Abstract
Abstract. Soil thickness plays a central role in the interactions between vegetation, soils, and topography, where it controls the retention and release of water, carbon, nitrogen, and metals. However, mapping soil thickness, here defined as the mobile regolith layer, at high spatial resolution remains challenging. Here, we develop a hybrid model that combines a process-based model and empirical relationships to estimate the spatial heterogeneity of soil thickness with fine spatial resolution (0.5 m). We apply this model to two aspects of hillslopes (southwest- and northeast-facing, respectively) in the East River watershed in Colorado. Two independent measurement methods – auger and cone penetrometer – are used to sample soil thickness at 78 locations to calibrate the local value of unconstrained parameters within the hybrid model. Sensitivity analysis using the hybrid model reveals that the diffusion coefficient used in hillslope diffusion modeling has the largest sensitivity among all input parameters. In addition, our results from both sampling and modeling show that, in general, the northeast-facing hillslope has a deeper soil layer than the southwest-facing hillslope. By comparing the soil thickness estimated between a machine-learning approach and this hybrid model, the hybrid model provides higher accuracy and requires less sampling data. Modeling results further reveal that the southwest-facing hillslope has a slightly faster surface soil erosion rate and soil production rate than the northeast-facing hillslope, which suggests that the relatively less dense vegetation cover and drier surface soils on the southwest-facing slopes influence soil properties. With seven parameters in total for calibration, this hybrid model can provide a realistic soil thickness map with a relatively small amount of sampling dataset comparing to machine-learning approach. Integrating process-based modeling and statistical analysis not only provides a thorough understanding of the fundamental mechanisms for soil thickness prediction but also integrates the strengths of both statistical approaches and process-based modeling approaches.
Funder
U.S. Department of Energy
Subject
Earth-Surface Processes,Geophysics
Reference56 articles.
1. Andrews, D. J. and Bucknam, R. C.: Fitting degradation of shoreline scarps
by a nonlinear diffusion model, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 92,
12857–12867, https://doi.org/10.1029/JB092iB12p12857, 1987.
2. Breiman, L.: Random Forests, Mach. Learn., 45, 5–32,
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324, 2001.
3. Brodrick, P., Goulden, T., and Chadwick, K. D.: Custom NEON AOP reflectance mosaics and maps of shade masks, canopy water content, Watershed Function SFA [data set], https://doi.org/10.15485/1618131, 2020.
4. Brugger, K. A.: Climate in the Southern sawatch range and Elk Mountains,
Colorado, U.S.A., during the last glacial maximum: Inferences using a simple
degree-day model, Arctic, Antarct. Alp. Res., 42, 164–178,
https://doi.org/10.1657/1938-4246-42.2.164, 2010.
5. Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., and Saltelli, A.: An effective screening design
for sensitivity analysis of large models, Environ. Model. Softw., 22,
1509–1518, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.10.004, 2007.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献