Precision Agriculture

, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp 53–72 | Cite as

Interpreting Soil Electrical Conductivity and Terrain Attribute Variability with Soil Surveys

  • N. J. Hartsock
  • T. G. Mueller
  • A. D. Karathanasis
  • P. L. Cornelius


Utilizing soil electrical conductivity (EC) measurements and terrain attributes for precision management will require secondary soil information for adequate interpretation. The objective of this study was to determine whether readily available second-order soil surveys were of adequate quality to aid with interpreting soil EC and terrain data. For three locations in Kentucky, USA, first-order soil surveys were created, second-order surveys reports were obtained, elevation was measured and used to calculate terrain attributes (slope, aspect, plan curvature, profile curvature), and bulk soil electrical conductivity was measured. Three analytical methods (an ordinary least squares analysis and two random field analyses), visual map assessment, and examination of least-squares means were used to assess the relationships between soil EC measurements, terrain attributes and first- and second-order soil surveys. The OLS and random field analyses were problematic. However, the ranking of the OLS F-statistics appeared to reflect the general relationship between landscape variables and first-order soil surveys. The landscape variables related particularly well with soil properties that had been impacted by past soil erosion. Unfortunately, however, second-order soil surveys in this study were not created at suitable scales to adequately interpret EC and terrain data regarding erosion history or other attributes. While these surveys may provide some useful information, field measurements, sampling, and observations will likely be required to develop high quality interpretations of soil EC and terrain attribute data.


digital elevation models terrain attributes soil electrical conductivity random-field analysis soil survey order 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bell, J. C., Butler, C. A. and Thompson, J. A. 1995. Soil-terrain modeling for site-specific agricultural management. In: Site-Specific Management for Agricultural Systems, edited by P. C. Robert, R. H. Rust, W. E. Larson (ASA Misc. Publ., ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, USA), p. 209-227.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, J. C., Cunningham, R. L., Havens, M. W. 1992Calibration and validation of a soil-landscape model for predicting soil drainage classSoil Science Society of America Journal5618601866Google Scholar
  3. Bourennane, H., King, D., Chery, P., Bruand, A. 1996Improving the kriging of soil variables using slope gradient as external driftEuropean Journal of Soil Science47473483Google Scholar
  4. Cressie, N., Hawkins, D. M. 1980Robust estimation of the variogramMathematical Geology12115125Google Scholar
  5. Doolittle, J. A., Sudduth, K. A., Kitchen, N. R., Indorante, S. J. 1994Estimating depths to claypans using electromagnetic induction methodsJournal of Soil and Water Conservation49572575Google Scholar
  6. Hammer, R. D., Young, F. J., Wollenhaupt, N. C., Barney, T. L., Haithcoate, T. W. 1995Slope class maps from soil survey and digital elevation modelsSoil Science Society of America Journal59509519Google Scholar
  7. Kachanoski, R.G., Gregorich, E. G., Van Wesenbeeck, I. J. 1988Estimating spatial variations of soil water content using non-contacting electromagnetic inductive methodsCanadian Journal of Soil Science68715722Google Scholar
  8. Kitchen, N.R., Sudduth, K. A., Drummond, S. T. 1996Mapping of sand deposition from Midwest floods with electromagnetic induction measurementsJournal of Soil and Water Conservation51336340Google Scholar
  9. Kravchenko, A. N., Bollero, G. A., Omonode, R. A., Bullock, D. G. 2002Quantitative mapping of soil drainage classes using topographical data and soil electrical conductivitySoil Science Society of America Journal66235243Google Scholar
  10. Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D. 1996SAS System for Mixed ModelsSAS Institute CaryNC, USAGoogle Scholar
  11. McBride, R. A., Gordon, A. M., Shrive, S. C. 1990Estimating forest soil quality from terrain measurements of apparent electrical conductivitySoil Science Society of America Journal54290293Google Scholar
  12. Moore, I. D., Gessler, P. E., Nielsen, G. A., Peterson, G. A. 1993Soil attribute prediction using terrain analysisSoil Science Society of America Journal57443452Google Scholar
  13. Mueller, T. G., Hartsock, N. J., Stombaugh, T. S., Shearer, S. A., Cornelius, P. L., Barnhisel, R. I. 2003Soil electrical conductivity map variability in limestone soils overlain by loessAgronomy Journal95496507Google Scholar
  14. Rhoades, J. D., Ingvalson, R. D. 1971Determining salinity in field soils with soil resistance measurementsSoil Science Society of America Proceedings355460Google Scholar
  15. Robert, P. 1993Characterization of soil conditions at the field level for soil specific managementGeoderma605772Google Scholar
  16. Schabenberger, O., Pierce, F. J. 2002Contemporary Statistical Models for the Plant and Soil SciencesCRC Press LLC, Boca RatonFL, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil Survey Manual. (Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18, Washington, DC). Available on line at Google Scholar
  18. USDA-NRCS. 2003a. List of Printed soil Surveys by State. Available on-line at Scholar
  19. USDA-NRCS. 2003b. Official Soil Series Descriptions Data Access. Available on-line at Scholar
  20. USDA-SCS. 1973. Soil Survey of Calloway and Marshall Counties, KY, USA.Google Scholar
  21. USDA-SCS. 1979. Soil Survey of Hardin County, KY, USA. Google Scholar
  22. USDA-SCS. 1980. Soil Survey of Shelby County, KY, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Williams, B. G., Hoey, D. 1987The use of electromagnetic induction to detect the spatial variability of the salt and clay contents of soilAustralian Journal of Soil Science252127Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. J. Hartsock
    • 1
  • T. G. Mueller
    • 2
  • A. D. Karathanasis
    • 2
  • P. L. Cornelius
    • 3
  1. 1.Agriculture Management Solutions, John Deere Ag. Management SolutionsJohn Deere and CompanyUrbandaleUSA
  2. 2.Department of AgronomyUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of AgronomyUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations