projections for Remote Sensing, GIS, and Surveying. Whittles Pub., CRC Press. Scotland, UK, 250p.
10.Keesstra, S.D., Bouma, J., Wallinga, J., Tittonell, P., Smith, P., Cerda, A., et al. 2016. The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the united nations sustainable development goals. Soil. 2: 111-128.
11.Kempen, B., Brus, D.J., Stoorvogel, J.J., Heuvelink, J.B.M., and de Vries, F. 2012. Efficiency Comparison of Conventional and Digital Soil Mapping for Updating Soil Maps. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 76: 2097-2115.
12.Leenaars, J.G.B., Kempen, B., van Oostrum, A.J.M., and Batjes, N.H. 2014. Africa soil profiles database: A compilation of georeferenced and standardised legacy soil profile data for Sub-Saharan Africa. P 51-57. In: D. Arrouays (ed.) Global Soil Map basis of the global spatial soil information system. Taylor & Francis, London.
13.Li, W., Zhang, C., Dey, D.K., Dipak, K., and Willig, M.R. 2013. Updating Categorical Soil Maps Using Limited Survey Data by Bayesian Markov Chain Cosimulation. Sci. World J. 587284.
14.Mahler, P.J. 1970. Manual of Multipurpose Land Classification. Report no. 212. Soil and Water Research Institute, Tehran. Iran,
15.Mayr, T., Rivas-Casado, M., Bellamy, P., Palmer, R., Zawadzka, J., and Corstanje, R. 2010. Two methods for using legacy data in digital soil mapping. P 191-202. In: J.L. Boettinger (ed.) Digital Soil Mapping: Bridging Research, Environmental Application, and Operation. Springer, Dordrecht.
16.McBratney, A.B., Mendonça-Santos, M.L., and Minasny, B. 2003. On digital soil mapping. Geoderma. 117: 3-52.
17.Mohammadi, J. 2010. Pedomining. Vol. 3. postmodern statistics. Pelk Press, 594p. (In Persian)
18.Pahlavan-Rad, M.R., Toomanian, N., Khormali, F., Brungard, C.W., Komaki, C.B., and Bogaert, P. 2014. Updating soil survey maps using random forest and conditioned Latin hypercube sampling in the loess derived soils of northern Iran. Geoderma. 232-234. 97-106.
19.Pahlavan-Rad, M.R., Khormali, F., Toomanian, N., Brungard, C.W., Kiani, F., Komaki, C.B., and Bogaert, P. 2016. Legacy soil maps as a covariate in digital soil mapping: A case study from Northern Iran. Geoderma. 279: 141-148.
20.Rossiter, D.G. 2001. Assessing the thematic accuracy of area-class soil maps. Soil Science Division, ITC. Enschede Netherlands, 46p.
21.Rossiter, D.G. 2004. Technical note: Statistical methods for accuracy assessment of classified thematic maps, Enschede, the Netherlands, 43p.
22.Rossiter, D.G. 2008. Digital soil mapping as a component of data renewal for areas with sparse soil data infrastructures. P 69-80. In: A.E. Hartemink (ed.) Digital soil mapping with limited data. Springer, Dordrecht.
23.Rossiter, D.G., Zeng, R., and Zhang, G.L. 2017. Accounting for taxonomic distance in accuracy assessment of
soil class predictions. Geoderma.292: 118-127.
 24.Sarmento, E.C., Giasson, E., Weber, E.J., Flores, C.A., Rossiter, D.G., and Hasenack, H. 2014. Characterization of legacy soil maps: use of indicators in maps at different cales in Rio Grande do Sul. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo. 38: 1672-
25.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1968. Semi-detailed soil survey of some parts of Shahrekord area. No. 119. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
26.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1970a. Semi-detailed soil survey of Avargan region (Borujen). No. 135. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
27.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1970b. Semi-detailed soil survey of Dezak region of Shahrekord. No. 136. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
28.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1977a. Semi-detailed and reconnaissance soil survey of different parts of Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari province (around Borujen). Iranian Soil and Water Research Institute, No. 543. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
29.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1977b. Semi-detailed soil survey of Agriculture and animal college of Shahrekord. No. 551. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
30.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1984. Semi-detailed soil survey and land classification research centers of Isfahan and Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari provinces (Golpaygan, Borujen, Braan, Shahrekord). No. 813. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
31.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1986a. Semi-detailed soil survey of Chaharmahal-Va-Bakhtiari province (Shahrekord and Borujen area). No. 696. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
32.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1986b. Semi-detailed soil survey of Juneghan region, Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari province. No. 701. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
33.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran. 1992. Reconnaissance semi-detailed soil survey and land classification of Fereydan region. No. 855. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
34.Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, 1999. Correlation study of soils in central arid south of Iran, Vol. 2: East of Zagros region (Fereydan, Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari and Semirom). No, 1062. Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran, Ministry of Agricultures, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
35.Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil Taxonomy: a basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. Agricultural Handbook No. 436.
36.Soil Survey Staff. 1985. Keys to soil taxonomy for the management support service. 2nd edition. Agronomy department of Cornell university. Washington DC.
37.Soil Survey Staff. 2014. Keys to soil taxonomy. 12th edition. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
38.Sulaeman, Y., Minasny, B., McBratney, A.B., Sarwani, M., and Sutandi, A. 2013. Harmonizing legacy soil data for digital soil mapping in Indonesia. Geoderma. 192: 77-85.
39.Waltner, I., Michéli, E., Fuchs, M., Láng, V., Pásztor, L., Bakacsi, Z., Laborczi, A., and Szabo, J. 2014.
Digital mapping of selected WRB units based on vast and diverse legacy data.P 313-318. In: D. Arrouays (ed.) GlobalSoilMap basis of the global spatial soil information system. Taylor & Francis, London.
 40.Yang, L., Jiao, Y., Fahmy, S., Zhu,A.X., Hann, S., Burt, J.E., and Qi, F. 2011. Updating Conventional Soil Maps through Digital Soil Mapping. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 75: 1044-1053.
41.Zeraatpisheh, M., Ayoubi, S.,Brungard, C.W., and Finke, P. 2019. Disaggregating and updating a legacy soil map using DSMART, fuzzy cmeans and k-means clustering algorithms in Central Iran. Geoderma. 340: 249-258.
42.Zhu, A.X., Hudson, B., Burt, J.E., Lubich, K., and Simonson, D. 2001. Soil mapping using GIS, expert knowledge, and fuzzy logic. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 65: 1463-1472.
43.Zinck, J.A. 2016. The Geopedologic Approach. P 27-59. In: J.A. Zinck (ed.) Geopedology: An Integration of Geomorphology and Pedology for Soil and Landscape Studies. Springer, Switzerland.
Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production
Volume 9, Issue 4
March 2020
Pages 47-68

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics