See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262957019

Sequential indicator simulation and indicator kriging estimation of 3-

dimensional soil textures

Article  in  Australian Journal of Soil Research · October 2009

DOI: 10.1071/SR08218

CITATIONS READS

22 3,179

7 authors, including:

Yong He Deli Chen

National Research Council Canada University of Melbourne
18 PUBLICATIONS   273 CITATIONS    361 PUBLICATIONS   12,645 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Li Baoguo Kelin hu
China Agricultural University China Agricultural University
240 PUBLICATIONS   6,229 CITATIONS    146 PUBLICATIONS   2,928 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Soil sustainable productivity under long-term chemical fertilization in rainfed area View project

Prospects of improving efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen in Australian agriculture View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kelin hu on 11 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

CSIRO PUBLISHING
www.publish.csiro.au/journals/ajsr Australian Journal of Soil Research, 2009, 47, 622–631

Sequential indicator simulation and indicator kriging estimation

of 3-dimensional soil textures

Y. He A,B, D. Chen B, B. G. Li A, Y. F. Huang A, K. L. Hu A,C, Y. Li B, and I. R. Willett B

A
Department of Soil and Water Sciences, College of Resources and Environmental Sciences,
China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
B
School of Resource Management and Geography, Melbourne School of Land and Environment,
The University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia.
C
Corresponding author. Email: hukel@cau.edu.cn

Abstract. The complex distribution characteristics of soil textures at a large or regional scale are difficult to understand
with the current state of knowledge and limited soil profile data. In this study, an indicator variogram was used to describe
the spatial structural characteristics of soil textures of 139 soil profiles. The profiles were 2 m deep with sampling intervals
of 0.05 m, from an area of 15 km2 in the North China Plain. The ratios of nugget-to-sill values (SH) of experimental
variograms of the soil profiles in the vertical direction were equal to 0, showing strong spatial auto-correlation. In contrast,
SH ratios of 0.48–0.81 in the horizontal direction, with sampling distances of ~300 m, showed weaker spatial auto-
correlation. Sequential indicator simulation (SIS) and indicator kriging (IK) methods were then used to simulate and
estimate the 3D spatial distribution of soil textures. The outcomes of the 2 methods were evaluated by the reproduction of
the histogram and variogram, and by mean absolute error of predictions. Simulated results conducted on dense and sparse
datasets showed that when denser sample data are used, complex patterns of soil textures can be captured and simulated
realisations can reproduce variograms with reasonable fluctuations. When data are sparse, a general pattern of major soil
textures still can be captured, with minor textures being poorly simulated or estimated. The results also showed that when
data are sufficient, the reproduction of the histogram and variogram by SIS was significantly better than by the IK method
for the predominant texture (clay). However, when data are sparse, there is little difference between the 2 methods.

Additional keywords: soil textures, spatial variability, 3D, SIS and IK.

Introduction Currently, sequential indicator simulation (SIS) and indicator

The texture, thickness, location, and sequence of horizons and
layers in alluvial soils control physical properties such as water
retention and hydraulic conductivity characteristics (Finke et al.
1992), and provide a record of alluvial deposition and soil
formation. They also play a crucial role in the distribution of
soil chemical properties (Plante et al. 2006) and the uptake of
water and plant nutrients (Zhou and Selim 2001). Therefore, soil
texture layering has a significant influence on water movement
(Eagleman and Jamison 1962) and the transport of nutrients
and pollutants in the vadose zone (Leij et al. 1991; Zhou and
Selim 2001).
Spatial variability of soil textural layers at regional scales is
associated with several factors including sediment deposition,
soil formation, and human activity. Spatial variability of soil
textural layers occurs in the layering sequence and in the
category and thickness of each layer. Therefore, it is difficult
to assess the regional spatial distribution of soil textures and to
quantify their spatial uncertainty based on expert knowledge
and limited soil profile data, because of high variability and
complexity (Li et al. 1997). Knowledge of the spatial
distribution of these highly variable parameters is often
lacking, and it is necessary to develop suitable mathematical
models to quantify the spatial distribution of soil textural layers.
kriging (IK) algorithms are the dominant methods for estimating
categorical variables. The simulation approach takes into
account not only the spatial variation of observed data at
sampled locations but also the variation in estimates at
unsampled locations (Deutsch 2006). It therefore enables the
production of simulations that can account for localised
variations in soil data distribution. The IK algorithm works
well for non-parametric, categorical variables such as geology
and soil type, and it has been widely used in soil mapping
(Goovaerts et al. 1997), hydrogeology, and sedimentology
(Weerts and Bierkens 1993). In addition, the IK algorithm is
convenient to obtain the conditional cumulative distribution
function (ccdf). Therefore, it is commonly used to estimate
the probability of distribution, or single location uncertainty.
However, as it is based on the kriging estimator, it has been
criticised for its smoothing effect (Goovaerts 2000; Juang et al.
2004). According to Goovaerts (1997), the smoothing effect is
minimal when the locations of the observed data are closely
spaced, and the smoothing effect increases as the distance from
the location to the observed data increases.
Both the SIS and IK algorithms have particular advantages;
IK is designed to minimise local criteria, whereas the objective
with SIS is to reproduce the global histogram and variogram.

CSIRO 2009 10.1071/SR08218 0004-9573/09/060622

Simulation and estimation of 3-D soil textures
SIS is increasingly preferred to kriging in cases where spatial
variation measured in the field must be preserved (Goovaerts
2000). However, in practice, some studies show that the mean
prediction error tends to be larger for simulated values than for
kriging estimates (Olea and Pawlowsky 1996; Goovaerts 1997,
1999). Therefore, selection of estimation or simulation to
predict soil properties may involve trade-offs in terms of
errors of the results, not only in prediction accuracy but also
in the reproduction of spatial variability.
Soil textures have been assessed at regional scale through
1-D simulation (Li et al. 1997, 1999) and 2-D estimation (Hengl
et al. 2007). Such research provides useful prediction of the
heterogeneity of soil textures. However, 3-D results are required
to provide detailed information and to allow visualisation of
vadose zone complexity for applications in agricultural and
environmental management.
The description of the spatial variability of soil texture by IK
or SIS at regional scale is still developing. Grunwald et al.
(2000) used Environmental Visualisation Software (EVS) to
export soil textures at differential scales. They used 2-D
horizontal ordinary kriging slices for interpolation; therefore,
the variability in the vertical direction was not considered in the
3-D results. Hengl et al. (2007) used regression kriging to
estimate the 2-D distribution of the textures of surface soils at
regional scale, and Santanello et al. (2007) used remotely sensed
estimates of soil moisture to infer soil texture. They introduced
auxiliary predictors which were useful when data were sparse.
However, auxiliary information has still not been applied to
subsoil layers. Bierkens and Weerts (1994) used indicators to
Y
X Materials
N Sandy loam
Study
area
ShanXi
7 0 7 14 km
Fig. 1. Location and soil profiles of study area in Quzhou county in Hebei, China.
Australian Journal of Soil Research 623
characterise the spatial variability of different texture classes,
and an SIS algorithm to model the 3-D distribution of a confining
layer. However, they did not quantitatively validate the results
of simulation and its corresponding variogram reproduction.
According to the study of Hengl et al. (2007), results for soil
texture estimation may appear to be satisfactory visually but can
sometimes be misleading.
The objectives of this study are to explore the 3-D spatial
structural characters of soil textures in an alluvial plain using
indicator geostatistics and to compare the performance of the
SIS and IK methods by their reproduction of histogram and
variogram, and accuracy of prediction. In addition, 2 datasets
were used to demonstrate the data density sensitivity of the two
methods.
Materials and methods
Study region
This research was conducted in an area of the plain of ~15 km2
near the Quzhou Experiment Station, China Agricultural
University, Hebei Province (368510 N, 115830 E) (Fig. 1). The
topography of the study region is mainly flat, only the south-west
corner is low-lying land. Most of the area is a loamy depression
in the Zhang River’s alluvial fan. The surface (the positive
direction in the vertical plane is upward) soil texture is primarily
sandy loam, clay, and light loam, whereas the bottom is
primarily sand and clay. The entire research region is
farmland, cultivated to a depth of 0.2–0.3 m by small tractors
and oxen. The main crop rotations are wheat–maize,
Sand
Light loam
BeiJing Medium loam
TianJin Heavy loam
Clay
ShanDong
HeNan
624 Australian Journal of Soil Research Y. He et al.

wheat–cotton, and wheat–soybean. The soil organic matter by h. After calculation and variogram analysis, a suitable model
content is <1 g/kg in most of the area (Liu et al. 2005). can be derived.

Data collection Sequential indicator simulation

The data used in this study have been published by Li et al. For a categorical variable, the algorithm for SIS relies on IK
(1997, 1999). As shown in Fig. 2, a total of 139 observation soil to infer the probability density function (pdf) of categorical
profiles were sampled on a grid in the study area at intervals of variable Z(u). It simulates the non-parametric distribution by
350 m from west to east (X), 300 m from north to south (Y), and combining the indicator formalism with the sequential paradigm
0.05 m in the vertical direction (Z). Categories and thicknesses of (Remy et al. 2008). Through stochastic simulation, a series of
textural layers in each soil profile were recorded. There were alternative, equally probable realisations of the distribution of an
almost no particles >1 mm in these soils. According to previous indicator variable z(u) are produced. For example, if z(u)
soil survey data, soil texture was divided into 6 categories as belonging to category k is simulated in spatial site u, the pdf
shown in Table 1. to be estimated becomes:
Methods ProbfIðuÞ ¼ 1jðnÞg ¼ EfIðuÞjðnÞg
The main principles of geostatistics have been described in the
literature, and Goovaerts (1997, 1999) has provided theoretical Let i(u; zk) be category zk, set to 1 if u 2 zk, else 0. Mutual
details, so it is not necessary to introduce them in detail here. The exclusion must satisfy:
positive-defined functions often used in geostatistical models
are the spherical, exponential, Gaussian, and linear-with-sill X
K
models. The formula used in indicator variograms is: ik ðuÞik 0 ðuÞ ¼ 0; 8k 6¼ k 0 and iðu; zk Þ ¼ 1 ð2Þ
k ¼1
1 X
NðhÞ
rI ðh; zk Þ ¼ ½Iðu; zk Þ  Iðu þ h; zk Þ2 ð1Þ
2NðhÞ i ¼1 Actually satisfying those 2 conditions will be mutual exclusive
and exhaustive. Using sample kriging to estimate probability of
where I(u; zk) is the indicator variable of category k at location variables zk on location u yields:
of u, h is the lag, and N(h) is the number of data pairs separated
X
n
Prob  fIðu; zk Þ ¼ 1jðnÞg ¼ pk þ la ½Iðu; zk Þ  pk  ð3Þ
(a)
a¼1

where pk = E{I(u; zk)} 2 [0, 1] is the marginal frequency of

(b)
Fig. 2. (a) Locations of soil profiles used for the variogram model and for
the algorithms SIS and IK methods (&) (dense dataset, 83 points), and
(b) those that were used for the validation data (&) (56 points); sparse dataset
(40 points).
category zk; la is weight of sample kriging system.
The detailed steps of SIS are:
(1) Define a path visiting all locations to be simulated;
(2) For each location u along the path:
(a) Retrieve the neighbouring categorical conditioning
data: z(ua), a = 1,. . ., N
(b) Estimate the indicator random variable I(u; zk) for each
of the K categories by solving a kriging system
(c) Estimate values of i * (u; zk) = Prob * (Z(u) = zk), after
correction of order relation problems, and definition of
an estimate of the discrete conditional probability
density function (cpdf) of the categorical variable Z(u),
and drawing a realisation from cpdf and assigning it as
a datum at location u. The previous simulated results
can then be used as conditioning data for the later
unsampled location
(d) Loop until all locations are visited;
(3) Repeat the previous steps to generate another realisation
(Deutsch and Journel 1998).

Table 1. Division of types of soil textural layers in the study area

From Li et al. (1999)

Soil texture Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
<0.01 mm particles (%) 0–10 10–20 20–30 30–45 45–60 >60
Simulation and estimation of 3-D soil textures
Indicator kriging
The aim of IK is to estimate the conditional cumulative
distribution function (ccdf) belonging to any category zk,
conditional to data (n):
I*ðu; zk Þ ¼ E * fIðu; zk ÞjðnÞg ¼ Prob * ðZðuÞ 2 zk jðnÞÞ
The algorithm IK assumes that the marginal probabilities
E * (ua; zk) are constant and known for all ua and zk (Goovaerts
1997).
For a categorical variable, the indicator variable for category
k is defined as:
 total spatial heterogeneity (Robertson et al. 1993). A value close
1 if zðuÞ ¼ zk
iðu; zk Þ ¼ ð5Þ
0 otherwise
and the probability I * (u; k) for Z(u) belonging to a category is
estimated by simple kriging:
X
N
I*ðu; zk Þ  EfIðu; zk Þg ¼ la ðIðua ; zk Þ  EfIðua ; zk ÞgÞ
a ¼1
The
P n estimated probabilities must all be in [0, 1] and verify:
k = 1 I *(u; zk) = 1. If not, they are corrected as follows:
(1) If I * (Z(u), zk) 2
= [0, 1] reset it to the closest boundary. If
all the probability values are 0, no correction is made and
a warning is issued.
(2) Standardise the values so that they sum to 1:
I*ðZðuÞ; zk Þ
I *corrected ðZðuÞ; zk Þ ¼ PK
i ¼ 1 I*ðZðuÞ; zi Þ
The weights la in (4) were calculated from simple kriging
system:
X
nðu 0Þ
lk ðu0 ; zc ÞC I ðuk  uj ; zc Þ ¼ C I ðuj  u0 ; zc Þ
k¼1
for j ¼ 1 to nðu0 Þ
where n(u0) weights associated with the neighbouring data, zc
denotes the corresponding indicators, CI (uk – uj) is the
covariance between indicators at uk and uj, and CI (uk – uj) is
the covariance between the sample point uj and the point being
estimated, with CI (h; zc) = E(zc)[1 – E(zc)] – g I (h; zc). Only
limited data close to the location u0 being estimated can be
efficiently used, therefore, the n(u0) << N (Goovaerts 1997). The
estimated value of variable characters can be drawn from the
final probability distribution of IK results.
Results and discussion
Variogram analysis of soil textures in vertical
and horizontal directions
After transforming the measured texture data into indicator data,
variograms were calculated for both the vertical (Z) and
horizontal directions based on the dense dataset. Geostatistics
software SGeMS v 2.0 was used for calculation of variograms
Australian Journal of Soil Research 625
for both IK and SIS, and the scatter plot of variogram v. distance
was generated (Fig. 3). A theoretical variogram model was then
used to fit the calculated values, and the model with the best-
fitting value (Isaaks and Srivastava 1989) was selected. The data
in the Y direction were sparse, and the spatial variability
ð4Þ structure in the Y and in the 458 (X–Y) directions was
similar to the X direction; we assumed that the variogram in
the horizontal direction is symmetrical. This is similar to other
sedimentary variable studies, such as geology facies (Falivene
et al. 2007).
The nugget-to-sill ratio (SH) designates the degree of spatial
heterogeneity arising from random components to that of the
to 0 indicates that the variable has strong spatial auto-
relationship. Conversely, a value close to 1 indicates spatial
heterogeneity is dominated by randomness, or nugget effect.
From Table 2, we can see that soil texture layers in the vertical
direction have a strong spatial auto-relation (all SH = 0),
reflecting regular sedimentary deposition. However, soil
textures in the horizontal direction exhibited some degree of
nugget effect, especially the light loam and medium loam
ð6Þ (>0.80), indicating random heterogeneity, and reflecting
complicated formation conditions at the scale of sampling.
The nugget effect is also called the variance of the minimal
practical error for sampling, which is a sum of all variances
(Esbensen et al. 2007). For the soil texture data, the nugget effect
may be caused by data errors, tillage, or data sparseness. In this
study, the sampling interval may be the main factor for the
nugget effect in the horizontal direction, because the variance
with lags <300 m cannot be measured (Esbensen et al. 2007;
Hengl et al. 2007). If the correlation range is <300 m, the
ð7Þ variogram becomes a pure nugget model. In the vertical
direction, the sample data are sufficient and the sampling
almost continuous. In this direction the variograms can be
estimated at even 1 pixel length lag (0.05m), which is why
the variograms have no nugget effect. However, the variograms
of soil textures in these 2 directions cannot be compared because
of the great differences in their scales and sample intervals.
The range is also part of the variogram. For lags within the
ð8Þ range, increments are progressively more auto-correlated, which
implies that sampling with these increment distances will
capture the variation in the process with increasing reliability
(Esbensen et al. 2007). Although all the ranges derived from
fitted models were bigger than their corresponding sampling
distances, for textures present at small proportions, such as light
loam and heavy loam in the horizontal direction (Fig. 3), the
ranges are insufficient. Therefore, only few pairs of indicator
data can be used for variogram computation, which is another
factor inducing a certain degree of nugget effect (Goovaerts
1997).
Three-dimensional SIS
We made 20 realisations and then conducted post-possessing
by the probability distribution. The 20 realisations are adequate
because an additional 30 realisations (totalling 50, results not
shown) gave no significant difference in the histogram and
variogram statistics compared with 20 realisations. The SIS
was conducted on a 170  50  80 grid (grid size is 35 m by
626 Australian Journal of Soil Research Y. He et al.

Vertical
0.30 0.40 Sandy loam 0.10 Light loam
Sand
0.08
0.30
0.20
0.06
0.20
0.04
0.10
Experimental variogram 0.10 0.02
MODEL
0.00 0.00 0.00

0.10 Medium loam 0.03 Heavy loam 0.25 Clay

0.08 0.02 0.20
0.06 0.02 0.15
Indicator variogram

0.04 0.01 0.10

0.02 0.01 0.05
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
Horizontal
0.30 Sand 0.30 Sandy loam 0.12 Light loam
0.09
0.20 0.20
Direction Y 0.06
0.10 Direction X–Y 0.10
Direction X 0.03
MODEL
0.00 0.00 0.00

0.12 Medium loam Heavy loam 0.25 Clay

0.03
0.09 0.20

0.02 0.15
0.06
0.10
0.03 0.01
0.05
0.00 0.00 0.00
0 1000 2000 3000 0 1000 2000 3000 0 1000 2000 3000

Distance (m)

Fig. 3. Experimental indicator variograms (points) and corresponding fitted models (solid lines) for each texture
category based on dense data.

Table 2. Parameters of indicator variogram models in the vertical 0–1.6 m depth. The light loam and medium loam appeared in
direction with nested structures and in the horizontal direction both the upper and lower layers, but only to a small degree. In the
C0 is nugget, C is sill, a is range, and SH is nugget-to-sill ratio value south-west corner of the sampled area (Z = 1.7–2.0 m), clay is
(C0/(C0 + C)); all fitted models used were spherical present at the soil surface. The realisation is therefore visually
Soil texture C0 C1 a1(m) C2 a2 (m) SH consistent with the observed data.
(experimental) Figure 5a shows the SIS results based on the sparse dataset
(Fig. 2b). Obviously, the general pattern is captured in the
Vertical direction simulated map. However, due to the sparseness of the
Sand 0.00 0.13 0.5 0.100 1.2 0.00
conditioning data, the minor variables (such as light loam)
Sandy loam 0.00 0.12 0.5 0.080 1.3 0.00
Light loam 0.00 0.065 0.3 0.015 1.3 0.00
are underestimated, which is similar to the results of Li and
Medium loam 0.00 0.06 0.3 0.027 0.8 0.00 Zhang (2006).
Heavy loam 0.00 0.01 0.4 0.011 0.8 0.00
Clay 0.00 0.15 0.4 0.050 0.9 0.00 Three-dimensional IK
Horizontal direction A 3-D IK estimation was also conducted on a 170  50  80
Sand 0.13 0.10 2100 0.57 grid. The 3-D and cross-section results for IK are shown in
Sandy loam 0.12 0.08 2200 0.60 Fig. 6. In order to compare the SIS realisation with the IK
Light loam 0.065 0.015 1100 0.81
estimation, the results were derived from the estimated
Medium loam 0.06 0.027 2100 0.69
probability of IK. For convenience, the assigned value on
Heavy loam 0.01 0.011 950 0.48
Clay 0.15 0.05 2700 0.75 estimated grid was based on the maximum probability of
each soil texture, which is different from other reports
(Goovaerts et al. 1997; Castrignanò et al. 2000; Lin et al. 2002).
50 m by 0.025m); the total number of grids was ~680 000. The From Fig. 5, the results (based on dense datasets) reflected
realisation was based on the dense dataset. The cross-sections of the measured distribution. For example, sand layers are mostly
the SIS realisation (Fig. 4) showed that where the subsoil was distributed in the surface, and the sandy loam and clay layers are
clay, sandy loam dominated the upper layer (1.6–2.0 m). When mainly distributed at depth. A clay layer was shown at the
the bottom was sand and clay, the sand layer mainly appeared in surface in the south-west. In addition, from the realisations of
Simulation and estimation of 3-D soil textures Australian Journal of Soil Research 627

Materials Materials
Sand Sand
Sandy loam Sandy loam
Light loam Light loam
Medium loam Medium loam
2.00 Heavy loam 2.00 Heavy loam
Clay Clay
1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00

0
0

500
500

1000
1000

1500
1500

2000
2000

2500
2500

3000
Z Z
3000

3500

2000
3500

4000
2000

4500
4000

1000
5000
4500

1000
Y Y

5500
5000

6000
5500
6000
X X
(a) 3-D IK estimation
(a) 3-D SIS realisation

2000
2000

1000
1000

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

(b) X–Y section (Z = 2 m) (b) X–Y section (Z = 2 m)

2.00 2.00

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

(c) X–Z section (Y = 0 m) (c) X–Z section (Y = 0 m)

Fig. 4. 3-D realisation by SIS and its corresponding cross-section Fig. 5. 3-D estimation by IK and its corresponding cross-section
conditioned on the dense dataset. conditioned on the dense dataset.

SIS and IK, they had similar general trends, although the The histograms of SIS and IK are shown in Fig. 7 and
distribution of SIS realisation seems less ordered and the IK Table 3. In comparison with the frequency distribution of texture
realisation was smoothed. classes derived from the data (Fig. 2), the overall proportions
Similar to results of SIS, when using the sparse dataset, the were reproduced reasonably well by both SIS and IK (Fig. 7)
general pattern can be captured in the estimated map (see conditioned on the dense dataset. For the predominant textures,
Fig. 8b) and the minor textures were also relatively when using the dense dataset, SIS is better than IK (e.g. the
underestimated (e.g. light loam) in IK. MAPE of clay for SIS is 0.4, whereas for IK it is 17.9). However,
when using the sparse dataset, there is no obvious difference
Model validation between SIS and IK. In addition, the textures present in small
Reproduction of histogram and variogram proportions (light loam and medium loam) were underestimated
by both SIS and IK when using the dense dataset and the case
The histograms and variograms were calculated on grid was serious when using the sparse dataset (Table 4, Fig. 8). This
points (32  10  40 grids, grid size is 175 m by 250 m by indicates that the reproduction of such small variables is difficult
0.05 m) from the SIS and IK results. This scale is similar to in these methods if there are many category variables, as also
the measured data. The histograms and variograms of simulated found by Regli et al. (2004).
and experimental results were compared by absolute percentage The variogram reproduction for SIS and IK is shown in
error (APE): Tables 5, 6; Figs 3, 9). When using the dense dataset, there
 
 At  A i  was little difference in the horizontal directions between SIS
APE ¼   ð9Þ
At  and IK. However, in the vertical direction, the MAPE for IK
was much bigger than for SIS for clay (i.e. predominant
The difference between measured value At and predicted Ai is textures). When using the sparse dataset, the variograms
divided by the measured value At. were not well reproduced (except for clay). In addition, when
628 Australian Journal of Soil Research Y. He et al.

0.50
Measured
0.40 SIS
IK
Frequency 0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay

Soil texture

Fig. 6. Histogram reproduction of the frequency distribution of the 6 textures by SIS and IK conditioned
on the dense dataset.

Vertical
0.40 0.10 Light loam
Sand Sandy loam
0.40
0.08
0.30
0.30
0.06
0.20 0.20 0.04
SIS
0.10 IK 0.10 0.02
MODEL
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.09 Medium 0.03 Heavy loam 0.25 Clay
loam 0.20
0.06 0.02
0.15
Indicator variogram

0.03 0.10
0.01
0.05
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5

Horizontal
0.30 Sand 0.25 Sandy loam 0.15 Light loam
0.20 0.12
0.20
0.15 0.09
0.10 0.06
0.10
0.05 0.03
0.00 0.00 0.00

0.12 Medium loam Heavy loam 0.25 Clay

0.10 0.03
0.20
0.08
0.02 0.15
0.06
0.10
0.04 0.01
0.02 0.05
0.00 0.00 0.00
0 1000 2000 3000 0 1000 2000 3000 0 1000 2000 3000
Distance (m)

Fig. 7. Indicator variogram reproduction by SIS realisation and IK estimation based on sparse dataset.

Table 3. Absolute percentage error (APE) of SIS and IK histogram reproduction

Soil texture type: Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
Frequency of histogram Measured 0.308 0.287 0.075 0.078 0.015 0.230
SIS 0.376 0.276 0.052 0.049 0.015 0.231
IK 0.410 0.296 0.048 0.050 0.018 0.195
APE SIS 18.1 4.00 44.2 59.2 0.00 0.400
IK 24.9 3.00 56.3 56.0 16.7 18.0

using the dense dataset, SIS does not work well for textures dataset, indicating that when large-range continuity is present
present in small proportions (light loam, medium loam, and the SIS does not provide good variogram reproduction
heavy loam) and the case was even worse when using the sparse (Goovaerts 1999; Bastante et al. 2008) and sensitive to data
Simulation and estimation of 3-D soil textures Australian Journal of Soil Research 629

Table 4. Mean absolute percentage error of SIS and IK indicator variogram reproduction

Soil texture type: Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
Vertical SIS 12.1 19.2 16.4 85.6 41.5 2.40
IK 16.5 22.1 92.3 101.7 25.0 30.5
Horizontal SIS 9.60 10.2 8.50 15.5 9.40 6.80
IK 12.3 9.7 13.8 10.0 5.70 6.80

(a) (b)
Materials
Sand
2000 2000
Sandy loam
Light loam
1000 1000 Medium loam
Heavy loam

0 0 Clay
0
500

1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500

6000

0
500

1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500

6000
Fig. 8. (a) SIS simulation and (b) IK estimation based on the sparse dataset (Z = 2 m).

Table 5. Absolute percentage error of SIS and IK indicator variogram reproduction conditioned on the sparse dataset

Soil texture type: Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
Vertical SIS 15.2 21.9 185.6 452.1 80.7 9.8
IK 9.0 17.4 341.5 215.7 83.8 8.8
Horizontal SIS 12.6 20.2 164.4 244.6 30.9 5.0
IK 13.5 24.0 304.6 331.9 19.8 3.3

Table 6. Absolute percentage error of SIS and IK histogram reproduction conditioned on the sparse dataset

Soil texture type: Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
Frequency of histogram Measured 0.308 0.287 0.075 0.078 0.015 0.230
SIS 0.348 0.325 0.027 0.027 0.013 0.260
IK 0.333 0.350 0.017 0.028 0.014 0.258
APE SIS 11.5 11.7 177.8 188.9 15.4 11.5
IK 7.5 18.0 341.2 178.6 7.1 10.9

0.50
Measured
0.40 SIS
Frequency

IK
0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
Sand Sandy loam Light loam Medium loam Heavy loam Clay
Soil texture

Fig. 9. Histogram reproduction of the frequency distribution of the 6 textures by SIS and IK conditioned
on the sparse dataset.
630 Australian Journal of Soil Research
density, which is an issue that should be considered in further
study.
Mean absolute error
Prediction errors were quantified in a cross-validation step.
Independent texture layer data were used as validation data to
check the results of SIS (after post-processing of 20 realisations)
and IK by mean absolute error (MAE):
PN
jy  ^yi j ð10Þ
MAE ¼ i ¼ 1 i
N
where the yi is validation data and ^yi is IK estimation or SIS
realisation (Lee et al. 2007).
Here, the prediction error was a binary variable, which means
the cross-validation has only 2 situations: correct or incorrect.
The results showed that, when using the dense dataset, the errors
for SIS and IK were 0.47 and 0.42, respectively, in the
distribution of soil textures. When using the sparse dataset,
the errors became 0.51 and 0.48, which indicates that the
MAE tends to be larger for simulated values than for kriging
estimation, and the prediction error has no obvious difference
between the 2 methods obtained by 2 datasets.
Conclusions
Indicator variograms were used to describe the spatial variation
of 6 texture layers. The results indicated that spatial auto-
correlation dominated in the direction of sedimentary
deposition. However, because of the large sampling distances
in the horizontal directions and the infrequent occurrence of
textures present in small proportions, such as light loam and
heavy loam, the variograms computed from few pairs of those
indicator data showed a certain degree of randomness or nugget
effect. The SIS and IK algorithms were then used to simulate
and estimate the 3-D distribution of soil textures. Finally,
the result was checked by reproduction of histograms and
variograms, and by MAE of prediction. The prediction errors
of realisation of SIS and IK were 0.47 and 0.42, respectively.
This indicates that the IK method had slightly better predication
accuracy. However, the performance of histogram and
variability reproduction by SIS is far better than by IK. For
studies in which variability of textures is critical, such as water
and pollutant movement in soil, the SIS method is the better
method. When using a sparse dataset, the performance of
histogram and variability reproduction and prediction error
was worse than dense dataset based results for both
methods. These results may be useful for further sampling
strategies.
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr Weidong Li (Kent State University) for providing the data used
in this paper. We also thank Dr Jianbing Wu (Stanford University) and Dr
Helen Suter for their constructive comments. We appreciate funding support
of the National Key Basic Research Special Funds (2009CB118607),
ACIAR project (LWR/2003/039), the National Key Technologies R&D
Program (2006BDA10A06), and by the Program for New Century Excellent
Talents in University (NCET-07-0809).
Y. He et al.
References
Bastante FG, Ordóñez C, Taboada J, Matías JM (2008) Comparison of
indicator kriging, conditional indicator simulation and multiple-point
statistics used to model slate deposits. Engineering Geology 98, 50–59.
doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.01.006
Bierkens MFP, Weerts HJT (1994) Application of indicator simulation to
modeling the lithological properties of a complex confining layer.
Geoderma 62, 265–284. doi: 10.1016/0016-7061(94)90040-X
Castrignanò A, Goovaerts P, Lulli L, Bragato G (2000) A geostatistical
approach to estimate probability of occurrence of Tuber melanosporum
in relation to some soil properties. Geoderma 98, 95–113. doi: 10.1016/
S0016-7061(00)00054-9
Deutsch CV (2006) A sequential indicator simulation program for
categorical variables with point and block data: BlockSIS. Computers
& Geosciences 32, 1669–1681. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2006.03.005
Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1998) ‘GSLIB, Geostatistical Software Library
and User’s Guide.’ (Oxford University Press: New York)
Eagleman JR, Jamison VC (1962) Soil layering and compaction effects
on unsaturated moisture movement. Soil Science Society of America
Journal 26, 519–522.
Esbensen KH, Friis-Petersen HH, Petersen L, Holm-Nielsen JB,
Mortensen PP (2007) Representative process sampling—in practice:
Variographic analysis and estimation of total sampling errors (TSE).
Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 88, 41–59.
doi: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2006.09.011
Falivene O, Cabrera L, Sáez A (2007) Optimum and robust 3D facies
interpolation strategies in a heterogeneous coal zone (Tertiary as pontes
basin, NW Spain). International Journal of Coal Geology 71, 185–208.
doi: 10.1016/j.coal.2006.08.008
Finke PA, Bouma J, Stein A (1992) Measuring field variability of disturbed
soils for simulation purposes. Soil Science Society of America Journal
56, 187–192.
Goovaerts P (1997) ‘Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation.’ (Oxford
University Press: New York)
Goovaerts P (1999) Impact of the simulation algorithm, magnitude of
ergodic fluctuations and number of realizations on the spaces of
uncertainty of flow properties. Stochastic Environmental Research
and Risk Assessment 13(3), 161–182. doi: 10.1007/s004770050037
Goovaerts P (2000) Estimation or simulation of soil properties? An
optimization problem with conflicting criteria. Geoderma 97,
165–186. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(00)00037-9
Goovaerts P, Webster R, Dubois JP (1997) Assessing the risk of soil
contamination in the Swiss Jura using indicator geostatistics.
Environmental and Ecological Statistics 4, 49–64. doi: 10.1023/
A:1018505924603
Grunwald S, Barak P, McSweeney K, Lowery B (2000) SOIL
landscape models at different scales portrayed in virtual reality
modeling. Soil Science 165(8), 598–615. doi: 10.1097/00010694-
200008000-00002
Hengl T, Toomanian N, Reuter HI, Malakouti MJ (2007) Methods to
interpolate soil categorical variables from profile observations:
Lessons from Iran. Geoderma 140, 417–427. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.
2007.04.022
Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) ‘Applied geostatistics.’ (Oxford
University Press: New York)
Juang KW, Chen YS, Lee DY (2004) Using sequential indicator simulation
to assess the uncertainty of delineating heavy-metal contaminated soils.
Environmental Pollution 127, 229–238. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2003.
07.001
Lee SY, Carle SF, Fogg GE (2007) Geologic heterogeneity and a
comparison of two geostatistical models: Sequential Gaussian
and transition probability-based geostatistical simulation. Advances
in Water Resources 30, 1914–1932. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.
03.005
 Simulation and estimation of 3-D soil textures
Leij FJ, Dane JH, van Genuchten MT (1991) Mathematical analysis of one-
dimensional solute in a layered soil profile. Soil Science Society of
America Journal 55, 944–953.
Li WD, Li BG, Shi YC (1999) Markov-chain simulation of soil textural
profiles. Geoderma 92, 37–53. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(99)00024-5
Li WD, Li BG, Shi YC, Tang DY (1997) Application of the Markov chain
theory to describe spatial distribution of textural layers. Soil Science
162, 672–683. doi: 10.1097/00010694-199709000-00009
Li WD, Zhang C (2006) A generalized Markov Chain Approach for
conditional simulation of categorical variables from grid samples.
Transactions in GIS 10(4), 651–669. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9671.
2006.01017.x
Lin YP, Chang TK, Shih CW, Tseng CH (2002) Factorial and indicator
kriging methods using a geographic information system to delineate
spatial variation and pollution sources of soil heavy metals.
Environmental Geology 42, 900–909. doi: 10.1007/s00254-002-0600-5
Liu YH, Yu ZR, Zhang FR, Song CM, Liu Y (2005) Dynamic change of soil
organic matter and its affecting factors at county level. Plant Nutrition
and Fertilizer Science 11(3), 294–301.
Olea RA, Pawlowsky V (1996) Compensating for estimation smoothing in
kriging. Mathematical Geology 28, 407–417. doi: 10.1007/BF02083653
Plante AF, Conant RT, Stewart CE, Paustian K, Six J (2006) Impact of soil
texture on the distribution of soil organic matter in physical and chemical
fractions. Soil Science Society of America Journal 70, 287–296.
doi: 10.2136/sssaj2004.0363
http://www.publish.csiro.au/journals/ajsr
View publication stats
Australian Journal of Soil Research 631
Regli C, Rosenthaler L, Huggenberger P (2004) GEOSSAV: a simulation
tool for subsurface applications. Computers & Geosciences 30, 221–238.
doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2003.10.007
Remy N, Boucher A, Wu JB (2008) ‘Applied Geostatistics with SGeMS.’
(Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK)
Robertson GP, Crum JR, Ellis BG (1993) The spatial variability of soil
resources following long-term disturbance. Oecologia 96, 451–456.
doi: 10.1007/BF00320501
Santanello JA Jr, Peters-Lidard CD, Garcia ME, Mocko DM, Tischler MA,
Moran MS, Thoma DP (2007) Using remotely-sensed estimates of soil
moisture to infer soil texture and hydraulic properties across a semi-arid
watershed. Remote Sensing of Environment 110, 79–97. doi: 10.1016/
j.rse.2007.02.007
Weerts HJT, Bierkens MFP (1993) Geostatistical analysis of overbank
deposits of anastomosing and meanding fluvial systems – Rhine
Meuse Delta, The Netherlands. Sedimentary Geology 85, 221–232.
doi: 10.1016/0037-0738(93)90085-J
Zhou LZ, Selim HM (2001) Solute transport in layered soils: nonlinear and
kinetic reactivity. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65,
1056–1064.
Manuscript received 29 September 2008, accepted 6 May 2009