Research Article

Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics

Volume: 14 Number: 1 January 1, 2025
EN

Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics

Abstract

Many national and international initiatives depend on detailed spatial data on changes in soil organic carbon stock (SOC stock) at various scales to support policies aimed at land degradation neutrality and climate change mitigation Developing tools to accurately model the spatial distribution of SOCstock at national scales is a priority for both monitoring soil organic carbon (SOC) changes and contributing to global carbon cycle studies. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate and compare various spatial performance metrics used to assess the accuracy of predicting soil SOC and SOCstock content in a semi-arid pasture. Soil samples were taken from 0-20 cm soil depth at 150 random sampling points. Spatial structure of SOCstock and SOC were modelled by ordinary kriging The soil pH varied from slightly acidic (6.34) to neutral (7.19), and salinity was not an issue in the study area. Lime content, with an average of 2.04%, stands out as the most variable soil property, with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 61.76%. The carbon stock ranged from 23.46 to 65.36 tons ha-1, with an average carbon stock of 43.28 tons ha-1 calculated. In the study area, SOC (%) and stoniness (%) had the shortest autocorrelation distance (21.00 m), while bulk density had the longest (27.00 m). The prediction errors indicated that parameters in the random sampling did not result in better predictions using the OK technique.The results indicated that SOC content can exhibit significant spatial variability even within a small area, highlighting the need for site-specific management in semi-arid pastures. In order to achieve high accuracy and success in modeling, metrics of the performance such as RRMSE, RMSE and MAPE should be used that minimize the effect of the relevant soil property measurement unit.

Keywords

References

  1. Ballabio, C., Fava, F., Rosenmund, A., 2012. A plant ecology approach to digital soil mapping, improving the prediction of soil organic carbon content in alpine grasslands. Geoderma 187 (188): 102–116.
  2. Bhunia, G.S., Shit, P.K., Maiti, R., 2018. Comparison of GIS-based interpolation methods for spatial distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC). Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences 17(2):114-126.
  3. Blackburn, K.W., Libohova, Z., Adhikari, K., Kome, C., Maness, X., Silman, M.R., 2022. Influence of land use and topographic factors on soil organic carbon stocks and their spatial and vertical distribution. Remote Sensing 14(12):1-22.
  4. Blake, G.R., Hartge, K.H., 1986. Bulk density. In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1 Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Klute A., (Ed.). American Society of Agronomy-Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, USA. pp. 363–375.
  5. Bouyoucous, G.J., 1951. A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal 43: 434-438.
  6. Burrough, P.A., McDonnell, R.A., 1998. Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, USA. 327p.
  7. Cambardella, C.A., Moorman, T.B., Novak, J.M., Parkin, T.B., Karlen, D.L., Turco, R.F., Konopka, A.E., 1994. Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa Soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58(5): 1501-1511.
  8. Despotovic, M., Nedic, V., Despotovic, D., Cvetanovic, S., 2016. Evaluation of empirical models for predicting monthly mean horizontal diffuse solar radiation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 56: 246–260.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Soil Sciences and Plant Nutrition (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

January 1, 2025

Submission Date

May 2, 2024

Acceptance Date

September 16, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 14 Number: 1

APA
Yılmaz, Ü., & Sünal Kavaklıgil, S. (2025). Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science, 14(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.18393/ejss.1558316
AMA
1.Yılmaz Ü, Sünal Kavaklıgil S. Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics. EJSS. 2025;14(1):1-8. doi:10.18393/ejss.1558316
Chicago
Yılmaz, Ülkü, and Seval Sünal Kavaklıgil. 2025. “Evaluating the Prediction Success of Soil Organic Carbon Stock in Pasture Land Using Different Modeling Performance Metrics”. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science 14 (1): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.18393/ejss.1558316.
EndNote
Yılmaz Ü, Sünal Kavaklıgil S (January 1, 2025) Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science 14 1 1–8.
IEEE
[1]Ü. Yılmaz and S. Sünal Kavaklıgil, “Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics”, EJSS, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–8, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.18393/ejss.1558316.
ISNAD
Yılmaz, Ülkü - Sünal Kavaklıgil, Seval. “Evaluating the Prediction Success of Soil Organic Carbon Stock in Pasture Land Using Different Modeling Performance Metrics”. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science 14/1 (January 1, 2025): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.18393/ejss.1558316.
JAMA
1.Yılmaz Ü, Sünal Kavaklıgil S. Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics. EJSS. 2025;14:1–8.
MLA
Yılmaz, Ülkü, and Seval Sünal Kavaklıgil. “Evaluating the Prediction Success of Soil Organic Carbon Stock in Pasture Land Using Different Modeling Performance Metrics”. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science, vol. 14, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 1-8, doi:10.18393/ejss.1558316.
Vancouver
1.Ülkü Yılmaz, Seval Sünal Kavaklıgil. Evaluating the prediction success of soil organic carbon stock in pasture land using different modeling performance metrics. EJSS. 2025 Jan. 1;14(1):1-8. doi:10.18393/ejss.1558316