21 datasets found
  1. d

    Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Jul 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2024). Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-available-water-holding-capacity
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  2. g

    Predictive soil property map: Silt content | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Dec 3, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2024). Predictive soil property map: Silt content | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-silt-content
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 3, 2024
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  3. g

    Predictive soil property map: Very fine sand content | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Very fine sand content | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-very-fine-sand-content
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  4. g

    Predictive soil property map: Fine sand content | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Fine sand content | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-fine-sand-content/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  5. g

    Predictive soil property map: Sand content | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Sand content | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-sand-content/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  6. g

    Predictive soil property map: Soil pH | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Dec 3, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2024). Predictive soil property map: Soil pH | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-soil-ph
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 3, 2024
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  7. g

    Predictive soil property map: Calcium carbonate content | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Calcium carbonate content | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-calcium-carbonate-content
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  8. g

    Predictive soil property map: Bulk density (oven dry) | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Bulk density (oven dry) | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-bulk-density-oven-dry/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  9. g

    Predictive soil property map: Depth to top of first restrictive layer |...

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Depth to top of first restrictive layer | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-depth-to-top-of-first-restrictive-layer
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  10. g

    Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-available-water-holding-capacity
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  11. g

    Predictive soil property map: Sodium adsorption ratio | gimi9.com

    • gimi9.com
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Sodium adsorption ratio | gimi9.com [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-sodium-adsorption-ratio
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  12. g

    Predictive soil property map: Organic matter

    • gimi9.com
    • s.cnmilf.com
    • +1more
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    (2020). Predictive soil property map: Organic matter [Dataset]. https://gimi9.com/dataset/data-gov_predictive-soil-property-map-organic-matter
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  13. A

    Predictive soil property map: Very fine sand content

    • data.amerigeoss.org
    • catalog.data.gov
    xml
    Updated Aug 25, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    United States (2022). Predictive soil property map: Very fine sand content [Dataset]. https://data.amerigeoss.org/it/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-very-fine-sand-content-0a65a
    Explore at:
    xmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 25, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    United States
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  14. A

    Predictive soil property map: Clay content

    • data.amerigeoss.org
    • res1catalogd-o-tdatad-o-tgov.vcapture.xyz
    • +2more
    xml
    Updated Aug 11, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    United States (2022). Predictive soil property map: Clay content [Dataset]. https://data.amerigeoss.org/uk_UA/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-clay-content-be839
    Explore at:
    xmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 11, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    United States
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  15. c

    Predictive soil property map: Sand content

    • s.cnmilf.com
    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Jul 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2024). Predictive soil property map: Sand content [Dataset]. https://s.cnmilf.com/user74170196/https/catalog.data.gov/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-sand-content
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  16. d

    Predictive soil property map: Bulk density (oven dry)

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Jul 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2024). Predictive soil property map: Bulk density (oven dry) [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-bulk-density-oven-dry
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    United States Geological Surveyhttp://www.usgs.gov/
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  17. U

    Predictive soil property map: Soil pH

    • data.usgs.gov
    • catalog.data.gov
    • +1more
    Updated Jul 9, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Nauman Travis W; Duniway Michael C (2020). Predictive soil property map: Soil pH [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.5066/P9SK0DO2
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 9, 2020
    Dataset provided by
    United States Geological Survey
    Authors
    Nauman Travis W; Duniway Michael C
    License

    U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    2020
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0. ...

  18. d

    Predictive soil property map: Depth to top of first restrictive layer

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Jul 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Geological Survey (2024). Predictive soil property map: Depth to top of first restrictive layer [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-depth-to-top-of-first-restrictive-layer
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    United States Geological Surveyhttp://www.usgs.gov/
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  19. A

    Predictive soil property map: Sodium adsorption ratio

    • data.amerigeoss.org
    • datasets.ai
    • +1more
    xml
    Updated Aug 20, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    United States (2022). Predictive soil property map: Sodium adsorption ratio [Dataset]. https://data.amerigeoss.org/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-sodium-adsorption-ratio-60281
    Explore at:
    xmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 20, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    United States
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

  20. A

    Predictive soil property map: Fine sand content

    • data.amerigeoss.org
    • s.cnmilf.com
    • +1more
    xml
    Updated Aug 20, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    United States (2022). Predictive soil property map: Fine sand content [Dataset]. https://data.amerigeoss.org/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-fine-sand-content-a6c34
    Explore at:
    xmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 20, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    United States
    Description

    These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
U.S. Geological Survey (2024). Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/predictive-soil-property-map-available-water-holding-capacity

Predictive soil property map: Available water holding capacity

Explore at:
Dataset updated
Jul 6, 2024
Dataset provided by
U.S. Geological Survey
Description

These data were compiled to demonstrate new predictive mapping approaches and provide comprehensive gridded 30-meter resolution soil property maps for the Colorado River Basin above Hoover Dam. Random forest models related environmental raster layers representing soil forming factors with field samples to render predictive maps that interpolate between sample locations. Maps represented soil pH, texture fractions (sand, silt clay, fine sand, very fine sand), rock, electrical conductivity (ec), gypsum, CaCO3, sodium adsorption ratio (sar), available water capacity (awc), bulk density (dbovendry), erodibility (kwfact), and organic matter (om) at 7 depths (0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 100, and 200 cm) as well as depth to restrictive layer (resdept) and surface rock size and cover. Accuracy and error estimated using a 10-fold cross validation indicated a range of model performances with coefficient of variation (R2) for models ranging from 0.20 to 0.76 with mean of 0.52 and a standard deviation of 0.12. Models of pH, om and ec had the best accuracy (R2 > 0.6). Most texture fractions, CaCO3, and SAR models had R2 values from 0.5-0.6. Models of kwfact, dbovendry, resdept, rock models, gypsum and awc had R2 values from 0.4-0.5 excepting near surface models which tended to perform better. Very fine sands and 200 cm estimates for other models generally performed poorly (R2 from 0.2-0.4), and sample size for the 200 cm models was too low for reliable model building. More than 90% of the soils data used was sampled since 2000, but some older samples are included. Uncertainty estimates were also developed by creating relative prediction intervals, which allow end users to evaluate uncertainty easily.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu