

浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
1. 中山大学地理科学与规划学院,广州,510006
2. 广西壮族自治区林业科学研究院,南宁,530002
Published:2024
移动端阅览
YANG Hualei, WANG Xiaoqing, ZHANG Meiwei, et al. Comparison of Different Two-Step Models of Three-Dimensional Mapping Approaches for Soil Organic Carbon Prediction in Hilly Woodlands[J]. 2024, 38(2): 351-363.
YANG Hualei, WANG Xiaoqing, ZHANG Meiwei, et al. Comparison of Different Two-Step Models of Three-Dimensional Mapping Approaches for Soil Organic Carbon Prediction in Hilly Woodlands[J]. 2024, 38(2): 351-363. DOI: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2024.02.037.
[目的] 为了探讨多种两步模式三维制图方法的准确度影响因素及其规律。[方法] 以华南典型丘陵区1个面积约5 km2的林场内土壤有机碳为研究对象
分别使用样条函数、指数函数和幂函数作为深度函数
普通克里格和随机森林作为水平制图方法
以及两步模式的2种不同制图形式(称为形式A和B)
进行土壤有机碳含量的三维预测制图
并探究不同的深度函数、水平制图方法或制图形式对两步模式三维制图结果的影响规律。[结果] (1)深度函数在很大程度上决定制图结果在垂直和水平方向上的变异
表现在制图结果的变异在3个深度函数之间差异较大
其中指数函数上的变异最大
幂函数上最弱
而水平制图方法(普通克里格与随机森林)对制图结果的垂直变异影响不大
但对表层的空间变异影响较大;(2)样条函数由于模拟的深度曲线与实测点吻合得最好
因而准确度最好
表现在基于样条函数的三维制图一致性相关系数(CCC)为0.72~0.75
均高于同种制图形式下的其他函数(CCC为0.64~0.74)
而水平制图方法中普通克里格的制图效果好于随机森林
表现在前者的CCC为0.67~0.75
后者的CCC为0.64~0.72;(3)两步模式的2种制图形式对准确度的影响较小
仅在底层的准确度上表现出形式A (即水平预测制图深度函数模拟值)好于形式B (即水平预测制图深度函数参数);(4)所有制图方式中
普通克里格与样条函数相结合的制图形式A的准确度最高
决定系数(R2)达0.76
一致性相关系数(CCC)为0.75
均方根误差(RMSE)为3.50 g/kg。[结论] 在两步模式的三维土壤制图中
首先应考虑样条函数作为深度函数
其次依据研究区的景观条件和样本量
考虑水平制图方法
最后
尽量采用两步模式的第一种制图形式。
[Objective] In order to investigate the influencing factors and variation rules of accuracy of various two-step models of 3D mapping methods. [Methods] Soil organic carbon in a forest with an area of about 5 km2 in a typical hilly region of South China was mapped. Spline functions
exponential functions and power functions were used as depth functions
ordinary kriging and random forest were used as horizontal mapping methods and two different mapping forms (called forms A and B) were used. The 3D prediction mapping of soil organic carbon was carried out
and the influence of different depth functions
horizontal mapping methods and mapping forms on the 3D mapping results of two-step model was explored. [Results] (1) The depth function largely determined the variation of mapping results in vertical and horizontal directions
which showed that the variation of the mapping results was significantly different among the three depth functions. Exponential function had the largest variation and power function had the weakest variation
while horizontal mapping methods (ie.ordinary kriging and random forest) had little influence on the vertical variation of mapping results. However
the spatial variation of surface layer was greatly affected by the horizontal mapping methods. (2) The accuracy of spline function was the best because the simulated depth curve was in the best agreement with the measured values. The consistency correlation coefficients (CCC) of the 3D mapping based on the spline function were 0.72 and 0.75
which were higher than the other functions in the same form of 3D mapping (CCC were between 0.64 and 0.74). For the horizontal mapping methods
the accuracy of the ordinary kriging was better than that of the random forest
the CCC of the former was between 0.67 and 0.75
the latter was between 0.64 and 0.72; (3) The two mapping forms of the two-step model had little influence on accuracy. Only in the case of prediction for bottom layer
form A (i.e.
horizontally mapping simulated walues of a depth function was better than form B (i.e.
simulating parameters of a depth function).(4) Among all 3D mapping methods
the form A
with ordinary kriging and spline functions
had the highest accuracy
generating coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.76
CCC of 0.75
and root mean square error (RMSE) of 3.50 g/kg. [Conclusion] In the two-step model of 3D soil mapping
firstly
the spline function should be considered as the depth function. Secondly
the horizontal mapping method should be considered according to the landscape conditions and sample size. Finally
the first mapping form of the two-step model should be adopted as far as possible.
BATJES N H. Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world[J].European Journal of Soil Science,1996,47(2):151-163.
MALONE B P, MCBRATNEY A B, MINASNY B. Empirical estimates of uncertainty for mapping continuous depth functions of soil attributes[J].Geoderma,2011,160(3/4):614-626.
MALONE B P, MCBRATNEY A B, MINASNY B, et al. Mapping continuous depth functions of soil carbon storage and available water capacity[J].Geoderma,2009,154(1/2):138-152.
LACOSTE M, MINASNY B, MCBRATNEY A, et al. High resolution 3D mapping of soil organic carbon in a heterogeneous agricultural landscape[J].Geoderma,2014,213:296-311.
VASQUES G M, GRUNWALD S, COMERFORD N B,et al. Regional modelling of soil carbon at multiple depths within a subtropical watershed[J].Geoderma,2010,156(3/4):326-336.
GRIMM R, BEHRENS T, MÄRKER M, et al. Soil organic carbon concentrations and stocks on Barro Colorado Island: Digital soil mapping using Random Forests analysis[J].Geoderma,2008,146(1/2):102-113.
MEERSMANS J, VAN WESEMAEL B, DE RIDDER F, et al. Modelling the three-dimensional spatial distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC) at the regional scale (Flanders, Belgium)[J].Geoderma,2009,152(1/2):43-52.
MISHRA U, LAL R, SLATER B, et al. Predicting soil organic carbon stock using profile depth distribution functions and ordinary Kriging[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2009,73(2):614-621.
KEMPEN B, BRUS D J, STOORVOGEL J J. Three-dimensional mapping of soil organic matter content using soil type-specific depth functions[J].Geoderma,2011,162(1/2):107-123.
TEKIN Y, KUL B, OKURSOY R. Sensing and 3D mapping of soil compaction[J].Sensors,2008,8(5):3447-3459.
ADHIKARI K, BOU KHEIR R, GREVE M B, et al. High-resolution 3-D mapping of soil texture in Denmark[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2013,77(3):860-876.
ODGERS N P, MCBRATNEY A B, MINASNY B. Digital soil property mapping and uncertainty estimation using soil class probability rasters[J].Geoderma,2015,237/238:190-198.
LIU F, ZHANG G L, SUN Y J, et al. Mapping the three-dimensional distribution of soil organic matter across a subtropical hilly landscape[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2013,77(4):1241-1253.
VERONESI F, CORSTANJE R, MAYR T. Mapping soil compaction in 3D with depth functions[J].Soil and Tillage Research,2012,124:111-118.
ORTON T G, PRINGLE M J, BISHOP T F A. A one-step approach for modelling and mapping soil properties based on profile data sampled over varying depth intervals[J].Geoderma,2016,262:174-186.
WANG S, ZHUANG Q L, WANG Q B, et al. Mapping stocks of soil organic carbon and soil total nitrogen in Liaoning Province of China[J].Geoderma,2017,305:250-263.
SONG X D, WU H Y, JU B, et al. Pedoclimatic zone-based three-dimensional soil organic carbon mapping in China[J].Geoderma,2020,363:e114145.
VAN MEIRVENNE M, MAES K, HOFMAN G. Three-dimensional variability of soil nitrate-nitrogen in an agricultural field[J].Biology and Fertility of Soils,2003,37(3):147-153.
杨谦,王晓晴,孙孝林,等.基于REML的普通克里格和回归克里格在土壤属性空间预测中的比较[J].土壤通报,2018,49(2):283-292. YANG Q, WANG X Q, SUN X L, et al. Comparing prediction accuracies of ordinary Kriging and regression Kriging with REML in soil properties mapping[J].Chinese Journal of Soil Science,2018,49(2):283-292.
BISHOP T F A, MCBRATNEY A B, LASLETT G M. Modelling soil attribute depth functions with equal-area quadratic smoothing splines[J].Geoderma,1999,91(1/2):27-45.
LIU F, WU H Y, ZHAO Y G, et al. Mapping high resolution National Soil Information Grids of China[J].Science Bulletin,2022,67(3):328-340.
张世文,宁汇荣,高会议,等.基于各向异性的区域土壤有机碳三维模拟与空间特征分析[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(16):115-124. ZHANG S W, NING H R, GAO H Y, et al. Three-dimensional simulation and spatial characteristics of soil organic carbon based on anisotropy in region[J].Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering,2016,32(16):115-124.
贺勇,胡克林,李卫东,等.华北冲积平原区土壤剖面质地层次空间分布的三维随机模拟[J].土壤学报,2008,45(2):193-200. HE Y, HU K L, LI W D, et al. Stochastic simulation of three-dimensional spatial distribution of soil profile textural layers in alluvial plain, North China[J].Acta Pedologica Sinica,2008,45(2):193-200.
陈冲,胡克林,贺勇.农田土壤质地空间分布的三维随机模拟及其不确定性评价[J].土壤,2013,45(2):1319-1325.CHEN C, HU K L, HE Y. 3-D stochastic simulation and uncertainty assessment of soil texture at field scale[J].Soils,2013,45(2):1319-1325.
姚荣江,杨劲松,赵秀芳,等.沿海滩涂土壤盐分空间分布的三维随机模拟与不确定性评价[J].农业工程学报,2010,26(11):91-97. YAO R J, YANG J S, ZHAO X F, et al. Three-dimensional stochastic simulation and uncertainty assessment on spatial distribution of soil salinity in coastal region[J].Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering,2010,26(11):91-97.
李洪义,史舟,唐惠丽.基于三维普通克立格方法的滨海盐土电导率三维空间变异研究[J].土壤学报,2010,47(2):359-363. LI H Y, SHI Z, TANG H L. Research on three-dimension spatial variability of soil electrical conductivity of coastal saline land using 3D ordinary Kriging method[J].Acta Pedologica Sinica,2010,47(2):359-363.
张忠启,史学正,于东升,等.红壤区土壤有机质和全氮含量的空间预测方法[J].生态学报,2010,30(19):5338-5345.ZHANG Z Q, SHI X Z, YU D S, et al. Spatial prediction of soil organic matter and total nitrogen in the hilly red soil region, China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2010,30(19):5338-5345.
郭龙,张海涛,陈家赢,等.基于协同克里格插值和地理加权回归模型的土壤属性空间预测比较[J].土壤学报, 2012,49(5):1037-1042. GUO L, ZHANG H T, CHEN J Y, et al. Comparison between co-kriging model and geographically weighted regression model in spatial prediction of soil attributes[J].Acta Pedologica Sinica,2012,49(5):1037-1042.
0
Views
558
下载量
0
CSCD
Publicity Resources
Related Articles
Related Author
Related Institution
京公网安备11010802024621