IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i1p114-d1323104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Proposed Methodology for Determining the Economically Optimal Number of Sample Points for Carbon Stock Estimation in the Canadian Prairies

Author

Listed:
  • Preston Thomas Sorenson

    (Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

  • Jeremy Kiss

    (Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

  • Angela Bedard-Haughn

    (Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture and Bioresources, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

Abstract

Soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration assessment requires accurate and effective tools for measuring baseline SOC stocks. An emerging technique for estimating baseline SOC stocks is predictive soil mapping (PSM). A key challenge for PSM is determining sampling density requirements, specifically, determining the economically optimal number of samples for predictive soil mapping for SOC stocks. In an attempt to answer this question, data were used from 3861 soil organic carbon samples collected as part of routine agronomic soil testing from a 4702 ha farming operation in Saskatchewan, Canada. A predictive soil map was built using all the soil data to calculate the total carbon stock for the entire study area. The dataset was then subset using conditioned Latin hypercube sampling (cLHS), both conventional and stratified by slope position, to determine the total carbon stocks with the following sampling densities (points per ha): 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, and 0.8. A nonlinear error function was then fit to the data, and the optimal number of samples was determined based on the number of samples that minimized soil data costs and the value of the soil carbon stock prediction error. The stratified cLHS required fewer samples to achieve the same level of accuracy compared to conventional cLHS, and the optimal number of samples was more sensitive to carbon price than sampling costs. Overall, the optimal sampling density ranged from 0.025 to 0.075 samples per hectare.

Suggested Citation

  • Preston Thomas Sorenson & Jeremy Kiss & Angela Bedard-Haughn, 2024. "A Proposed Methodology for Determining the Economically Optimal Number of Sample Points for Carbon Stock Estimation in the Canadian Prairies," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:114-:d:1323104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/114/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/114/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wright, Marvin N. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2017. "ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 77(i01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Backer, David & Billing, Trey, 2024. "Forecasting the prevalence of child acute malnutrition using environmental and conflict conditions as leading indicators," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Mariana Oliveira & Luís Torgo & Vítor Santos Costa, 2021. "Evaluation Procedures for Forecasting with Spatiotemporal Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-27, March.
    3. Bokelmann, Björn & Lessmann, Stefan, 2024. "Improving uplift model evaluation on randomized controlled trial data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 691-707.
    4. Joel Podgorski & Oliver Kracht & Luis Araguas-Araguas & Stefan Terzer-Wassmuth & Jodie Miller & Ralf Straub & Rolf Kipfer & Michael Berg, 2024. "Groundwater vulnerability to pollution in Africa’s Sahel region," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 558-567, May.
    5. Chakravorty, Bhaskar & Arulampalam, Wiji & Bhatiya, Apurav Yash & Imbert, Clément & Rathelot, Roland, 2024. "Can information about jobs improve the effectiveness of vocational training? Experimental evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Arjan S. Gosal & Janine A. McMahon & Katharine M. Bowgen & Catherine H. Hoppe & Guy Ziv, 2021. "Identifying and Mapping Groups of Protected Area Visitors by Environmental Awareness," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, May.
    7. Albert Stuart Reece & Gary Kenneth Hulse, 2022. "European Epidemiological Patterns of Cannabis- and Substance-Related Congenital Neurological Anomalies: Geospatiotemporal and Causal Inferential Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-35, December.
    8. Foutzopoulos, Giorgos & Pandis, Nikolaos & Tsagris, Michail, 2024. "Predicting full retirement attainment of NBA players," MPRA Paper 121540, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Michael Parzinger & Lucia Hanfstaengl & Ferdinand Sigg & Uli Spindler & Ulrich Wellisch & Markus Wirnsberger, 2020. "Residual Analysis of Predictive Modelling Data for Automated Fault Detection in Building’s Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Van Belle, Jente & Guns, Tias & Verbeke, Wouter, 2021. "Using shared sell-through data to forecast wholesaler demand in multi-echelon supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 466-479.
    11. Albert Stuart Reece & Gary Kenneth Hulse, 2022. "European Epidemiological Patterns of Cannabis- and Substance-Related Body Wall Congenital Anomalies: Geospatiotemporal and Causal Inferential Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-38, July.
    12. Philipp Bach & Victor Chernozhukov & Malte S. Kurz & Martin Spindler & Sven Klaassen, 2021. "DoubleML -- An Object-Oriented Implementation of Double Machine Learning in R," Papers 2103.09603, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    13. Marchetto, Elisa & Da Re, Daniele & Tordoni, Enrico & Bazzichetto, Manuele & Zannini, Piero & Celebrin, Simone & Chieffallo, Ludovico & Malavasi, Marco & Rocchini, Duccio, 2023. "Testing the effect of sample prevalence and sampling methods on probability- and favourability-based SDMs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 477(C).
    14. Jorge Luis Andrade & José Luis Valencia, 2022. "A Fuzzy Random Survival Forest for Predicting Lapses in Insurance Portfolios Containing Imprecise Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Eeva-Katri Kumpula & Pauline Norris & Adam C Pomerleau, 2020. "Stocks of paracetamol products stored in urban New Zealand households: A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, June.
    16. Michael Bucker & Gero Szepannek & Alicja Gosiewska & Przemyslaw Biecek, 2020. "Transparency, Auditability and eXplainability of Machine Learning Models in Credit Scoring," Papers 2009.13384, arXiv.org.
    17. Jian Lu & Raheel Ahmad & Thomas Nguyen & Jeffrey Cifello & Humza Hemani & Jiangyuan Li & Jinguo Chen & Siyi Li & Jing Wang & Achouak Achour & Joseph Chen & Meagan Colie & Ana Lustig & Christopher Dunn, 2022. "Heterogeneity and transcriptome changes of human CD8+ T cells across nine decades of life," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    18. Timo Schulte & Tillmann Wurz & Oliver Groene & Sabine Bohnet-Joschko, 2023. "Big Data Analytics to Reduce Preventable Hospitalizations—Using Real-World Data to Predict Ambulatory Care-Sensitive Conditions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Bennett, Donyetta & Mekelburg, Erik & Strauss, Jack & Williams, T.H., 2024. "Unlocking the black box of sentiment and cryptocurrency: What, which, why, when and how?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    20. Fogliato Riccardo & Oliveira Natalia L. & Yurko Ronald, 2021. "TRAP: a predictive framework for the Assessment of Performance in Trail Running," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 129-143, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:114-:d:1323104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.