Comparison between detailed digital and conventional soil maps of an area with complex geology

• Autor(a) principal: Bazaglia Filho,Osmar
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Outros Autores: Rizzo,Rodnei, Lepsch,Igo Fernando, Prado,Hélio do, Gomes,Felipe Haenel, Mazza,Jairo Antonio, Demattê,José Alexandre Melo
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-06832013000500003
• topic: soil cartography; detailed soil survey; remote sensing; soil-landscape relationship

Since different pedologists will draw different soil maps of a same area, it is important to compare the differences between mapping by specialists and mapping techniques, as for example currently intensively discussed Digital Soil Mapping. Four detailed soil maps (scale 1:10.000) of a 182-ha sugarcane farm in the county of Rafard, São Paulo State, Brazil, were compared. The area has a large variation of soil formation factors. The maps were drawn independently by four soil scientists and compared with a fifth map obtained by a digital soil mapping technique. All pedologists were given the same set of information. As many field expeditions and soil pits as required by each surveyor were provided to define the mapping units (MUs). For the Digital Soil Map (DSM), spectral data were extracted from Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) imagery as well as six terrain attributes from the topographic map of the area. These data were summarized by principal component analysis to generate the map designs of groups through Fuzzy K-means clustering. Field observations were made to identify the soils in the MUs and classify them according to the Brazilian Soil Classification System (BSCS). To compare the conventional and digital (DSM) soil maps, they were crossed pairwise to generate confusion matrices that were mapped. The categorical analysis at each classification level of the BSCS showed that the agreement between the maps decreased towards the lower levels of classification and the great influence of the surveyor on both the mapping and definition of MUs in the soil map. The average correspondence between the conventional and DSM maps was similar. Therefore, the method used to obtain the DSM yielded similar results to those obtained by the conventional technique, while providing additional information about the landscape of each soil, useful for applications in future surveys of similar areas.