IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i7p909-d1420442.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revealing Topsoil Behavior to Compaction from Mining Field Observations

Author

Listed:
  • Anne C. Richer-de-Forges

    (INRAE, Info&Sols, 45075 Orléans, France)

  • Dominique Arrouays

    (INRAE, Info&Sols, 45075 Orléans, France)

  • Zamir Libohova

    (USDA-ARS Dale Bumpers Small Farms Research Center, 6883 S. State Hwy. 23, Booneville, AR 72927, USA)

  • Songchao Chen

    (ZJU-Hangzhou Global Scientific and Technological Innovation Center, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 311215, China
    College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Dylan E. Beaudette

    (USDA-NRCS, Soil and Plant Science Division, 19777 Greenley Rd, Sonora, CA 95370, USA)

  • Hocine Bourennane

    (INRAE, Info&Sols, 45075 Orléans, France)

Abstract

Soils are a finite resource that is under threat, mainly due to human pressure. Therefore, there is an urgent need to produce maps of soil properties, functions and behaviors that can support land management and various stakeholders’ decisions. Compaction is a major threat to soil functions, such as water infiltration and storage, and crops’ root growth. However, there is no general agreement on a universal and easy-to-implement indicator of soil susceptibility to compaction. The proposed indicators of soil compaction require numerous analytical determinations (mainly bulk density measurements) that are cost prohibitive to implement. In this study, we used data collected in numerous in situ topsoil observations during conventional soil survey and compared field observations to usual indicators of soil compactness. We unraveled the relationships between field estimates of soil compactness and measured soil properties. Most of the quantitative indicators proposed by the literature were rather consistent with the ordering of soil compactness classes observed in the field. The best relationship was obtained with an indicator using bulk density and clay (BDr 2 ) to define three classes of rooting limitation. We distinguished six clusters of topsoil behaviors using hierarchical clustering. These clusters exhibited different soil behaviors to compaction that were related to soil properties, such as particle-size fractions, pH, CaCO 3 and organic carbon content, cation exchange capacity, and some BDr 2 threshold values. We demonstrate and discuss the usefulness of field observations to assess topsoil behavior to compaction. The main novelty of this study is the use of large numbers of qualitative field observations of soil profiles and clustering to identify contrasting behavior. To our knowledge, this approach has almost never been implemented. Overall, analysis of qualitative and quantitative information collected in numerous profiles offers a new way to discriminate some broad categories of soil behavior that could be used to support land management and stakeholders’ decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne C. Richer-de-Forges & Dominique Arrouays & Zamir Libohova & Songchao Chen & Dylan E. Beaudette & Hocine Bourennane, 2024. "Revealing Topsoil Behavior to Compaction from Mining Field Observations," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:7:p:909-:d:1420442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/909/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/909/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Tibshirani & Guenther Walther & Trevor Hastie, 2001. "Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(2), pages 411-423.
    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. Thiemo Fetzer & Samuel Marden, 2017. "Take What You Can: Property Rights, Contestability and Conflict," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(601), pages 757-783, May.
    2. Daniel Agness & Travis Baseler & Sylvain Chassang & Pascaline Dupas & Erik Snowberg, 2022. "Valuing the Time of the Self-Employed," Working Papers 2022-2, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    3. Khanh Duong, 2024. "Is meritocracy just? New evidence from Boolean analysis and Machine learning," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 1795-1821, October.
    4. Batool, Fatima & Hennig, Christian, 2021. "Clustering with the Average Silhouette Width," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Nicoleta Serban & Huijing Jiang, 2012. "Multilevel Functional Clustering Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 805-814, September.
    6. Orietta Nicolis & Jean Paul Maidana & Fabian Contreras & Danilo Leal, 2024. "Analyzing the Impact of COVID-19 on Economic Sustainability: A Clustering Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-30, February.
    7. Li, Pai-Ling & Chiou, Jeng-Min, 2011. "Identifying cluster number for subspace projected functional data clustering," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 2090-2103, June.
    8. Yaeji Lim & Hee-Seok Oh & Ying Kuen Cheung, 2019. "Multiscale Clustering for Functional Data," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 36(2), pages 368-391, July.
    9. Forzani, Liliana & Gieco, Antonella & Tolmasky, Carlos, 2017. "Likelihood ratio test for partial sphericity in high and ultra-high dimensions," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 18-38.
    10. Yujia Li & Xiangrui Zeng & Chien‐Wei Lin & George C. Tseng, 2022. "Simultaneous estimation of cluster number and feature sparsity in high‐dimensional cluster analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 574-585, June.
    11. Vojtech Blazek & Michal Petruzela & Tomas Vantuch & Zdenek Slanina & Stanislav Mišák & Wojciech Walendziuk, 2020. "The Estimation of the Influence of Household Appliances on the Power Quality in a Microgrid System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Andrew Clark & Alexander Mihailov & Michael Zargham, 2024. "Complex Systems Modeling of Community Inclusion Currencies," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 64(2), pages 1259-1294, August.
    13. Nicoleta Serban, 2008. "Estimating and clustering curves in the presence of heteroscedastic errors," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 553-571.
    14. Caruso, Germán & Scartascini, Carlos & Tommasi, Mariano, 2015. "Are we all playing the same game? The economic effects of constitutions depend on the degree of institutionalization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 212-228.
    15. Alessandro Crimi & Olivier Commowick & Adil Maarouf & Jean-Christophe Ferré & Elise Bannier & Ayman Tourbah & Isabelle Berry & Jean-Philippe Ranjeva & Gilles Edan & Christian Barillot, 2014. "Predictive Value of Imaging Markers at Multiple Sclerosis Disease Onset Based on Gadolinium- and USPIO-Enhanced MRI and Machine Learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-10, April.
    16. Mehmet Çağlar & Cem Gürler, 2022. "Sustainable Development Goals: A cluster analysis of worldwide countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8593-8624, June.
    17. Elizabeth Tipton & Robert B. Olsen, "undated". "Enhancing the Generalizability of Impact Studies in Education," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 35d5625333dc480aba9765b3b, Mathematica Policy Research.
    18. Cyril Atkinson-Clement & Eléonore Pigalle, 2021. "What can we learn from Covid-19 pandemic’s impact on human behaviour? The case of France’s lockdown," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    19. Jelle R Dalenberg & Luca Nanetti & Remco J Renken & René A de Wijk & Gert J ter Horst, 2014. "Dealing with Consumer Differences in Liking during Repeated Exposure to Food; Typical Dynamics in Rating Behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    20. Daniel Lewis & Davide Melcangi & Laura Pilossoph, 2019. "Latent Heterogeneity in the Marginal Propensity to Consume," 2019 Meeting Papers 519, Society for Economic Dynamics.

    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:7:p:909-:d:1420442. 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.