Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70022337

Forest soil chemistry and terrain attributes in a Catskills watershed

C.E. Johnson·J. J. Ruiz-Mendez·G.B. Lawrence
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Knowledge of soil chemistry is useful in assessing the sensitivity of forested areas to natural and anthropogenic disturbances, but characterizing large areas is expensive because of the large sample numbers required and the cost of soil chemical analyses. We collected and chemically analyzed soil samples from 72 sites within a 214-ha watershed in the Catskill Mountains of New York to evaluate factors that influence soil chemistry and whether terrain features could be used to predict soil chemical properties. Using geographic information system (GIS) techniques, we determined five terrain attributes at each sampling location: (i) slope, (ii) aspect, (iii) elevation, (iv) topographic index, and (v) flow accumulation. These attributes were ineffective in predicting the chemical properties of organic and mineral soil samples; together they explained only 4 to 25% of the variance in pH(w), effective cation-exchange capacity (CEC(e)), exchangeable bases, exchangeable acidity, total C, total N, and C/N ratio. Regressions among soil properties were much better; total C and pH(w) together explained 33 to 66% of the variation in exchangeable bases and CEC(e). Total C was positively correlated with N (r = 0.91 and 0.96 in Oa horizons and mineral soil, respectively), exchangeable bases (r = 0.65, 0.76), and CEC(e) (r = 0.54, 0.44), indicating the importance of organic matter to the chemistry of these acidic soils. The fraction of CEC(e) occupied by H explained 44% of the variation in pH(w). Soil chemical properties at this site vary on spatial scales finer than typical GIS analyses, resulting in relationships with poor predictive power. Thus, interrelationships among soil properties are more reliable for prediction.Knowledge of soil chemistry is useful in assessing the sensitivity of forested areas to natural and anthropogenic disturbances, but characterizing large areas is expensive because of the large sample numbers required and the cost of soil chemical analyses. We collected and chemically analyzed soil samples from 72 sites within a 214-ha watershed in the Catskill Mountains of New York to evaluate factors that influence soil chemistry and whether terrain features could be used to predict soil chemical properties. Using geographic information system (GIS) techniques, we determined five terrain attributes at each sampling location: (i) slope, (ii) aspect, (iii) elevation, (iv) topographic index, and (v) flow accumulation. These attributes were ineffective in predicting the chemical properties of organic and mineral soil samples; together they explained only 4 to 25% of the variance in pHw, effective cation-exchange capacity (CECe), exchangeable bases, exchangeable acidity, total C, total N, and C/N ratio. Regressions among soil properties were much better; total C and pHw together explained 33 to 66% of the variation in exchangeable bases and CECe. Total C was positively correlated with N (r = 0.91 and 0.96 in Oa horizons and mineral soil, respectively), exchangeable bases (r = 0.65, 0.76), and CECe (r = 0.54, 0.44), indicating the importance of organic matter to the chemistry of these acidic soils. The fraction of CECe occupied by H explained 44% of the variation in pHw. Soil chemical properties at this site vary on spatial scales finer than typical GIS analyses, resulting in relationships with poor predictive power. Thus, interrelationships among soil properties are more reliable for prediction.

Explore related subjects

Soil Science Society of America JournalArticle
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41.98603585974727° to 42.03093424950211° latitude; -74.4107437133789° to -74.34928894042967° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C.E. Johnson, J. J. Ruiz-Mendez, G.B. Lawrence. 2000. Forest soil chemistry and terrain attributes in a Catskills watershed. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.6451804x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2021

The processes of preferential flow in the unsaturated zone

Preferential flow, a major influence in unsaturated soil and rock almost everywhere, occurs by multiple phenomenologically distinct hydraulic processes. For the mode known as funneled flow, concentrated in particularly conductive portions of the medium, the surface-tension/viscous-flow processes of traditional unsaturated flow theory predominate. Fingered flow, through conductive paths of higher water content than surrounding material, requires amendments to traditional theory concerning instabilities and dynamic flow-regime boundaries. Macropore flow, the most recognized preferential flow mode, poses unanswered questions and major difficulties in practice. Accumulated evidence shows that water flows preferentially mostly through macropores that are (a) only partially filled with water, and (b) surrounded by matrix material that is drier, sometimes much drier, than saturation. With partial filling, geometric characteristics such as aperture have much less influence than was previously thought, and the intra-macropore configuration of the flowing water phase, about which little is conclusively known, is then a dominant controlling influence. With unsaturated surroundings, macropore/matrix exchange interactions control, for given input and medium, the initiating circumstances, conveyed flux, and duration of macropore flow. The multiple processes in play during such interactions have different sensitivities to the matrix water state and different directions of influence. The net influence of matrix water content on macropore flow is thus highly complex and a major research need. Additional high-priority topics are: flowpath connectivity, for watersheds as well as small scales; intra-macropore processes, to discern their importance and possible means of quantification; and the identification of measurable soil and rock properties that can be utilized predictively.

Soil Science Society of America Journal↗
USGS2020

A hybrid approach for predictive soil property mapping using conventional soil survey data

Soil property maps are important for land management and earth systems modeling. A new hybrid point-disaggregation predictive soil property mapping strategy improved mapping in the Colorado River Basin, and can be applied to other areas with similar data (e.g. conterminous United States). This new approach increased sample size ~6-fold over past efforts. Random forests related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors to samples to predict 15 soil properties (pH, texture fractions, rock, electrical conductivity, gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio, available water capacity, bulk density, erodibility, organic matter) at 7 depths, depth to restrictive layer, and surface rock size and cover. Cross-validations resulted in coefficient of determinations averaging 0.52, with a range of 0.20 to 0.76; and mean absolute errors ranged from 3% to 98% of training data averages with a mean of 41%. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals (RPIs) for the entire study area, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty relative to original data distributions. Average error increased with higher RPI values (higher uncertainty), and areas with the highest RPI are consistently under-sampled, suggesting that additional sampling in these areas may improve prediction accuracy. Greater uncertainty was also observed in areas with shale parent materials and physiographic settings uncommon relative to the broader study area.

New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Arizo↗
USGS2018

Approaches for improving field soil identification

Use of soil survey information by non-soil-scientists is often limited by their inability to select the correct soil map unit component (COMP). Here, we developed two approaches that can be deployed to smartphones for non-soil-scientists to identify COMP from the location alone or location together with easily observed field data (i.e., slope, depth to the restrictive layer, and soil texture by depth). In addition, we also compared the two newly developed approaches with a traditional approach identifying COMP based on the dominant COMP (DC-based approach). All three approaches were tested with the Rapid Assessment of US Soil Carbon database and the combined USDA- NRCS Soil Survey Geographic database and the USDA-NRCS State Soil Geographic Database. The results indicated that the observation-based approach performed significantly better than the other two approaches, suggesting that a small set of easy-to-measure site-specific observations could significantly improve COMP identification. The location- and DC-based approaches had similar low performance overall. However, the location-based approach slightly improved identifications over the DC-based approach for cases where (i) there were multiple possible components within the soil map unit and (ii) the components were located in close proximity to a boundary of a different soil map unit polygon. The benefit of using the location-based approach may be greater in specific soil survey areas where topography was the major factor leading to the creation of the map unit legend.

Soil Science Society of America Journal↗