The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mapping topsoil physical properties at European scale using the LUCAS database
Open accessAbstract
The Land Use and Cover Area frame Statistical survey (LUCAS) aimed at the collecting harmonised data about the state of land use/cover over the extent of European Union (EU). Among these 2 · 10 5 land use/cover observations selected for validation, a topsoil survey was conducted at about 10% of these sites. Topsoil sampling locations were selected as to be representative of European landscape using a Latin hypercube stratified random sampling, taking into account CORINE land cover 2000, the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) DEM and its derived slope, aspect and curvature. In this study we will discuss how the LUCAS topsoil database can be used to map soil properties at continental scale over the geographical extent of Europe. Several soil properties were predicted using hybrid approaches like regression kriging. In this paper we describe the prediction of topsoil texture and related derived physical properties. Regression models were fitted using, along other variables, remotely sensed data coming from the MODIS sensor. The high temporal resolution of MODIS allowed detecting changes in the vegetative response due to soil properties, which can then be used to map soil features distribution. We will also discuss the prediction of intrinsically collinear variables like soil texture which required the use of models capable of dealing with multivariate constrained dependent variables like Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS). Cross validation of the fitted models proved that the LUCAS dataset constitutes a good sample for mapping purposes leading to cross-validation R 2 between 0.47 and 0.50 for soil texture and normalized errors between 4 and 10%.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Closed‐form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils
van Genuchten, M. T. (1980) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x · Cited by 27,578
Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security
Lal, R. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1097396 · Cited by 8,376
Cited by
LUCAS Soil, the largest expandable soil dataset for Europe: a review
Orgiazzi, A., Ballabio, C., Panagos, P., Jones, A., & Fernández‐Ugalde, O. (2018) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/ejss.12499 · Cited by 699
Self-citationUsing quantile regression forest to estimate uncertainty of digital soil mapping products
Vaysse, K., & Lagacherie, P. (2017) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.12.017 · Cited by 359
Thomsen, E., & Andreasen, R. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aav8083 · Cited by 183
Rudiyanto, Minasny, B., Setiawan, B. I., Saptomo, S. K., & McBratney, A. B. (2018) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.018 · Cited by 143
Spatial Prediction of Concentrations of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in European Soils
Moghadasi, R., Mumberg, T., & Wanner, P. (2023) · Environmental Science & Technology Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.3c00633 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Ballabio, C., Panagos, P., & Monatanarella, L.
- Venue
- Geoderma
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 261
- Pages
- 110-123
- ISSN
- 0016-7061 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2237118555
- Cited by
- 543
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 19.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.