Soil Atlas of Asia: Some backgrounds

Erika Michéli
Professor and head, Department of Soil Science and Agrochemistry
Chair of Division 1. IUSS
Member of the Soil Awareness and Education Working Group of the European Soil Partnership

Szent István
University Hungary
Erika Micheli
Department of Soil Science and Agrochemistry
Micheli.Erika@mkk.szie.hu

Approches to translate national soil data
to the WRB
• Available data
• The WRB
• Methods for correlation

The
The original objectives of the Global Soil Map
(GSM) project is to produce high resolution
maps for defined soil properties), with new
digital soil mapping tools.
Deriving soil classes from the Global Soil Map
data is not among the original purposes of the
project.

0 - 5 cm
5 – 15 cm
15 – 30 cm
30 – 60 cm
60-100 cm
100-200 cm
Depth to
bedrock &
effective depth
Image: courtesy of Alfred Hartemink
The goal of GSM
• Fine-resolution grid (~100m) of the world
• Estimation of functional soil properties
– Organic carbon (g/kg)
– Percentage sand, silt, clay and coarse
fragments
– pH
– Depth to bedrock or restricting layer (m)
– Bulk density (kg/m3)
– Available water capacity (mm/m)
– Effective cation exchange capacity (incl.
exch. acidity mol/kg)
– Electrical conductivity (dS/m)
• Provision of uncertainties for all estimates

SoilGrids
is a system for automated soil mapping based on global
soil profile and environmental covariate data. SoilGrids
represents a collection of updatable soil property and class
maps of the world at 1 km and 250 m spatial resolution
produced using automated soil mapping based on machine
learning algorithms.

Materials
Contains over 10 000 soil profiles
Profiles correlated to WRB
Both laboratory and descriptive data for the profiles
ISRIC WISE 3.1 dataset

1635 profiles for Asia
Intensity of Availability (no of profile data)

Intensity of Availability per country

Frequency of RSGs in the data base

HOWEVER
Yesterday!!!
We learnt, there is a LOT of data

The classification scheme
The official soil correlation
system of the IUSS since 1998
The tool for harmonized products
The World Reference Base for Soil Resources
http://www.fao.org/soils-portal/soil-survey/soil-classification/world-
reference-base/en/
WRBSR.apk

Podzol (Ir) Podzol (Cz)Podzol (Fr)Podzol (H)
Argic horizon Spodic horizonSpodic horizon
Allows soils from different regions or countries to be
identified and characterized with the same
terminology
Argic horizon
Alisol (WRB) Luvisol (WRB) Podzol (WRB) Podzol (WRB)
Albic horizon Albic horizonAlbic horizon

The IUSS (2014) endorsed both classification systems
ST and WRB as international systems

Differences in structure and principles between
WRB and ST
Number of classification levels
 ST has 6 levels
4 levels are defined by a key
 WRB has 2 levels in the system
1 defined by a key
At the highest level:
 ST has 12 order
 WRB has 32 Reference Soil Groups (RSGs)
Soil moisture and temperature regimes:
 The WRB has no direct information on those

The diagnostics approach
Diagnostic horizons, properties and materials
(as well the qualifiers) are elements (building blocks)
of modern classification systems
• They are established from
set of properties
for specific intervalls of
of the soil body
• They carry important
information by themselves
regardless of the class

Basic principles
It comprises two tiers of categorical level:
1st level: Reference Soil Groups (RSGs)
The 32 RSGs are determined by key and serve
to delineate the broad soil regions.
2nd level: Set of principal and supplementary
qualifiers that are giving a precise description
on important properties and are added to the
name of the RSGs.

RULES FOR CLASSIFICATION (three steps)
The expression, thickness and depth of layers are
checked against the requirements of WRB
diagnostic categories, defined in terms of
morphology and/or analytical criteria.
(overlapping or coinciding possible)
Step 1 – the diagnostics

RULES FOR CLASSIFICATION
The combination of diagnostics compared with the
WRB Key in order to find the RSG, which is the first
level of WRB classification.
The user should go through the Key
systematically!!!!
The soil belongs to the first RSG for which it meets
all specified requirements.
Step 2 – the key

RULES FOR CLASSIFICATION
For the second level of WRB classification,
qualifiers are used.
Step 3 – the qualifiers
Principal qualifiers:
are regarded as being most significant for a further
characterization of soils of the particular RSG.
They are given in a ranked order.
Supplementary qualifiers:
All other qualifiers (further details about the soil).
They are not ranked, but listed alphabetically.

Qualifiers 2014
The principal qualifiers are added before the name of
the RSG without brackets and without commas.
Priority order → The uppermost qualifier in the list is
placed closest to the name of the RSG.
The supplementary qualifiers are added in brackets
after the name of the RSG and are separated from each
other by commas, following the alphabetical order.
Qualifiers conveying redundant information are not
added.
Specifiers (→ subqualifiers) such as Epi-, Endo-, Amphi-,
Panto-, Thapto- Bathy-, Supra-, and Proto- indicate a
certain expression of the qualifier.

Key to RSGs
Principal
qualifiers
Supplementary
qualifiers
Definition
↓
Reference Soil Group
(RSG)
List of the RSG
Priority list ↓
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
List of the RSG
Alphabetic list ↓
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Classification name:
→
(B D)
←
4 1 RSG

Step 1 Diagnostics
Mollic horizon
Cambic horizon
Argic Horizon
Calcic horizon

Step 1 Diagnostics
Mollic horizon
Cambic horizon
Argic Horizon
Calcic horizon
65 cm

PHAEOZEMS Principal qualifiers Supplementary qualifiers
Rendzic
Chernic/ Someric
Petroduric/ Duric
Petrogypsic
Petrocalcic/
Endocalcic
Leptic
Hortic/ Irragric/
Pretic/ Terric
Gleyic
Stagnic
Fluvic
Vertic
Greyzemic
Glossic/ Retic
Luvic
Cambic
Skeletic
Gypsiric
Dolomitic/ Calcaric
Haplic
Abruptic
Albic
Andic
Anthric
Arenic/ Clayic/Loamic/ Siltic
Aric
Chromic
Colluvic
Columnic
Densic
Ferralic/ Sideralic
Fractic
Hyperhumic
Isolatic
Nechic
Novic
Oxyaquic
Pachic
Ruptic
Endosalic
Sodic
Technic
Tephric
Tonguic
Transportic
Turbic
Vermic
Vitric
Luvic Endocalcic Phaeozem (Siltic, Aric)
Step 3 - The qualifiers

PHAEOZEMS Principal qualifiers Supplementary qualifiers

Simple definitions in the Atlas

Methods for correlation
• Expert judgement supported by data evaluation
• Reclassification based on data
(mostly insufficient data)
• Numerical (pedometric methods) based on
taxonomic relationships

Reclassification Methods
 Manual reclassification using the key, based on
data (of various completeness)
 (Semi) automated algorithm based method
Simplification ajusted to the availlablity of data
(accuracy rate can be proveded)

ENTISOLS order
Aquents Arents Psamments Fluvents Orthents
suborders
Great groups
Subgroups
Families
Series

ENTISOLS
Aquents Arents Psamments Fluvents Orthents
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
Endoaquent Ustorthents
↓ ↓
Sodic
Endoaquent
Lithic
Ustorthents
Sodic
Gleysol
Anthrosol LeptosolFluvisolArenosol
Hungary China/ zhang Hungary Germany/Schad Croatia

The mollic epipedon consists of mineral soil materials and has the following properties:
1. When dry, either or both:
a. Structural units with a diameter of 30 cm or less
or secondary structure with a diameter of 30 cm or less;
or
b. A moderately hard or softer rupture-resistance class;
and
2. Rock structure, including fine (less than 5 mm) stratifications, in less than one-half of the volume of all parts;
and
3. One of the following:
a. All of the following:
(1) Colors with a value of 3 or less, moist, and of 5 or
less, dry; and
(2) Colors with chroma of 3 or less, moist; and
(3) If the soil has a C horizon, the mollic epipedon has a color value at least 1 Munsell unit lower or chroma at least 2 units lower (both moist and dry) than that of the C horizon or the epipedon has at least
0.6 percent more organic carbon than the C horizon; or
b. A fine-earth fraction that has a calcium carbonate equivalent of 15 to 40 percent and colors with a value and chroma of 3 or less, moist; or
c. A fine-earth fraction that has a calcium carbonate
equivalent of 40 percent or more and a color value, moist, of
5 or less; and
4. A base saturation (by NH4OAc) of 50 percent or more; and
5. An organic-carbon content of:
a. 2.5 percent or more if the epipedon has a color value,
moist, of 4 or 5; or
b. 0.6 percent more than that of the C horizon (if one occurs) if the mollic epipedon has a color value less than 1 Munsell unit lower or chroma less than 2 units lower (both moist and dry) than the C horizon;
or
c. 0.6 percent or more; and
6. After mixing of the upper 18 cm of the mineral soil or of the whole mineral soil if its depth to a densic, lithic, or paralithic contact, petrocalcic horizon, or duripan (all defined below) is less than 18 cm, the
minimum thickness of the epipedon is as follows:
a. 10 cm or the depth of the noncemented soil if the epipedon is loamy very fine sand or finer and is directly above a densic, lithic, or paralithic contact, a petrocalcic horizon, or a duripan that is within 18 cm
of the mineral soil surface; or
b. 25 cm or more if the epipedon is loamy fine sand or coarser throughout or if there are no underlying diagnostic horizons nd the organic-carbon content of the underlying materials decreases irregularly with
increasing depth; or
c. 25 cm or more if all of the following are 75 cm or more
below the mineral soil surface:
(1) The upper boundary of any pedogenic lime that is
present as filaments, soft coatings, or soft nodules; and
(2) The lower boundary of any argillic, cambic, natric,
oxic, or spodic horizon (defined below); and
(3) The upper boundary of any petrocalcic horizon, duripan, or fragipan; or
d. 18 cm if the epipedon is loamy very fine sand or finer in some part and one-third or more of the total thickness between the top of the epipedon and the shallowest of any features listed in item 6-c is less
than 75 cm below the mineral soil surface; or
e. 18 cm or more if none of the above conditions apply;and
7. Phosphate:
a. Content less than 1,500 milligrams per kilogram soluble in 1 percent citric acid; or
b. Content decreasing irregularly with increasing depth below the epipedon; or
c. Nodules are within the epipedon; and
8. Some part of the epipedon is moist for 90 days or more (cumulative) in normal years during times when the soil temperature at a depth of 50 cm is 5 oC or higher, if the soil is not irrigated; and
9. The n value is less than 0.7.
Mollic horizon

1. either or both:
a.
or
b.
2.
and
3. One of the following:
a. All of the following:
(1) and
(2) and
(3) or
b. or
c.
and
4.
and
5.
a. or
b.
or
c.
and
6.
a.
or
b. or
c.
(1) and
(2) and
(3)
or
d.
or
e.
and
7.
a. or
b. or
c.;
8.
and
9.
Required Characteristics of the Mollic horizon
(ST, WRB)
The Mollic epipedon occupies 1,5 pages;
It has 9 major diagnostic requirements,
6 has sub requirements,
2 has 3rd level sub requirements,
includes 10 ORs and 12 ANDs.
All refer to structure, color, B%, OC, depth

Structure
Munsell colour
• moist
• dry
Organic carbon
Base saturation
Thickness
Mollic horizon Criteria
Mostly available
Partly available (pH)
Mostly available
Partly available
Not given - determined
Availability
6 major diagnostic requirements , 4 has sub requirements, 2 has 3rd
level sub requirements, includes 10 ORs and 12 ANDs

Argic horizon Criteria Availability
Texture
Clay content
Morphological
evidence of clay
illuviation
Vertical distance
of clay increase
No natric horizon
Thickness
Mostly available
Mostly available
Mostly NOT available
Mostly NOT available
Not given
determined
Not given
determined

Yes branch
No branch
Further Pedogenic
Properties
“T, [tap,ag] “?
Horizon Symbol
„B..t, ..[+-]B..t,
..+Bbt, Bbt+Cv“?
2b
3a
Lab Results
“COLE ≥ 0,04”?
Lab Results
“oriented clay
bodies in thin
sections cover at
least 1 %“?
Lab Results
“Ratio of fine clay and
total clay ≥ 1.2 times
as high as in the layer
above with coarser
Fine Earth Texture”?
No Argic horizon
Check Upper boundary
Distincness and Clay
content “Gradual AND
{{{Clay content/Clay
content horizon above}-
1}*7.5} ≤15 cm “?
3b
4
Check horizon
“does fulfill
criteria of a
natric horizon “?
No Argic
horizon
5
Check Upper
boundary
Distinctness
“[abrupt, clear] “?
content of overlying
horizon “Gradual AND
1}*7.5} ≤30 cm “?
Check Lower
boundary
Distinctness of
overlying horizon
Horizon symbol (Field or Analytical) parameter
“7“? Is 7 ?
“[7,8]“? Is either 7 or 8?
A… Starts with an A (case-sensitive)
…A… Contains an A (case-sensitive)
Decision Compare with other
horizons above or
below
Result
Explanations
Yes branch
No branch
Further Pedogenic
Properties
“T, [tap,ag] “?
Horizon Symbol
„B..t, ..[+-]B..t,
..+Bbt, Bbt+Cv“?
2b
3a
Lab Results
“COLE ≥ 0,04”?
Lab Results
“oriented clay
bodies in thin
sections cover at
least 1 %“?
Lab Results
above with coarser
No Argic horizon
1}*7.5} ≤15 cm “?
3b
4
Check horizon
“does fulfill
criteria of a
natric horizon “?
No Argic
horizon
5
Check Upper
boundary
Distinctness
1}*7.5} ≤30 cm “?
Check Lower
boundary
Distinctness of
overlying horizon
Further Pedogenic
Properties
“T, [tap,ag] “?
Horizon Symbol
„B..t, ..[+-]B..t,
..+Bbt, Bbt+Cv“?
2b
3a
Lab Results
“COLE ≥ 0,04”?
Lab Results
“oriented clay
bodies in thin
sections cover at
least 1 %“?
Lab Results
above with coarser
No Argic horizon
1}*7.5} ≤15 cm “?
3b
4
Check horizon
“does fulfill
criteria of a
natric horizon “?
No Argic
horizon
5
Check Upper
boundary
Distinctness
1}*7.5} ≤30 cm “?
Check Lower
boundary
Distinctness of
overlying horizon
Horizon symbol (Field or Analytical) parameter
“7“? Is 7 ?
“[7,8]“? Is either 7 or 8?
A… Starts with an A (case-sensitive)
…A… Contains an A (case-sensitive)
Decision Compare with other
horizons above or
below
Result
Explanations
Eberhardt et al.
Part of the algorithm for the argic horizon, which includes altogether
28 decisions. Lab parameters are highlighted with green colour.

Simplified
set of
diagnostics
WRB
RSG
Classification algorithm

Simplified algorithm for mollic horizon
1. OC > 0,6%; and
2. a Munsell value (moist) of 3 and a chroma (moist) of
3 or less; and
3. a Munsell value (dry) of 5 and a chroma (dry) of 5 or
less (if data available); and
4. B% > 50; and
5. a thickness > 25 cm; or
6. a thickness > 10 cm if directly overlying continuous
rock;
7. surface horizon

Simplified criteria (examples)
Argic horizon, and
no lithological discontinuity, and
B ≥ 50 %
Argic horizon, and
no lithological discontinuity, and
B < 50 %
→ Luvisols
→ Alisols (Acrisols)
(CEC when not available neglected in CE, WE windows)

Simplified
set of diagnostics
Simplified key - Sequence kept!
WRB RSG
Step 2.

Algorithm based method
Main properties are available:
Leptosols (example)
Limitation of depth by
continuous rock
(Depth to bedrock in GSM)
Less than 20% fine earth
fraction to a depth of 75 cms
(Coarse fragments in GSM)

Some props are not available:
Nitisols (example)
Having a nitic horizon:
(clay content, structure, water
dispersable/total clay ratio etc…)
(Partly available)
Gradual to diffuse horizon
boundaries
(Generally no information)

Some props are not available:
Alisols (example)
Clay content
Change in clay (depth)
CEC
B%

Methods
Distance calculations
Study the similarities and dissimilarities
between soil groups
History in soil science since the 1950’s
(Hole, Hironaka, Bidwell, Sarkar, Minasny)
Already used to correlate different soil
classification systems

The process to calculate the Numerical
Taxonomic Relationships
Define (soil) groups for calculation
Define properties (variables) for calculation
Populate input matrixNational
system

The process to calculate the Numerical Taxonomic
Relationship
Define (soil) groups for calculation
Define properties (variables) for calculation
Populate input matrix
Calculate distance matrix (Euclidean)
Study results

The WISE 3.1 database was quality checked for the
WRB classification records
Centroids were calculated based on the GSM
specifications for every RSG and are available
Centroid and distance calculations

11WRBRSGs GSM defined properties X depth = variables
RSG
OC_0-5
OC_5-15
OC_15-30
OC_30-60
OC_60-100
OC100-200
pH_0-5
pH_5-15
pH_15-30
RSG1 1,73 1,51 1,01 0,63 0,44 0,33 5,43 5,33 5,21
RSG2 0,55 0,45 0,32 0,25 0,21 0,16 6,56 6,55 6,51
RSG3 0,75 0,70 0,61 0,46 0,33 0,25 8,13 8,17 8,18
RSG3 2,11 1,64 1,04 0,65 0,47 0,37 6,27 6,27 6,32
RSG4 2,76 2,40 1,70 1,13 0,71 0,50 5,31 5,26 5,20
RSG5 2,26 2,16 1,72 1,62 1,62 1,62 6,73 6,58 7,43
RSG6 2,76 1,68 0,75 0,43 0,34 0,27 6,36 6,32 6,41

Results (eg. From Africa)
RSG Distance M. Algorithm Combined
AC 34 42 60
AR 100 80 100
CL 100 100 100
CM 35 6,25 50
FR 42 46 78
LP 100 100 100
LV 66 66 100
LX 63 63 85
NT 83 46 80
PT 100 50 100
VR 100 100 100
Mean 75 63 86
% of validation profiles classified correctly

Cryozems (Russia)
Cryosols (WRB)
Gelisols (ST)
Spatial consquences of proper correlation

Soil Atlas of Asia: Some backgrounds

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Soil Atlas of Asia: Some backgrounds

Similar to Soil Atlas of Asia: Some backgrounds (20)

More from ExternalEvents

More from ExternalEvents (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Soil Atlas of Asia: Some backgrounds