Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70128794

Machine learning for predicting soil classes in three semi-arid landscapes

Abstract

Mapping the spatial distribution of soil taxonomic classes is important for informing soil use and management decisions. Digital soil mapping (DSM) can quantitatively predict the spatial distribution of soil taxonomic classes. Key components of DSM are the method and the set of environmental covariates used to predict soil classes. Machine learning is a general term for a broad set of statistical modeling techniques. Many different machine learning models have been applied in the literature and there are different approaches for selecting covariates for DSM. However, there is little guidance as to which, if any, machine learning model and covariate set might be optimal for predicting soil classes across different landscapes. Our objective was to compare multiple machine learning models and covariate sets for predicting soil taxonomic classes at three geographically distinct areas in the semi-arid western United States of America (southern New Mexico, southwestern Utah, and northeastern Wyoming). All three areas were the focus of digital soil mapping studies. Sampling sites at each study area were selected using conditioned Latin hypercube sampling (cLHS). We compared models that had been used in other DSM studies, including clustering algorithms, discriminant analysis, multinomial logistic regression, neural networks, tree based methods, and support vector machine classifiers. Tested machine learning models were divided into three groups based on model complexity: simple, moderate, and complex. We also compared environmental covariates derived from digital elevation models and Landsat imagery that were divided into three different sets: 1) covariates selected a priori by soil scientists familiar with each area and used as input into cLHS, 2) the covariates in set 1 plus 113 additional covariates, and 3) covariates selected using recursive feature elimination. Overall, complex models were consistently more accurate than simple or moderately complex models. Random forests (RF) using covariates selected via recursive feature elimination was consistently the most accurate, or was among the most accurate, classifiers between study areas and between covariate sets within each study area. We recommend that for soil taxonomic class prediction, complex models and covariates selected by recursive feature elimination be used. Overall classification accuracy in each study area was largely dependent upon the number of soil taxonomic classes and the frequency distribution of pedon observations between taxonomic classes. Individual subgroup class accuracy was generally dependent upon the number of soil pedon observations in each taxonomic class. The number of soil classes is related to the inherent variability of a given area. The imbalance of soil pedon observations between classes is likely related to cLHS. Imbalanced frequency distributions of soil pedon observations between classes must be addressed to improve model accuracy. Solutions include increasing the number of soil pedon observations in classes with few observations or decreasing the number of classes. Spatial predictions using the most accurate models generally agree with expected soil–landscape relationships. Spatial prediction uncertainty was lowest in areas of relatively low relief for each study area.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Colby W. Brungard, Janis L. Boettinger, Michael C. Duniway, Skye A. Wills, Thomas C. Edwards. 2015. Machine learning for predicting soil classes in three semi-arid landscapes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.09.019

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Season of grazing interacts with soil texture, selecting for associations of biocrust morphogroups

Livestock grazing, a widespread land use in semi-arid systems, is often placed in opposition to the perpetuation of biological soil crusts (“biocrusts”: lichens, mosses, and algal crusts including cyanobacteria) that live on the soil surface and provide ecosystem functions. The composition of biocrusts and vascular plants varies with climate, soils, and disturbance. In general, ruderal mosses and light algal crusts make up greater proportions of biocrusts in the presence of disturbance, although morphogroups of biocrusts respond differently to various disturbances. It is unknown if there are scenarios under which grazing can occur and ruderal components of biocrust could be maintained. We examine the hypothesis that soil surface texture-moisture interactions influence the ability of biocrusts to withstand trampling, reasoning that finer-textured soils are firmer (therefore serving as a better substrate for biocrusts) when dry and that coarser-textured are firmer when wet. We test these relationships within Birds of Prey, National Conservation Area (Boise, Idaho, USA). Results demonstrate two associations of biocrusts, dependent on season of grazing: one dominated by light algal crusts and lichens that frequently occurs with wet season grazing, and a second dominated by tall mosses and cup lichens that frequently occurs with dry season grazing. High cover of the invasive annual grass, Bromus tectorum (L.) was observed on sites with coarse-textured soils, and high sand content, that are grazed at relatively high intensities, creating unstable surfaces, and likely putting biocrusts at greater susceptibility to trampling. Results suggest that livestock management that accounts for soil texture and moisture could be used to maintain cover of ruderal biocrusts on fine-textured soils, that are grazed in the dry season, at low intensity. We discuss our findings in the context of managing for species of interest. Our findings are timely as varying the season of grazing is increasingly discussed as a means of favoring desirable native perennial grasses. Although ruderal morphogroups of biocrusts are not interpreted as having equivalent ecosystem functions compared to intact biocrusts, their contributions to soil stability, fertility, hydrology, and weed abatement could increase if they were more intentionally targeted by management.

Geoderma

Vertical movement of soluble carbon and nutrients from biocrusts to subsurface mineral soils

Dryland ecosystems can be constrained by low soil fertility. Within drylands, the soil nutrient and organic carbon (C) cycling that does occur is often mediated by soil surface communities known as biological soil crusts (biocrusts), which cycle C and nutrients in the top ca. 0–2 cm of soil. However, the degree to which biocrusts are influencing soil fertility and biogeochemical cycling in deeper, subsurface mineral soils is unclear. The movement of dissolved resources from biocrusts to deeper soil layers in leachate may be one of the main mechanisms through which biocrust fertility is transferred downward towards deeper microbial communities and plant roots occurring within mineral soil. Here we examined the role of biocrust leachate in contributing to subsurface nutrient and soluble C pools and subsurface microbial cycling. We collected biocrusts from three biocrust successional stages and explored resource pools in situ at multiple soil depths, while collecting leachate and measuring nutrient and organic C concentrations and metabolite composition from each successional stage in the laboratory. After four leachate collections, we conducted an incubation of mineral soil collected from below each biocrust successional stage to measure heterotrophic microbial CO 2 flux and biomass. Overall, our findings observed that the degree of nutrient and C connectivity between biocrusts and the sub-crust mineral soil depended on the biocrust successional stage and the element being considered, and the influence of biocrust successional stage on mineral soil CO 2 flux is likely related to long-term resource build up. Together, our results suggest that the influence of biocrust leachate on subsurface mineral soil is complex and context dependent, but, over longer time periods and at later successional stages, can have measurable effects on dryland soil biogeochemical cycling with feedbacks to resource availability and CO 2 flux.

Geoderma

Quantifying the influence of different biocrust community states and their responses to warming temperatures on soil biogeochemistry in field and mesocosm studies

Biocrusts influence soil biogeochemistry by fixing carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) and through leachate inputs to soils. Functional rates can vary among biocrust community states and in response to edaphic properties, heterotrophic microbial activity, and global change. Using soils and biocrusts from the Colorado Plateau, Utah, USA, we aimed to quantify the influence of early-successional (ES) and late-successional (LS) biocrust community states on soil biogeochemistry. In a field setting, we found soil was less “fertile” under ES than LS biocrust, but ES biocrust had a relative influence 1.3 times greater than LS biocrust on soil fertility. Leachate collected from LS biocrust had, on average, 6 times more organic C and 1.7 times more dissolved N than ES biocrust, but concentrations of phosphorus (P) and inorganic N did not differ among the two biocrust types. To disentangle influences of biocrusts and soil properties on biogeochemical pools, we constructed mesocosms from homogenized soil and left the surface bare or covered with ES or LS biocrust, before assignment to ambient or warmed (+5 °C) temperature treatments for 3 months. Multivariate biogeochemical properties differed among cover types, yet all exhibited losses of P, N, and organic C and nearly half of the biogeochemical variables considered did not differ among cover types. Mesocosms with LS biocrust retained more dissolved N, supported 8 additional, significant correlations among biogeochemical pools of the biocrust and mineral soil layer on average, and lost fewer of these correlations under warming. Overall, while soils under LS biocrusts were more fertile (i.e., had higher nutrient concentrations) than under ES, we did not find evidence implicating leachate as the primary driver of this difference. Biocrust influences on soil fertility were greater when mineral soil nutrients were in lower concentrations, highlighting the value of even incipient biocrusts for dryland functioning.

Arizona, Utah