Harmonisation of a large-scale historical database with the actual Czech soil classification system

https://doi.org/10.17221/41/2019-SWRCitation:Zádorová T., Žížala D., Penížek V., Vaněk A. (2020): Harmonisation of a large-scale historical database with the actual Czech soil classification system. Soil & Water Res., 15: 101-115.
supplementary materialdownload PDF

The possibility of the adequate use of data and maps from historical soil surveys depends, to a large measure, on their harmonisation. Legacy data originating from a large-scale national mapping campaign, “Systematic soil survey of agricultural soils in Czechoslovakia (SSS, 1961–1971)”, were harmonised and converted according to the actual system of soil classification and descriptions used in Czechia – the Czech taxonomic soil classification system (CTSCS). Applying the methods of taxonomic distance and quantitative analysis and reclassification of the selected soil properties, the conversion of two types of mapping soil units with different detailed soil information (General soil representative (GSR), and Basic soil representative (BSR)) to their counterparts in the CTSCS has been effectuated. The results proved the good potential of the used methods for the soil data harmonisation. The closeness of the concepts of the two classifications was shown when a number of soil classes had only one counterpart with a very low taxonomic distance. On the contrary, soils with variable soil properties were approximating several related units. The additional information on the soil skeleton content, texture, depth and parent material, available for the BSR units, showed the potential in the specification of some units, though the harmonisation of the soil texture turned out to problematic due to the different categorisation of soil particles. The validation of the results in the study region showed a good overall accuracy (75% for GSR, 76.1% for BSR) for both spatial soil units, when better performance has been observed in BSR. The conversion accuracy differed significantly in the individual soil units, and ranged from almost 100% in Fluvizems to 0% in Anthropozems. The extreme cases of a complete mis-classification can be attributed to inconsistencies originating in the historical database and maps. The study showed the potential of modern quantitative methods in the legacy data harmonisation and also the necessity of a critical approach to historical databases and maps.

Arrouays D., Leenaars J.G B., Richer-de-Forges A.C. et al. (2017): Soil legacy data rescue via GlobalSoilMap and other international and national initiatives. GeoResJ, 14: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.grj.2017.06.001
Damaška J., Němeček J., Šimek J., Ryglevicz J., Mattauschová E., Haruda F. (1967): Survey of Agricultural Soils in Czechoslovakia. Vol. 2, Praha, MZVŽ. (in Czech)
Fredlund M.D., Fredlund D.G., Wilson G.W. (2000): An equation to represent grain size distribution. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 37: 817– 827. https://doi.org/10.1139/t00-015
Hole F.D., Hironaka M. (1960): An experiment in ordination of some soil profiles. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, 24: 309–312.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1960.03615995002400040028x
Hughes P., McBratney A.B., Huang J., Minasny B., Micheli E., Hempel J. (2017): Comparisons between USDA Soil Taxonomy and the Australian Soil Classification System I: Data harmonization, calculation of taxonomic distance and inter-taxa variation. Geoderma, 307: 198–209.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.08.009
Hughes P., McBratney A.B., Minasny B., Huang J., Micheli E., Hempel J. (2018): Comparisons between USDA soil taxonomy and the Australian Soil Classification system II: Comparison of order, suborder and great group taxa. Geoderma, 322: 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.02.022
IUSS Working Group WRB (2006): World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2006. Rome, FAO.
Krasilnikov P., Ibanez-Martí J.-J., Arnold R.W. (2009): The theoretical bases of soil classifications. In: Krasilnikov P., Ibanez-Martí J.-J., Arnold R.W., Shoba S. (eds.): Handbook of Soil Terminology, Correlation and Classification. London, Earthscan: 5–43.
Kozák J. (2010): Soil Atlas of the Czech Republic. 1st Ed. Praha, ČZU.
Láng V., Fuchs M., Watner I., Michéli E. (2013): Soil taxonomic distance, a tool for correlation: as exemplified by the Hungarian brown forest soils and related WRB reference soil groups. Geoderma, 192: 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.07.023
Láng V., Fuchs M., Szegi T., Csorba A., Michéli E. (2016): Deriving World Reference Base Reference Soil Groups from the prospective Global Soil Map product — A case study on major soil types of Africa. Geoderma, 263: 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.07.005
Lunetta R.S., Lyon J.G.(2004): Remote Sensing and GIS Accuracy Assessment. Boca Raton, CRC Press.
Michéli E., Láng V., Owens P.R., McBratney A., Hempel J. (2016): Testing the pedometric evaluation of taxonomic units on soil taxonomy – A step in advancing towards a universal soil classification system. Geoderma, 264: 340–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.09.008
Minasny B., McBratney A.B. (2007): Incorporating taxonomic distance into spatial prediction and digital mapping of soil classes. Geoderma, 142: 285–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2007.08.022
Minasny B., McBratney A.B., Hartemink A.E. (2009): Global pedodiversity, taxonomic distance, and the world reference base. Geoderma, 155: 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.04.024
Nemes A., Wosten J.H.M., Lilly A., Voshaar J.H.O. (1999): Evaluation of different procedures to interpolate particle-size distributions to achieve compatibility within soil databases. Geoderma, 90:187–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(99)00014-2
Němeček J., Damaška J., Hraško J., Bedrna Z., Zuska V., Tomášek M., Kalenda M. (1967): Survey of agricultural soils in Czechoslovakia. Vol. 1, Praha, MZVŽ. (in Czech)
Němeček J., Mühlhanselová M., Macků J., Vokoun J., Vavříček D., Novák P. (2011): Czech Taxonomic Soil Classification System. Praha, ČZU. (in Czech)
R Core Team (2018): R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Availale at https://www.R-project.org/.
Sirový V., Facek Z. (1967): Survey of Agricultural Soils in Czechoslovakia. Vol. 3, Praha, MZVŽ. (in Czech)
Weibull W. (1951): A statistical distribution function of wide applicability. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 18: 293–297.
Zádorová T., Penížek V. (2011): Problems in correlation of Czech national soil classification and World Reference Base 2006. Geoderma, 167–168: 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.09.014
Zádorová T., Žížala D., Penížek V. (2018): Harmonization of the Database of Complex Soil Survey with the CTSCS and WRB 2014. Praha, VÚMOP. (in Czech)
supplementary materialdownload PDF

© 2020 Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences