Accounting for taxonomic distance in accuracy assessment of soil class predictions

Geoderma

Volumn 292, Issue , 2017, Pages 118-127

  Rossiter, David G ^a,c,d   Zeng, Rong ^a,b   Zhang, Gan Lin ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

^c ISRIC WORLD SOIL INFORMATION   (Netherlands)

^d Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Accuracy assessment; Map evaluation; Soil class maps

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; MAPPING; TAXONOMIES;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; ACCURACY MEASURES; CLASS SIMILARITIES; NUMERICAL TAXONOMY; PROBABILISTIC PREDICTION; SOIL CLASS; SOIL CLASSIFICATION; TAXONOMIC HIERARCHY;

SOILS;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; ERROR ANALYSIS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; MAP; MAPPING METHOD; PEDOGENESIS; PREDICTION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOIL CLASSIFICATION; SOIL PROPERTY; UNIVERSAL SOIL LOSS EQUATION;

CHINA;

EID: 85010220048     PISSN: 00167061     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.01.012     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Avery, T.E., Burkhart, H.E., Forest Measurements. fifth, 2015, Waveland Press, Long Grove, IL.
2. Beaudette, D.E., Roudier, P., O'Geen, A.T., Algorithms for quantitative pedology: a toolkit for soil scientists. Comput. Geosci. 52 (2013), 258–268.
3. Bidwell, O., Hole, F., An experiment in the numerical classification of some Kansas soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 28 (1964), 263–268.
4. Brus, D., Kempen, B., Heuvelink, G., Sampling for validation of digital soil maps. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 62 (2011), 394–407.
5. Buol, S.W., Southard, R.J., Graham, R.C., McDaniel, P., Soil Genesis and Classification. 2011, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, UK.
6. Butler, B., Soil Classification for Soil Survey. 1980, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
7. Carré, F., Jacobson, M., Numerical classification of soil profile data using distance metrics. Geoderma 148 (2009), 336–345.
8. Cohen, J., A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20 (1960), 37–46.
9. Congalton, R.G., Green, K., Assessing the Accuracy of Remotely Sensed Data: Principles and Practices. 1999, Lewis, Boca Raton, FL.
10. Cooperative Research Group on Chinese Soil Taxonomy. Chinese Soil Taxonomy. 2001, Science Press, Beijing.
11. de Gruijter, J., Numerical Classification of Soils and its Application in Survey. Vol. 855 of Agricultural Research Report, 1977, PUDOC, Wageningen (NL).
12. Dobos, E., Vadnai, P., Bertoti, D., Kovacs, K., Micheli, E., Lang, V., Fuchs, M., A Novel Approach for Validating Raster Datasets with Categorical Data. GlobalSoilMap: Basis of the Global Spatial Soil Information System, 2014, CRC Press-Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, 347–351.
13. Driessen, P., Deckers, J., Spaargaren, O., Nachtergaele, F., Lecture Notes on the Major Soils of the World: World Soil Resources Reports 94. World Soil Resources Reports, 2001, FAO, Rome.
14. Edmonds, W.J., Lentner, M., Statistical evaluation of the taxonomic composition of three soil map units in Virginia. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50 (1986), 997–1001.
15. FAO. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014: International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps. No. 106 in World Soil Resources Reports, 2014, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
16. Finke, P.A., Quality Assessment of Digital Soil Maps: Producers and Users Perspectives. Digital Soil Mapping: An Introductory Perspective, 2007, Elsevier Scientific, Amsterdam, 523–541 Ch. 31.
17. Foody, G.M., On the compensation for chance agreement in image classification and accuracy assessment. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 58 (1992), 1459–1460.
18. Gerasimova, M.I., Chinese soil taxonomy: between the American and the international classification systems. Eurasian Soil Sci. 43 (2010), 945–949.
19. GlobalSoilMap.net Science Committee. Specifications: Tiered GlobalSoilMap.net products; Release 2.3. 2012, Federation University Australia, Ballarat, Victoria (Australia).
20. Gopal, S., Woodcock, C., Theory and methods for accuracy assessment of thematic maps using fuzzy sets. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 60 (1994), 181–188.
21. Gower, J.C., A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 27 (1971), 857–871.
22. Hengl, T., de Jesus, J.M., MacMillan, R.A., Batjes, N.H., Heuvelink, G.B.M., Ribeiro, E., Samuel-Rosa, A., Kempen, B., Leenaars, J.G.B., Walsh, M.G., et al. SoilGrids1km - global soil information based on automated mapping. PLoS ONE, 9, 2014, e105992.
23. Laba, M., Gregory, S.K., Braden, J., Ogurcak, D., Hill, E., Fegraus, E., Fiore, J., DeGloria, S.D., Conventional and fuzzy accuracy assessment of the New York Gap Analysis Project land cover map. Remote Sens. Environ. 81 (2002), 443–455.
24. Láng, V., Fuchs, M., Szegi, T., Csorba, A., Michéli, E., Deriving world reference base reference soil groups from the prospective Global Soil Map product - a case study on major soil types of Africa. Geoderma 263 (2016), 226–233.
25. Láng, V., Fuchs, M., Waltner, I., Michéli, E., Soil taxonomic distance, a tool for correlation: as exemplified by the Hungarian Brown Forest Soils and related WRB Reference Soil Groups. Geoderma 192 (2013), 269–276.
26. Leenaars, J.G.B., Africa Soil Profiles Database, Version 1.1. A Compilation of Geo-referenced and Standardized Legacy Soil Profile Data for Sub Saharan Africa (with dataset). 2013, ISRIC-World Soil Information, Wageningen, NL ISRIC Report 2013/03.
27. Ma, Z., Redmond, R.L., Tau coefficients for accuracy assessment of classification of remote sensing data. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 61:4 (1995), 435–439.
28. McBratney, A., Minasny, B., On measuring pedodiversity. Geoderma 141 (2007), 149–154.
29. McBratney, A.B., Mendonça Santos, M.L., Minasny, B., On digital soil mapping. Geoderma 117 (2003), 3–52.
30. Michéli, E., Láng, V., Owens, P.R., McBratney, A., Hempel, J., Testing the pedometric evaluation of taxonomic units on soil taxonomy - a step in advancing towards a universal soil classification system. Geoderma 264 (2016), 340–349.
31. Minasny, B., McBratney, A.B., Hartemink, A.E., Global pedodiversity, taxonomic distance, and the world reference base. Geoderma 155 (2010), 132–139.
32. Moore, A.W., Russell, J.S., Ward, W.T., Numerical analysis of soils: a comparison of three soil profile models with field classification. J. Soil Sci. 23 (1972), 193–209.
33. Odgers, N.P., McBratney, A.B., Minasny, B., Bottom-up digital soil mapping. II. Soil series classes. Geoderma 163 (2011), 30–37.
34. O'Geen, A.T., Southard, S.B., Southard, R.J., A revised Storie index for use with digital soils information. No. 8335 in University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2008, University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Davis, CA (USA).
35. Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K., Belitz, K., Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science 263 (1994), 641–646.
36. Phillips, J.D., Evaluating taxonomic adjacency as a source of soil map uncertainty. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 64 (2013), 391–400.
37. Rossiter, D.G., Economic land evaluation: why and how. Soil Use Manag. 11 (1995), 132–140.
38. Rothkegel, W., Geschichtliche Entwicklung der Bodenbonitierungen, und Wesen und Bedeutung der deutschen Bodenschätzung. 1950, E. Ulmer, Stuttgart.
39. Scull, P., Franklin, J., Chadwick, O., McArthur, D., Predictive soil mapping: a review. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 27 (2003), 171–197.
40. Smith, G., The Guy Smith Interviews: Rationale for Concepts in Soil Taxonomy. SMSS Technical Monograph 11, 1986, Soil Management Support Service, Washington, DC.
41. Sneath, P.H.A., Thirty years of numerical taxonomy. Syst. Biol. 44 (1995), 281–298.
42. Sneath, P.H.A., Sokal, R.R., Numerical Taxonomy: The Principles and Practice of Numerical Classification. 1973, San Francisco, US: Freeman.
43. Staff, Soil Survey, Keys to Soil Taxonomy. 12th, 2014, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
44. Stehman, S.V., Czaplewski, R.L., Design and analysis for thematic map accuracy assessment: fundamental principles. Remote Sens. Environ. 64 (1998), 331–344.
45. Taghizadeh-Mehrjardi, R., Nabiollahi, K., Minasny, B., Triantafilis, J., Comparing data mining classifiers to predict spatial distribution of USDA-family soil groups in Baneh region, Iran. Geoderma 253 (2015), 67–77 Sep.
46. USDA-NRCS. Web Soil Survey. 2016 Accessed 14-January-2017. URL: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm.
47. USDA-NRCS. Official Soil Series Descriptions and Series Classification. 2016 Accessed 14-January-2017. URL: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053587.
48. van Beek, L., Statistical Validation of Soil Type Maps for Africa. No. SGL-80812 WUR in BSc Thesis Soil, Water, Atmosphere, 2014, Wageningen University Research, Wageningen (NL).
49. van Huyssteen, C.W., Micheli, E., Fuchs, M., Waltner, I., Taxonomic distance between South African diagnostic horizons and the World Reference Base diagnostics. Catena 113 (2014), 276–280.
50. Van Wambeke, A., Nachtergaele, F., Properties and Management of Soils of the Tropics. FAO Land and Water Digital Media Series, 2003, FAO, Rome.
51. Vepraskas, M.J., History of the Concept of Hydric Soil. Wetland Soils: Genesis, Hydrology, Landscapes, and Classification, 2nd edition, 2015, CRC Press, 23–38 Ch. 2.
52. Viscarra Rossel, R.A., Webster, R., Discrimination of Australian soil horizons and classes from their visible-near infrared spectra. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 62 (2011), 637–647.
53. Webster, R., Fundamental objections to the 7th approximation. J. Soil Sci. 19 (1968), 354–366.
54. Woodcock, C., Gopal, S., Fuzzy set theory and thematic maps: accuracy assessment and area estimation. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 14 (2000), 153–172.
55. Young, F.J., Hammer, R.D., Defining geographic soil bodies by landscape position, soil taxonomy, and cluster analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64 (2000), 989–998.
56. Zeng, R., Zhang, G.-L., Li, D.-C., Rossiter, D.G., Zhao, Y.-G., How well can VNIR spectroscopy distinguish soil classes?. Biosyst. Eng. 152 (2016), 117–125.