4.7 Article

Spatial prediction of soil organic matter in the presence of different external trends with REML-EBLUP

Journal

GEODERMA
Volume 148, Issue 2, Pages 159-166

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.09.018

Keywords

Soil organic matter; Regression kriging; Best linear unbiased predictor; Residual maximum likelihood; Topographic index

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [40671084]
  2. Beijing Natural Science Foundation [6072017]
  3. National Key Technologies RD Program [2006BAD10A01]
  4. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2006AA10Z224]
  5. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-06-0107]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of our study was to compare the performance of the empirical best linear unbiased predictor (E-BLUP) with residual maximum likelihood (REML) with that of regression kriging (RK) for predicting soil organic matter (SOM) with the presence of different external drifts. The study was conducted on a 933 km(2) area in Pinggu district of Beijing. Terrain attributes (elevation, slope and topographic wetness index) calculated from DEM were used as external drift variable. The root mean squared errors (RMSE) and the mean squared deviation ratio (MSDR) were used to assess the accuracy of prediction and the goodness of fit of the theoretical estimate of error respectively. RK resulted in both the most and least accurate predictions. REML-EBLUP provided more correct residual variogram models than RK for each trend model. Our results have shown that when the value of adjusted R-2 is greater than 0.45, there is litter difference in the ability to increase the accuracy between REML-EBLUP and RK; and when the value is less than 0.45, the performance of REML-EBLUP is significantly better than RK. It also suggested that topographical data can further improve the accuracy of the spatial predictions of SOM by using RK and REML-EBLUP (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available