HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by De Vos, B. Articles by Muys, B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by De Vos, B. Articles by Muys, B. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by De Vos, B. Articles by Muys, B. Related Collections Structure and Properties Soil Organic Matter Carbon Sequestration Pedotransfer Functions Forest Soils

Division S-7—Forest, Range & Wildland Soils

Predictive Quality of Pedotransfer Functions for Estimating Bulk Density of Forest Soils

^a Inst. for Forestry and Game Management, Gaverstraat 4, B-9500 Geraardsbergen, Belgium
^b Dep. of Soil Management and Soil Care, Ghent Univ., Coupure 653, B-9000 Gent, Belgium
^c Lab. for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, Katholieke Univ. Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

^* Corresponding author (bruno.devos{at}lin.vlaanderen.be)

Pedotransfer functions (PTFs) based on easily measured soil variables offer an alternative for labor-intensive bulk density (_b) measurements. The predictive quality of 12 published PTFs was evaluated using an independent dataset of forest soils (1614 samples) from Flanders, Belgium. For all samples, PTF accuracy and precision was calculated, and for topsoil and subsoil samples separately. All functions were found to produce a systematic underestimation of predicted _b, with mean prediction errors (MPEs) ranging between –0.01 and –0.51 Mg m^–3. Most PTFs performed differently when applied to topsoil or subsoil data. Prediction of topsoil _b showed the highest prediction error. The evaluation demonstrated the poor performance of some published PTFs, and raised concern that the predictive ability of even the better models may not be adequate. Therefore, two candidate PTFs were recalibrated and validated. With recalibration, accuracy improved considerably and showed a near-zero bias, but precision increased only slightly. The best fitted empirical model was based on loss-on-ignition (LOI): _b = 1.775 – 0.173(LOI)^1/2. Its predictive capacity was not significantly better than the Adams physical two-component model _b = 100/{(LOI/0.312) + [(100 – LOI)/1.661]}. For the prediction of _b in forest soils, LOI was two times more important than texture variables, and LOI alone accounted for >55% of the total variation. The lowest root mean squared prediction error (RMSPE) was 0.16 Mg m^–3 for LOI-based, and 0.21 Mg m^–3 for texture-based models. Separate calibration of topsoil and subsoil layers did not enhance the predictive capacity significantly.

Abbreviations: _b, bulk density • CI, confidence interval • LOI, loss-on-ignition • MPE, mean prediction error • MSPE, mean squared prediction error • OM, organic matter • PTF, pedotransfer function • RMSPE, root mean squared prediction error • RSE, residual standard error

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. A. Khan, R. L. Mulvaney, T. R. Ellsworth, and C. W. Boast The Myth of Nitrogen Fertilization for Soil Carbon Sequestration J. Environ. Qual., October 24, 2007; 36(6): 1821 - 1832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. M. Cornelis, M. Khlosi, R. Hartmann, M. Van Meirvenne, and B. De Vos Comparison of Unimodal Analytical Expressions for the Soil-Water Retention Curve Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., October 27, 2005; 69(6): 1902 - 1911. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]