English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Spatially continuous soil thickness data at large scales are usually not readily available and are often difficult and expensive to acquire. Various machine learning algorithms have become very popular in digital soil mapping to predict and map the spatial distribution of soil properties. Identifying the controlling environmental variables of soil thickness and selecting suitable machine learning algorithms are vitally important in modeling. In this study, 11 quantitative and four qualitative environmental variables were selected to explore the main variables that affect soil thickness. Four commonly used machine learning algorithms (multiple linear regression (MLR), support vector regression (SVR), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) were evaluated as individual models to separately predict and obtain a soil thickness distribution map in Henan Province, China. In addition, the two stacking ensemble models using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and generalized boosted regression model (GBM) were tested and applied to build the most reliable and accurate estimation model. The results showed that variable selection was a very important part of soil thickness modeling. Topographic wetness index (TWI), slope, elevation, land use and enhanced vegetation index (EVI) were the most influential environmental variables in soil thickness modeling. Comparative results showed that the XGBoost model outperformed the MLR, RF and SVR models. Importantly, the two stacking models achieved higher performance than the single model, especially when using GBM. In terms of accuracy, the proposed stacking method explained 64.0% of the variation for soil thickness. The results of our study provide useful alternative approaches for mapping soil thickness, with potential for use with other soil properties.

Improving Soil Thickness Estimations Based on Multiple Environmental Variables with Stacking Ensemble Methods