Catena 199 (2021) 105116

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Catena
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/catena

Spatial distribution characteristics of reconstructed soil bulk density of

opencast coal-mine in the loess area of China
Yuhan Huang a, Yingui Cao a, b, *, Marcin Pietrzykowski c, Wei Zhou a, b, *, Zhongke Bai a, b
a
School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
b
Key Lab of Land Consolidation, Ministry of Natural Resources of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing 100035, China
c
Department of Ecology and Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry, University of Agriculture in Krakow, Krakow, AL. 29 Listopada 46, 31 - 425, Poland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Controlling and adjusting the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD) in an artificially disturbed ecosystem is one
Land reclamation of the main challenges in land reclamation. Exploring the spatial distribution of RSBD is the best starting point to
Mine soil analyze and improve reclamation technology. This study quantifies the spatial distribution pattern and variation
Soil physical parameters
of RSBD on reclaimed land in the loess area of China using geostatistical spatial interpolation and multiple
Lignite mining
Revegetation
regression analysis. Topography (platform, slope, and slope aspects), vegetation cover, soil particle size distri­
bution, and soil erosion were found to affect the spatial variability of the RSBD. The boundary between the sunny
slope and shady slope was considered to be the dividing line for the RSBD, which was generally distributed in
stripes and patches. The RSBD was higher on the sunny slope than on the shady slope at 0–10 cm, while the
opposite was observed at 20–40 cm. However, the RSBD at the depths of 40–60 cm increased from west to east,
and the direction of the strong spatial variability also gradually changed from “ Southwest ↔ Northeast ” to “
West ↔ East ”. The unary quadratic regression equations accurately represent the variation laws of RSBD at
different soil depths under different topography and vegetation cover (R2 > 0.90). Measures that utilize engi­
neering and vegetation to improve the RSBD should be adjusted according to the specific landscape and
topography. This study provides a theoretical basis for the improvement of the RSBD and the optimization of
land reclamation technology used in opencast coal-mine dumps in the loess area.

1. Introduction
The large opencast mines of China are widely distributed in loess
areas characterized as arid and semi-arid that suffer from serious water
and soil erosion and fragile ecosystems. Mining activities have brought
about tremendous changes in the local environments and damaged the
health of local population (Wang et al., 2013; Cao et al., 2018; Huang
et al., 2018). Severe artificial disturbances such as strip mining, trans­
portation, and dumping have seriously damaged the original landform
(Bai et al., 2018). The soil-rock mixed and the reclamation technology
used have led to significant heterogeneity in the configuration of the
reconstructed soil profile (Pietrzykowski, 2014). Under the dual effects
of artificial and natural restoration, the continuous space–time variance
in the reconstructed soil is affected by many factors such as climate,
topography, and vegetation cover, leading to localized degradation of
the vegetation inhabiting the reclaimed land surrounding opencast
mining area (Huang et al., 2019).
Soil bulk density (SBD) is one of the important indicators that reflects
soil quality and productivity (Zheng et al., 2004; Suuster et al., 2011).
Mining and dumping both use large-scale machinery that repeatedly
compacts the land, resulting in excessive SBD, hindering revegetation
and the effectiveness of reclamation technology (Cao et al., 2013; Pan
et al., 2017). SBD varies over different spatial scale under affecting by
both natural factors and human activities including soil parent material,
topography, land use, climate, vegetation type (Sun et al., 2016; Xu
et al., 2017). The soil parent material, soil formation, and climate tend to
affect the spatial variability of SBD on large scales, while the topog­
raphy, soil moisture, and plant root systems have major effects on small
scales (Zhang et al., 2007). Geostatistical tools that are based on auto­
correlation and random variation provide an accurate assessment of the
spatial variability in soil properties (Zhang et al., 2009; Sun et al., 2016;
Rosemary et al., 2017).
The acquisition of SBD data is both time-consuming and labor-
intensive (Wang et al., 2014b), which it was not systematically

* Corresponding authors at: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China.
E-mail addresses: caoyingui@cugb.edu.cn (Y. Cao), zhouw@cugb.edu.cn (W. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105116
Received 22 February 2020; Received in revised form 17 December 2020; Accepted 20 December 2020
Available online 7 January 2021
0341-8162/© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Y. Huang et al.
measured in regular reclamation practice in the past. Measurement of
the SBD is not obligatory in China’s “The Second National Soil Census
Technical Regulations” (Chai and He, 2016) or other international large-
scale soil inventories, and is often missing in data bases (Sequeira et al.,
2014). Many studies on the spatial variability of SBD have therefore
been carried out on different scales. In the China’s terrestrial ecosystem,
Chai and He (2016) found that SBD were great differences among
different soil types, and the mean values of SBD ranged from 0.93 g/cm3
(alpine soil) to 1.41 g/cm3 (alkali-saline soil) via the systematic analysis
of 11,845 data points from 3361 sample plots. SBD had a coefficient of
variation of 12% based on 748 soil profiles in the loess plateau (Wang
et al., 2014b). The spatial variability of SBD was all medium variation,
and the coefficient of variation for SBD at depths of 0–10 cm, 10–20 cm
and 20–40 cm are 10.0%, 11.4% and 10.4%, respectively (Yu et al.,
2019). In the loess hill region, the spatial variability in the surface SBD
of shallow gullies may result mainly from erosion processes, as well as
biological and human activities (Geng et al., 2014). The heterogeneity of
soil configuration is responsible for significant differences between
reclaimed land and original land (Jacinthe and Lal, 2006; Cao et al.,
2015).
The research concept of using geostatistics to analyze the spatial
variability of soil has been successfully applied in various ecosystems
around the world (Kuklová et al., 2020; Wojcik-Len et al., 2020), but
most are concentrated on the original soil profile (Duan et al., 2020;
Song et al., 2020). Due to the heterogeneity of the soil structure in
reclaimed land, the spatial variability of SBD is significantly different
from that of undamaged land (Cao et al., 2015). Therefore, the objec­
tives of this study were to (i) analyze the spatial variability in the
reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD) and the variation laws as asso­
ciated with soil layer depth under different topography conditions, and
(ii) combine the characteristics of this spatial variation to propose
various measures for improving the SBD in reconstructed land. This
study provides a theoretical basis and technical support for the optimi­
zation of land reclamation technology.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area
The Pingshuo mine district (112◦ 11′ -113◦ 30′ E, 39◦ 23′ − 39◦ 37′ N) is
in the Black Triangle area bordered by Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Inner
Mongolia on the Loess Plateau and is dispersed across the Pinglu District,
Shuozhou City, and Shanxi Province (Bai and Yun, 2008; Wang et al.,
Fig. 1. Location of the study area and the digital elevation model (DEM).
2
Catena 199 (2021) 105116
2014a). The dump lying south (south dump) of the mining area was
selected for this research (Fig. 1). This area is characterized by a typical
temperate semi-arid continental monsoon climate with rainfall
concentrated in the summer and autumn months and only small
amounts of precipitation occurring during spring and winter. The annual
average temperature in the region is 4.8–7.8 ◦ C, the annual rainfall is
428.2–449.0 mm, and the annual evaporation is 1786.6–2598.0 mm.
According to Chinese Soil Taxonomic Classification, the zonal soil in the
mining area comprises chestnut soil and chestnut cinnamon soil. The
ecosystem has little resistance to erosion by water or wind (Cao et al.,
2016).
The Fig. 2 shows the evolution path of the landform and the mining
and reclamation processes that have been carried out around the
opencast coal-mine in the loess area of China. Mechanical compaction
and the heterogeneity of the soil configuration has led to the bulk
density becoming the core control index for soil reconstruction, and
even determines the success or failure of land reclamation (Cao et al.,
2013).
2.2. Soil sampling and testing
In August 2018, after 27 years of land reclamation at the south dump,
20 representative sample sites were randomly selected representing
different altitudes, site conditions, slope aspects, and types of vegetation
cover (Fig. 3). Limitations caused by the topographic conditions and
vegetation cover meant that the collection of some samples deviated
slightly from the set sampling sites. Soil samples were collected at depths
of 0–10 cm, 10–20 cm, 20–30 cm, 30–40 cm, 40–50 cm and 50–60 cm
using a cutting ring (V = 100 cm3), and a total of 120 test soil samples
were sealed and numbered. In the laboratory, the soil samples were
dried in an oven and an electronic balance was used to weigh the dry
mass of each soil sample and cutting ring, after which the cutting ring
was weighed separately. Finally, the SBD was calculated using Eq. (1):
M1 − M2
ρB = (1)
V
where ρB represents the SBD (g/cm3), M1 represents the mass of the
dry soil and the cutting ring (g), M2 represents the mass of the cutting
ring (g), and V represents the volume of the cutting ring (cm3).
2.3. Statistical analysis
Microsoft Excel 2016 and SPSS 22.0 were used to perform multiple
Y. Huang et al. Catena 199 (2021) 105116

Fig. 2. Effects of mining and reclamation on the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD).

regression analysis, one-way ANOVA, and sample data charting, and the
semi-variance function model was fitted using GS+9.0. The analytical
methods were utilized to obtain the distribution characteristics of the
RSBD over three-dimensional space from the horizontal and vertical
results. The spatial variability theory is described below.
2.3.1. Classical statistical spatial variability analysis theory
In the field of classical statistics, spatial variables that satisfy random
distribution characteristics are mainly characterized by the variation
function Cv (Zhang et al., 2014). The variogram can be defined using Eq.
(2):
2.3.2. Geostatistical spatial variability analysis theory
The core of geostatistical analysis is to determine the law of the
research object (a variable) as a function of the spatial position ac­
cording to the location from which a sample is taken, and to infer the
attribute values of unknown locations in turn. The analysis of the vari­
ation characteristics of a spatial variable is based on the variation laws of
the semi-variance function (Shi and Li, 2006; Marchant et al., 2007;
Marchant et al., 2010). The calculation is carried out using Eq. (3):
N(h)
1 ∑
γ(h) = [Z(Xi ) − Z(Xi + h) ]2 (3)
2N(h) i=1

S where γ(h) represents the value of the semi-variance function, N(h)

Cv = × 100% (2)
X represents the logarithm between locations at the distance h, and Z(X)
where Cv represents the coefficient of variation, S represents the represents the measured value of the variable Z at X. According to the
classification criteria of Cambardella et al. (1994), a spatial heteroge­
standard deviation, and Xrepresents the mean of the variables. Ac­
neity ratio C0 / (C0 + C) of ≤ 25% means that variables have strong
cording to the degree of variation, If Cv ≤ 10% the variables are weakly
spatial autocorrelation; variables have medium spatial autocorrelation
variation, if 10% < Cv < 100% the variables are moderately variation,
at 25–75%; and variables have very weak spatial autocorrelation at ≥
and if Cv ≥ 100% the variables are strong variation.
75%.

3
Y. Huang et al. Catena 199 (2021) 105116

Fig. 3. Distribution maps of the soil sampling points. (a) Digital elevation model, (b) Slope grading map, (c) Slope aspects map, and (d) Vegetation cover types map.

2.3.3. Precision test of the spatial interpolation results
In order to test the rationality of the parameters used in the semi-
variance function model, a cross-validation method is used to test the
established semi-variance function and the spatial interpolation pre­
diction method. It is assumed that the values of each measured data are
unknown and the selected variation model is used to estimate the value
at the sampling point using a specific interpolation method according to
the data associated with n-1 other measurement points. The error be­
tween the actual observation value and the predicted value for all
sample points is then calculated to evaluate the accuracy of the spatial
interpolation results.
The average error (AE), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean
square error (RMSE), and average standard error (ASE) were taken as
evaluation indexes. The evaluation principle used is that AE is close to 0,
the lower MAE, and the smaller and closer the gap between the values
describing RMSE and ASE, the higher the prediction accuracy and the
better the interpolation method. The indexes were obtained using Eqs.
(4), (5), (6), and (7):
1∑ n
( )
AE = Xi − Xj
n i=1
prediction. The predicted values are underestimated when the RMSE
values are higher than the ASE values, and the predicted values are
overestimated when the RMSE values are lower than the ASE values.
3. Results
3.1. Spatial statistical characteristics analysis of RSBD
The descriptive statistics of the RSBD at different soil layers are
exhibited in Table 1 and Fig. 4. The RSBD gradually increases with soil
depth, with the minimum value observed at 0–10 cm (0.87 g/cm3) and
the maximum at 50–60 cm (2.00 g/cm3). The coefficient of variation for
the RSBD was between 12.77% and 15.60%, with medium variation.
This was consistent with the results of investigating the spatial vari­
ability for the surface soil bulk density over the whole loess plateau by
Wang et al. (2014b). The measured data showed normal distribution
under the single-sample K-S test and can therefore be directly statisti­
cally analyzed.
(4) 3.2. Spatial variability analysis of RSBD

1∑ n The structural parameters generated by the optimal semi-variance

MAE = |Xi − Xj | (5) function models of the RSBD are showed in Table 2. The Spherical
n i=1
model was found to fit best at 0–10 cm and 40–50 cm, with the Gaussian
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ model fitting better at the other depths sampled. Table 3 demonstrates
1∑ n
that the “C0 / (C0 + C)” of the RSBD values were all ≤ 25%, indicating
RMSE = (Xi − Xj )2 (6)
n i=1 strong spatial autocorrelation, and the spatial variation was mainly a
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ result of heterogeneity in the configuration of the soil. The range “A0”
1∑ n was between 66.00 and 127.09 m, and the determination coefficient R2
ASE = (Xi − Xi )2 (7) was between 0.58 and 0.81 and was well fitting.
n i=1

Where n represents the number of samples, Xi represents the

3.3. Cross-validation of spatial interpolation results for RSBD
measured value, and Xj represents the predicted value. If the AE values
are positive, the interpolation results are lower than the actual values,
The indexes that are used for evaluation often show inconsistent
whereas negative AE values indicate interpolation results that are higher
trends with the actual interpolation. Lower MAE values indicated that
than the actual values. The lower MAE values indicate better model
the prediction effect of the ordinary kriging model was better (Table 3).

4
Y. Huang et al. Catena 199 (2021) 105116

Table 1
Classical statistical characteristics of the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD).
Soil depths /cm Average value /g/cm3 Median /g/cm3 Maximum value /g/cm3 Minimum value /g/cm3 Standard deviation Coefficient of variation /% K-S

0–10 1.24 1.26 1.55 0.87 0.18 14.54 0.89

10–20 1.36 1.35 1.61 1.04 0.18 13.36 0.85
20–30 1.39 1.43 1.71 0.88 0.22 15.60 0.88
30–40 1.45 1.47 1.95 0.98 0.22 15.13 0.91
40–50 1.49 1.49 1.97 1.09 0.23 15.18 0.97
50–60 1.52 1.54 2.00 1.18 0.19 12.77 0.80

Fig. 4. Boxplot of the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD) values at different soil layers. The horizontal lines represent the minimum, maximum, and median
values of the RSBD for each soil layer, respectively. The bottom and top of the box represent the 25th (Q1) and 75th (Q3) percentiles, respectively.

Two evaluation standards, AE and RMSE/ASE were therefore used. The

Table 2
AE evaluation standard predicted values of the RSBD were over­
Semi-variance analysis of the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD).
estimated at 0–10 cm, 20–30 cm, and 50–60 cm, while the predicted
Soil depths Optimal C0/(C0＋C)/ A0/m R2 RSS values for other soil depths were underestimated. The RMSE/ASE eval­
/cm model %
uation standard predicted values of the RSBD that were underestimated
0–10 Spherical 3.04 66.00 0.69 5.43*10- at 10–20 cm and 40–50 cm, while the predicted values were over­
4
estimated for other soil depths. Comparing the two evaluation results,
10–20 Gaussian 0.26 75.00 0.81 8.03*10-
4 we found that the accuracy of the spatial results was consistent at all
20–30 Gaussian 0.21 66.00 0.58 4.77*10- depths except 30–40 cm. The predicted values of RSBD can therefore be
4
adjusted according to the evaluation standards and interpolation results.
30–40 Gaussian 0.27 90.00 0.67 2.92*10-
4

40–50 Spherical 0.24 107.00 0.58 5.03*10- 3.4. Spatial distribution pattern of RSBD
4

50–60 Gaussian 0.03 89.00 0.75 7.86*10- The spatial interpolate results of the RSBD by using the ordinary
4
kriging method are showed in Fig. 5. The spatial distribution of the
C0 represents Nugget, C0 + C represents Sill, and C0/(C0＋C) represents the RSBD in different soil layers showed a striped and patchy pattern, with
spatial heterogeneity ratios, %; A0 represents Range, m, R2 represents the co­ stripes dominating on the slope and patches dominating on the platform.
efficient of determination, and RSS represents the residual sum of squares. The RSBD was generally higher on the platform than the slope. How­
ever, there were some significant differences in the spatial distribution
pattern of the RSBD in the different soil layers. The boundary between
Table 3
the sunny slope and shady slope was considered the dividing line (Fig. 3
Cross-validation results of ordinary kriging interpolation for the reconstructed
(c)), the RSBD at 0–10 cm on sunny slope was higher than on the shady
soil bulk density (RSBD).
slope, and showed higher values in the southwest and lower values in
Soil depths /cm AE MAE RMSE ASE
the northeast, and the direction of stronger spatial variability was the
0–10 − 0.0014 0.1415 0.1759 0.1805 “Southwest ↔ Northeast”. The RSBD at 10–20 cm showed a radial dis­
10–20 0.0037 0.1609 0.1895 0.1806 tribution when the top platform was taken as the central point, while the
20–30 − 0.0014 0.1634 0.1926 0.2169
spatial differentiation law was not obvious. If the boundary between the
30–40 0.0049 0.1714 0.1968 0.2198
40–50 0.0142 0.2140 0.2401 0.2259 sunny slope and shady slope is still taken as the dividing line at 20–30
50–60 − 0.0030 0.1414 0.1817 0.1943 cm and 30–40 cm, the RSBD on shady slope was higher than on the
AE, average error; MAE, mean absolute error; RMSE, root mean square error;
sunny slope and showed lower values in the southwest and higher values
ASE, average standard error. in the northeast, and the same direction of strong spatial variability as
that observed in the 0–10 cm soil layer. At the depths of 40–50 cm and

5
Y. Huang et al.
Fig. 5. Spatial distribution maps of the reconstructed soil bulk density (RSBD) at different soil depths using the ordinary kriging method. (a) 0–10 cm, (b) 10–20 cm,
(c) 20–30 cm, (d) 30–40 cm, (e) 40–50 cm, and (f) 50–60 cm.
50–60 cm, the spatial distribution of the RSBD showed a striped pattern
in which the RSBD gradually increased from west to east, and the di­
rection of stronger spatial variability was the “East ↔ West”.
6
Catena 199 (2021) 105116
3.5. Spatial variation laws of RSBD
3.5.1. RSBD on the slope and platform
The relationships between RSBD and soil depths on the slope and
platform are shown in Fig. 6 (a). The relationship between the RSBD and
soil depths on the slope was y = 0.0105x2 − 0.0312x + 1.2108, R2 =
Y. Huang et al. Catena 199 (2021) 105116

Fig. 6. Relationships between RSBD and soil depths (a); the green and blue trendlines represent soil sampling points located on the slope and platform, respectively.
Differences of the RSBD at different soil layers of the slope and platform (b); the green and blue histograms represent soil sampling points located on the slope and
platform, respectively; the different letters indicate significant at P < 0.05. RSBD, reconstructed soil bulk density. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

0.9382, which it was y = -0.0167x2 + 0.1767x + 1.124, R2 = 0.9896 on
the platform. These results indicated that the RSBD generally increased
on both the slope and the platform as soil depths increased. The trend by
which the RSBD changed on the slope showed a concave parabola and
the minimum value was 1.18 g/cm3. The trend by which the RSBD
changed on the platform showed a convex parabola and the maximum
value was 1.59 g/cm3. The RSBD on the platform was greater than on the
slope, and it was designed to ensure the stability of the dump (Bai and
Yun, 2008). No significantly difference was observed between the RSBD
on the slope and the platform in the 0–10 cm soil layer (Fig. 6 (b)), but
this was significantly different in the other soil layers (P < 0.05).
3.5.2. RSBD on the different slope aspects
The relationships between RSBD and soil depths on the shady slope
and sunny slope are shown in Fig. 7 (a). The relationship between RSBD
and soil depths on the shady slope was y = 0.0063x2 − 0.0174x +
1.3303, R2 = 0.9534, while it was y = -0.0237x2 + 0.2522x + 0.9394,
R2 = 0.9940 on the sunny slope. These results showed that the RSBD
increased on both slope types as the soil depth increased. The trend by
which the RSBD changed on the shady slope showed a convex parabola
and the maximum value was 1.61 g/cm3. The trend by which the RSBD
changed on the sunny slope was a concave parabola and the minimum
value was 1.31 g/cm3. The RSBD of the shady slope was lower than that
of the sunny slope at 0–10 cm, while the opposite was observed at 10–60
cm. The RSBD of the shady slope was closest to that of the sunny slope at
10–20 cm. The RSBD was significantly different between the shady slope
and the sunny slope at depths of 30–40 cm and 40–50 cm (P < 0.05)
(Fig. 7 (b)), which may have been caused by differences in the vegeta­
tion cover types (Pan et al., 2017; Yuan et al., 2018).
3.5.3. RSBD on the different vegetation cover types
The relationships between RSBD and soil depths in reclaimed land
covered with mixed forest, pure forest and non-forest are shown in Fig. 8
(a). The relationship between RSBD and soil depths in the mixed forest
land was y = -0.0127x2 + 0.1542x + 1.0786, R2 = 0.9962, it was y =
-0.0179x2 + 0.2022x + 1.0367, R2 = 0.9853 in the pure forest land,
while it was y = 0.0075x2 − 0.0306x + 1.3311, R2 = 0.9049 in the non-
forest land. These results showed that the RSBD increased gradually in
all three vegetation types as the soil depth increased. The RSBD of the
mixed forest land and pure forest land showed convex parabolas, and the
maximum values were 1.55 g/cm3 and 1.61 g/cm3, respectively. The
trend by which the RSBD changed in the non-forest land was a concave
parabola, and the minimum value was 1.30 g/cm3. The highest value for
the RSBD at 0–10 cm was observed in the non-forest land, followed by
that in the pure forest land and in the mixed forest land. The highest
value for the RSBD at 10–60 cm was observed in the pure forest land,
followed by that in the mixed forest land and in the non-forest land. The
RSBD of pure forest land and non-forest land were significantly different
in the soil layers of 30–40 cm, 40–50 cm and 50–60 cm (P < 0.05) (Fig. 8
(b)), but no significant difference in the RSBD was observed in the other

Fig. 7. Relationships between RSBD and soil depths (a); the orange and yellow trendlines represent soil sampling points located on the shady slope and the sunny
slope, respectively. Differences of the RSBD at different soil layers of the shady slope and the sunny slope (b); the orange and yellow histograms represent soil
sampling points located on the shady slope and sunny slope, respectively; the different letters indicate significant at P < 0.05. RSBD, reconstructed soil bulk density.
(For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

7
Y. Huang et al.
Fig. 8. Relationships between RSBD and soil depths (a); the green, blue, and orange trendlines represent soil sampling points located on the mixed forest land, pure
forest land, and non-forest land, respectively. Differences of the RSBD at different soil layers of the mixed forest land, pure forest land, and non-forest land (b); the
green, blue, and orange histograms represent soil sampling points located on the mixed forest land, pure forest land, and non-forest land, respectively; the different
letters indicate significant at P < 0.05. RSBD, reconstructed soil bulk density. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred
to the web version of this article.)
soil layers (P > 0.05), indicating that the deeper soil remains in a rela­
tively original state while the upper soil is more vulnerable to distur­
bance by external processes, decreasing the differences in the RSBD of
the upper layers (Li et al., 2019).
4. Discussions
4.1. Spatial distribution characteristics of RSBD
In the natural ecosystem, structural factors such as climate, topog­
raphy, and the vegetation in river basin will significantly affect the
spatial variability of the soil (Sanches et al., 2020; Wang and Franz,
2015; Yu et al., 2019). The dumps formed by opencast mining and
reclamation activities belong to an artificial-natural composite
ecosystem. In the early stages of reclamation, human activities are an
important factor affecting the spatial variability of soil (Wang et al.,
2019), but environmental factors continuously adjust the soil attributes
over time, further affecting the spatial distribution characteristics of the
soil. The soil bulk density gradually decreased following opencast coal
mine reclamation while the amount of organic matter and total nitrogen
in the soil gradually increased, and it took approximately 10 years for
the disturbed soil to approach the original levels (Yuan et al., 2018). The
south dump in the Pingshuo mining area has undergone 27 years of
natural recovery following reclamation. If the impact of human activ­
ities is not considered, climatic conditions such as rainfall and temper­
ature generally have the same effect on the small scale, meaning that
topography and vegetation are the main factors affecting the spatial
variability of the reclaimed soil (Lin et al., 2020). We used cross-
validation to test the prediction results, and found that the ordinary
Kriging interpolation could accurately predict the spatial distribution
pattern of RSBD (Wang et al., 2001).
Previously, Wang et al. (2019) applied multi-fractal theory to study
the spatial variability of soil properties in layers at 0–20 cm and 20–40
cm in the inner dump of the Pingshuo mining area, and found that
mining and dumping activities had a significant effect on the hetero­
geneity of the sand and clay contents, while the spatial variability of the
silt content, organic matter and total nitrogen was relatively low. The
heterogeneity of the sand and clay contents may affect the spatial dis­
tribution pattern of the RSBD in the south dump. The annual precipi­
tation and potential evapotranspiration in the area are 428–449 mm and
1787–2598 mm, respectively. Under arid climate conditions, the lack of
surface water runoff from the platform meant the RSBD was greater on
the platform than on the slope. The topographic map (Fig. 3 (b))
8
Catena 199 (2021) 105116
indicates that the angle of the shady slopes is smaller than that of the
sunny slope, meaning that there is a lack of surface water runoff and a
lower possibility of soil erosion on the shady slope. Therefore, the RSBD
was greater on the shady slope than the sunny slope. In the non-forest
land, the vegetation cover was mostly composed of grassland, Chinese
pine (dead), Caragana × Acacia (dead), and surface water runoff and soil
erosion was therefore more likely to occur on the non-forest land than
pure forest land or mixed forest land, meaning that the RSBD is rela­
tively lower on the non-forest land. An interesting phenomenon is that
the RSBD was smaller on the shady slope than the sunny slopes at 0–10
cm, and the RSBD of the pure forest land and the mixed forest land was
smaller than that of the non-forest land, which may be a result of the
regulation by vegetation or the influence of organic matter decompo­
sition (Lu et al., 2015; Fest et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2016; Pan et al.,
2017), because we found that the humus layer of shady slope was 5–10
cm and it was<5 cm on the sunny slope. Finally, we found that the unary
quadratic regression equations can accurately represent the spatial
variation laws of RSBD under different site conditions, slope aspects, and
vegetation cover types.
4.2. Measures of improving RSBD
In order to further improve the land reclamation technology for use
in similar ecosystems, the following suggestions are put forward on the
basis of this research: (i) Both engineering measures and vegetation
measures should be emphasized, starting with rebuilding the landform
while imitating the design of the natural landform, so as to make the
reconstructed land landscape more harmonious and stable (Alan, 2008;
Schor, 2008). For example, according to the natural landform charac­
teristics of the loess area (Jing, 2014; Zhang et al., 2016), building dams
and terraces on slopes and greening the slopes of the ridges may be
advantageous in carrying out reclamation work. (ii) Increasing or
reducing the number of platforms between the slopes, adjusting the
slope angle to shape the micro-topography, or using land use methods
(deep tillage) to adjust the RSBD of the deeper soil layers (Hu and
Chong, 1999) by reducing the angle of shady slopes and increasing the
angle of sunny slopes, thereby reducing the effect of gravity on the RSBD
of the shady slopes and of sunlight on the evaporation of soil moisture
from sunny slopes, indirectly adjusting the RSBD. (iii) Adjusting the
mode of vegetation configuration to increase the amount of particular
types of vegetation coverage, especially arbors and shrubs, using plants
such as Chinese pine × Acacia, Acacia × Caragana to mutually adjust the
balance between vegetation and soil, thereby controlling soil erosion
Y. Huang et al.
and altering the RSBD. The above suggestions are not only applicable to
land that has not been reclaimed, but are also useful in the further
optimization of reclaimed land. However, the specific engineering
technical standards require further exploration.
5. Conclusions
Controlling and adjusting the RSBD is one of the challenges to land
reclamation in artificially disturbed ecosystems. Exploring the spatial
distribution characteristics of the RSBD is the best starting point in
analyzing and improving reclamation technology. Through geo­
statistical spatial interpolation and multiple regression analysis, the
spatial distribution pattern and variation trends of the RSBD on
reclaimed land in the loess area of China were quantified. Without
considering the influence of human activities, the topography (platform,
slope, and slope aspects), vegetation coverage, heterogeneity of the soil
particle size distribution, and the possibility of soil erosion affect the
spatial variability of RSBD. The boundary between the sunny slope and
the shady slope was taken as the dividing line for the RSBD, the spatial
distribution whereof was mainly striped and patchy. The RSBD was
higher on the sunny slope than on the shady slope at 0–10 cm, while the
opposite was true at 20–40 cm. Additionally, the RSBD was observed to
increase from west to east at 40–60 cm, and the direction of strong
spatial variability also gradually changed from “ Southwest ↔ Northeast
” to “ West ↔ East ”. The unary quadratic regression equations were
found to accurately represent the RSBD in different soil layers (R2 >
0.90). Measures that use engineering and vegetation to improve the
RSBD should therefore be adjusted according to the specific landscape
and topography, and the specific technical standards need to be further
explored.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foun­
dation of China (U1810107, 41701607, 41571508), and the Funda­
mental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (2-9-2018-
025, 2-9-2019-307). We acknowledge Gubai Luo, Shufei Wang, and
Xinyu Kuang for their help with the field and laboratory work.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105116.
References
Alan, B., 2008. Designing the reclaimed landscape. Taylor & Francis, London & New
York.
Bai, Z.K., Yun, W.J., 2008. A case study on Pingshuo mining area: land rehabilitation and
reutilization in mining districts. Resour. Ind. 10 (05), 32–37.
Bai, Z.K., Zhou, W., Wang, J.M., Zhao, Z.Q., Cao, Y.G., Zhou, Y., 2018. Rethink on
ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation of mining areas. China Land Sci. 32 (11),
1–9.
Cambardella, C.A., Moorman, T.B., Novak, J.M., Parkin, T.B., Karlen, D.L., Turcon, R.F.,
Konopka, A.E., 1994. Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58 (05), 1501–1511.
Cao, Y.G., Bai, Z.K., Zhang, G.J., Zhou, W., Wang, J.M., Yu, Q.F., Du, Z.Z., 2013. Soil
quality of surface reclaimed farmland in large open-cast mining area of Shanxi
province. J. Agro-Environ. Sci. 32 (12), 2422–2428.
Cao, Y.G., Wang, J.M., Bai, Z.K., Zhou, W., Zhao, Z.Q., Ding, X., Li, Y.N., 2015.
Differentiation and mechanisms on physical properties of reconstructed soils on
open-cast mine dump of loess area. Environ. Earth Sci. 74 (08), 6367–6380.
9
Catena 199 (2021) 105116
Cao, Y.G., Zhou, W., Bai, Z.K., Wang, J.M., Zhang, X.R., 2016. Differentiations in
nutrients of reconstructed soils on open-cast mine dump of Loess Area. Fresen.
Environ. Bull. 25 (07), 2331–2342.
Cao, Y.G., Dallimer, M., Stringer, L.C., Bai, Z.K., Siu, Y.L., 2018. Land expropriation
compensation among multiple stakeholders in a mining area: Explaining “skeleton
house” compensation. Land Use Policy 74, 97–110.
Chai, H., He, N.P., 2016. Evaluation of soil bulk density in Chinese terrestrial ecosystems
for determination of soil carbon storage on a regional scale. Acta Ecol. Sin. 36 (13),
3903–3910.
Geng, R., Zhang, G.H., Li, Z.W., Wang, H., Luan, L.L., 2014. Spatial variation of soil bulk
density of ephemeral gullies in hilly area of Losse Plateau. J. Soil Water Conserv. 28
(04), 257–262.
Duan, L., Li, Z., Xie, H., Li, Z., Zhang, L., Zhou, Q., 2020. Large-scale spatial variability of
eight soil chemical properties within paddy fields. Catena 188.
Fest, B., Wardlaw, T., Livesley, S.J., Duff, T.J., Arndt, S.K., 2015. Changes in soil moisture
drive soil methane uptake along a fire regeneration chronosequence in a eucalypt
forest landscape. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 4250–4264.
Hu, Z.Q., Chong, S.K., 1999. Study on improvement of physical properties of reclaimed
soil by deep-plowing. Chinese J. Soil Sci. 30 (06), 248–250+264.
Huang, Y.H., Kuang, X.Y., Cao, Y.G., Bai, Z.K., 2018. The soil chemical properties of
reclaimed land in an arid grassland dump in an opencast mining area in China. RSC
Adv. 8, 41499–41508.
Huang, Y.H., Kuang, X.Y., Cao, Y.G., Bai, Z.K., 2019. Comparison of soil physical
properties between reclaimed land and undamaged land in Grass-land opencast
mining area. J. Ecol. Rur. Environ. 35 (7), 940–946.
Jacinthe, P.A., Lal, R., 2006. Spatial variability of soil properties and trace gas fluxes in
reclaimed mine land of southeastern Ohio. Geoderma 136 (3–4), 598–608.
Jing, M., 2014. Evolution, water and soil response and optimization of landform
construction in Giant opencast coal mine on Loess area. China University of
Geosciences, Beijing.
Kuklová, M., Kukla, J., Hniličková, H., Hnilička, F., Pivková, I., 2020. Spatial variability
of nutrients in soils and plants of forest ecosystems located near the highway.
Environ. Monit. Assess. 192 (8) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08481-1.
Li, S., Li, Q.Q., Wang, C.Q., Li, B., Gao, X.S., Li, Y.D., Wu, D.Y., 2019. Spatial variability
of soil bulk density and its controlling factors in an agricultural intensive area of
Chengdu Plain, Southwest China. J. Integr. Agric. 18 (02), 290–300.
Lin, S., He, K.N., Wang, L., Li, Y.H., Chen, Q., Wang, Q.L., Huang, S.H., 2020. Soil
miosture surplus and loss of typical forestland in loess alpine area by the
geostatistical analyst method. Acta Ecol. Sin. 40 (02), 728–737.
Lu, L., Zhao, Y.X., Hu, L.F., Li, W.X., Shi, L., Ren, Y.Y., Han, Y.L., He, X.H., 2015. Effects
of hippophae rhamnoides plantation on soil bulk density, porosity and moisture
capacity in the Arsenic Sandstone Area of Inner Mongolia. J. Desert Res. 35,
1171–1176.
Marchant, B.P., Lark, R.M., 2007. Robust estimation of the variogram by residual
maximum likelihood. Geoderma 140 (01), 62–72.
Marchant, B.P., Saby, N.P.A., Lark, R.M., Bellamyc, P.H., Jolivet, C.C., Arrouaysb, D.,
2010. Robust analysis of soil properties at the national scale: cadmium content of
French soils. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 61 (01), 144–152.
Pan, J., Bai, Z.K., Cao, Y.G., Zhou, W., Wang, J.M., 2017. Influence of soil physical
properties and vegetation coverage at different slope aspects in a re-claimed dump.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 24 (30), 23953–23965.
Pietrzykowski, M., 2014. Soil quality index as a tool for Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris)
monoculture conversion planning on afforested, reclaimed mine land. J. Forest. Res.
25 (1), 63–74.
Rosemary, F., Vitharana, U.W.A., Indraratne, S.P., Weerasooriya, R., Mishra, U.N., 2017.
Exploring the spatial variability of soil properties in an Alfisol soil catena. Catena
150, 53–61.
Sanches, G.M., Magalhaes, P.S.G., Luciano, A.C.D., Camargo, L.A., Franco, H.C.J., 2020.
Comprehensive assessment of spatial soil variability related to topographic
parameters in sugarcane fields. Geoderma 362.
Schor, H.J., Gray, D.H., 2008. Landforming: An environmental approach to hillside
development, mine reclamation and watershed restoration. Landscape Archit. 98
(01), 110–111.
Sequeira, C.H., Wills, S.A., Seybold, C.A., West, L.T., 2014. Predicting soil bulk density
for incomplete databases. Geoderma 213 (01), 64–73.
Shi, Z., Li, Y., 2006. Application of Geostatistics in Soil Science. China Agriculture Press,
Beijing.
Song, F.F., Xu, M.G., Duan, Y.H., Cai, Z.J., Wen, S.L., Chen, X.N., Shi, W.Q., Colinet, G.,
2020. Spatial variability of soil properties in red soil and its implications for site-
specific fertilizer management. J. Integr. Agric. 19, 2313–2325.
Sun, G.J., Li, W.H., Zhu, C.G., Yang, Y.H., Wang, F., 2016. Spatial variation analysis of
topsoil bulk density in the Yili Valley, Xinjiang. Resour. Sci. 38 (07), 1222–1228.
Suuster, E., Ritz, C., Roostalu, H., Reintam, E., Kõlli, R., Astover, A., 2011. Soil bulk
density pedotransfer functions of the humus horizon in arable soils. Geoderma 163
(1–2), 74–82.
Wang, F.J., Wang, J.M., Wang, Y., 2019. Using multi-fractal and joint multi-fractal
methods to characterize spatial variability of reconstructed soil properties in an
opencast coal-mine dump in the Loess area of China. Catena 182, 104111.
Wang, T., Franz, T.E., 2015. Field observations of regional controls of soil hydraulic
properties on soil moisture spatial variability in different climate zones. Vadose Zone
J. 14.
Wang, J.M., Liu, W.H., Yang, R.X., Zhang, L., Ma, J.J., 2013. Assessment of the potential
ecological risk of heavy metals in reclaimed soils at an opencast coal mine. Disaster
Adv. 6 (03), 366–377.
Y. Huang et al.
Wang, J.M., Zhang, M., Bai, Z.K., Yang, R.X., Guo, L.L., 2014a. Multi-fractal
characteristics of reconstructed soil particle in opencast coal mine dump in loess
area. Transactions of the CSAE 30 (04), 230–238.
Wang, S.Q., Zhu, S.L., Zhou, C.H., 2001. Characteristics of spatial variability of soil
thickness in China. Geogr. Res. 20 (02), 161–169.
Wang, Y.Q., Shao, M.A., Liu, Z.P., Zhang, C.C., 2014b. Prediction of bulk density of soils
in the Loess Plateau region of China. Surv. Geophys. 35 (02), 395–413.
Wójcik - Leń, J., Postek, P., Stręk, Ż., Leń, P., 2020. Proposed algorithm for the
identification of land for consolidation with regard to spatial variability of soil
quality. Land Use Policy 94, 104570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landusepol.2020.104570.
Xu, Y.M., Smith, S.E., Grunwald, S., Abd-Elrahman, A., Wani, S.P., 2017. Evaluating the
effect of remote sensing image spatial resolution on soil exchangeable potassium
prediction models in smallholder farm settings. J. Environ. Manage. 200, 423–433.
Yang, Q.Y., Luo, W.Q., Jiang, Z.C., Li, W.J., Yuan, D.X., 2016. Improve the prediction of
soil bulk density by corkiging with predicted soil water content as auxiliary. J. Soils
Sediments 16, 77–84.
Yuan, Y., Zhao, Z.Q., Niu, S.Y., Li, X.Z., Wang, Y.Y., Bai, Z.K., 2018. Reclamation
promotes the succession of the soil and vegetation in opencast coal mine: a case
10
Catena 199 (2021) 105116
study from Robinia pseudoacacia reclaimed forests, Pingshuo mine, China. Catena
165, 72–79.
Yu, D., Jia, X.X., Huang, L.M., Shao, M.A., Wang, J., 2019. Spatial variation of soil bulk
density in different soil layers in the loess area and simulation. Acta Pedol. Sin. 56
(01), 55–64.
Zhang, C., Chen, H.S., Zhang, W., Mie, Y.P., Ye, Y.Y., Wang, K.L., 2014. Spatial variation
characteristics of surface soil water content, bulk density and saturated hydraulic
conductivity on Karst slopes. Chinese J. Appl. Ecol. 25 (06), 1585–1591.
Zhang, C.M., Wang, G.X., Long, X.J., Li, Y.S., 2007. Study on spatial heterogeneity of soil
bulk density of typical deteriorated minor watershed in Alpine Meadow. Journal of
Henan Agricultural Ences 6, 90–95.
Zhang, H.W., Ma, J.Y., Zhang, Z.W., Sun, T., Lyu, G.H., 2009. Utilization of and research
on geostatistics in soil science. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences) 45
(6), 14–20+27.
Zhang, L., Wang, J.M., Liu, T., 2016. Landscape reconstruction and recreation of
damaged land in opencast coal mine: A review. Adv. Earth Sci. 31 (12), 1235–1246.
Zheng, J.Y., Shao, M.A., Zhang, X.C., 2004. Spatial variation of surface soils bulk density
and saturated hydraulic conductivity on slope in Loess Region. J. Soil Water
Conserv. 18 (03), 53–56.