Northern circumpolar soil database and derived soil maps in different classification systems

Transcription

1 Symposium no. 21 Paper no. 838 Presentation: oral Northern circumpolar soil database and derived soil maps in different classification systems GORYACHKIN Sergey (1), STOLBOVOI Vladimir (2), TARNOCAI Charles (3), KIMBLE John (4), BROLL Gabriele (5), JAKOBSEN Bjarne (6), MONTANARELLA Luca (7), NAUMOV Evgeny (8), ARNOLDUSSEN Arnold (9), LACELLE Barbara (3) and WALTMAN Sharon (4) (1) Institute of Geography, Rus. Ac. Sci., Staromonetny 29, , Moscow, Russia (2) International Institute of Applied System Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria (3) Agriculture Canada, K.W.Neatby Build., 960 Carling Av., Ottawa K1A OC6, Canada (4) National Soil Survey Center, NRCS-USDA, MS 34, Lincoln, NE , USA (5) Univ. Muenster, Inst. Landsc. Ecol., Robert Koch Str. 26, Muenster 48149, Germany (6) Inst. Geography, Un. Copenh, Oester Voldagde 10, DK-1350, Copenhagen, Denmark (7) European Commission, European Soil Bureau, T.P. 280, I Ispra, Italy (8) Dokuchaev Soil Institute, Pyzhevsky 7, , Moscow, Russia (9) Norwegian Inst. of Land Inventory, Radhuspl, 29, PB 115, N-1430, Ås, Norway Abstract One of the largest projects on compiling of soil database and map of East and West Hemispheres has been completed. This database is named The Northern Circumpolar Soil Database (NCSD) and encompasses territories of the USA, Canada, Greenland, Northern Europe, Russia, Mongolia and East Kazakhstan. The NSCD was derived from numerous sources, but primarily national soil maps that used different classification systems and legends. The NCSD consists of both polygon and pedon database portions. A thorough correlation of all relevant classification systems (WRB, US, Canadian and Russian) was made. Using this database a set of four Northern Circumpolar Soil Maps was generated-in WRB, Soil Taxonomy, Canadian and Russian classification systems. The work on the development of the NCSD showed advantages and disadvantages of these classification systems. These maps are a solid basis for exchange of information on use of soil resources, on management of environmental problems, global modeling etc. Keywords: circumpolar soil database, soil maps, correlation, classification systems Introduction Last decades the soil science turns to ecological problems besides priorities in agriculture. One of the most important problems of the new century is the problem of global climate change and its consequences to mankind. Many climatic scenarios presume that high latitudes would be the place with pronounced climatic warming (Houghton, 1997). Northern regions are very significant also because of tremendous 838-1

2 pool of soil carbon here (Post et al., 1982). But not only climate change is essential for soils of the North. Other global processes as contamination of atmosphere and ocean and shift of oil and natural gas mining to the north are important factors of the change of soils of the arctic and boreal regions of the world. However, traditionally for soil science and soil surveys of different countries soils of extreme ecosystems were mostly studied by reconnaissance methods and remote sensing data than systematic soil surveys. And the soil information on the high latitudes gathered during last decades changed the earlier concepts. That is why in 1992 the group of specialists in northern soils from different countries-usa (R. Arnold, J. Kimble, R. Ahrens, C.-L. Ping), Canada (C. Tarnocai, S. Smith), Denmark (B. Jakobsen), Germany (G. Broll) and Russia (I. Sokolov, V. Targulian, E. Naumov, D. Gilichinsky) decided to develop the new Northern Circumpolar Soil Database (NCSD) and series of maps. Mainly for preparing of the NCSD the Cryosol Working Group were organized both at International Society of Soil Science (ISSS, now IUSS) and International Permafrost Association (IPA). The purpose of the database was to build links between different classification systems of northern countries and to supply users with the soil information of different kind. It was also good test area for classification systems recently having included Cryosol and Gelisol orders (Soil Taxonomy, WRB). In 1999 the European Soil Bureau with the soil data joint the NCSD. It became the ambitious project like the Soil map of the World (FAO/UNESCO, 1977) and SOTER. Materials and Methods The main sources for the NCSD were national soil maps and databases. As the part of IPA the Cryosol working group included in the NCSD all permafrost-affected soil covers (except mountains) and adjacent areas of the Northern Hemisphere-the most part of Russia, East Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Greenland, Canada and Alaska, USA. Not every country had the good soil maps or databases. Some of them were developed during the work on the NCSD-Greenland (Jakobsen and Eiby, 1997) and Iceland (Arnalds and Gretarsson, 2001), and some of them do not exist yet on national level (Finland, Sweden and most part of Norway). The EU Soil database were taken for these countries (European Soil Bureau, 1999). The part of STATSGO system were taken for Alaska, US (US Soil Conservation Service, 1994), the Soil Organic carbon database of Canada (Tarnocai and Lacelle, 1996) were taken for Canada-both databases are based on soil maps of 1:1,000,000 Scale. The national soil map of Russian Federation (Fridland, 1988) and the more recent map of North East Asia (Naumov, 1993), both having scale of 1:2,500,000 were digitized. The Soil map of Mongolia, scale 1:3,000,000 (Dorzhgotov and Nogina, 1990) and the portion of the Soil map of Kazakh SSR, scale 1:2,500,000 (Uspanov, 1976) for East Kazakhstan were also digitized. The NCSD consists of polygon and pedon databases for every country or the group of countries (e.g. EU database for Scandinavia). All the databases were developed with the help of ArcView 3.X, ArcInfo 7.2 UNIX and MSExcel tools. The databases a little bit different but all of them have dominant soil (Soil1) for every polygon and the percentage of this soil in the polygon. Besides Soil1, the subdominant soils and their percentage were included into every database-soil 2, Soil 3, etc. Pedon databases include georeferenced soil profiles with main soil characteristics for every soil horizontexture, ph, organic matter content, cation exchange capacity, several physical 838-2

3 parameters. West European and Russian soils are characterized by the standard set of EU database, versus soils of Alaska and Canada are characterized by national standards. Initially, soil names in polygon database were in different classification systems- Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Stuff, 1999) was used for US and Greenland, Canadian System (Soil Classification Working Group, 1998)-for Canada, WRB (FAO/ISRIC/ISSS, 1998)-for West Europe, Russian names-for Russia, Mongolia and Kazakhstan. Then the thorough correlation mainly on the subgroup level was done for every soil unit. For that purpose additional information was used, as one system can have no data on the parameter that is diagnostic for another. For example, Russian names usually do not show the depth of the permafrost, and that is crucial for Soil Taxonomy, WRB and Canadian system. Otherwise, US and Canadian systems take into account calcite content on very low level, and this feature is very important for WRB and Russian system. So, additional information from geocryological sources (permafrost depth), climatic data (for Soil Taxonomy suborders) and other databases (calcite content, drainage class) were applied for thorough correlation of different systems. As a result of this work all the soil names in the NCSD are in 4 classification systems-wrb, Soil Taxonomy, Canadian and Russian. Different soil maps can be produced from this database. Unfortunately, it is technically impossible to produce the Circumpolar Soil map on the subgroup level, as it is not enough colors to print and then differ by human eye. So, we produce a set of maps on the order level (unit level for WRB), and set of maps on subgroup level for Gelisol/Cryosol orders. Results and Discussion The Circumpolar soil map in WRB system is shown in Figure 1. This map illustrates the climatic soil zonality, discovered in XIX century by V.V.Dokuchaev. From the north to the south it is possible to see the zones of Cryosols (blue), then the areas of Cambisols (brown), Podzols (pink) and Albeluvisols/Luvisols (light green), the difference between which is related mostly to parent material, and then climate-induced set of Chernozems (dark green), Kastanozems (green) and Calcisols (light yellow). The areas of Histosols (dark brown) and Gleysols (violet) are related to imperfectly drained Hudson and West Siberian lowlands, and the areas of Andosols (dark red) are strongly limited by the volcanic activity (Iceland, Alaska and Kamchatka Peninsulas). Other soil units (Fluvisols, Arenosols, Leptosols, Solonetz, e tc.) have small areas. Figure 1 Northern circumpolar soil map in WRB system (see text)

4 The difference of soil maps in various classification systems is illustrated by set of soil maps of the northern part of Russia (Figures 2-5). The most diverse pattern is on the soil map in Russian system (Figure 2). The difference between this map and the other ones (Figures 3-5) is most pronounced in the northern latitudes, where permafrostaffected soils are widespread, as the rest of the Russian soil cover has the similar pattern in all the soil classification systems (Figures 2-5). The special order of permafrostaffected soils in the Russian soil classification system is named Cryozems (Shishov et al., 2001). Cryozems are permafrost-affected, cryoturbated soils without prominent features of any other pedogenic process. The areas of Cryozems (blue color) are very limited in the northern latitudes, as most of permafrost-affected soils in Russia have pronounced redox features and are correlated as Gleyzems (violet). Within permafrost areas the orders of Peat (dark brown), Metamorphic (brown), Al-Fe-humic (pink) and Organic-accumulative soils (red brown) which are close to WRB units of Histosols, Cambisols, Podzols and the group of soils with mucky horizons (not a special unit in WRB) are also widespread. Figure 2 Soil map of Northern Russia in Russian classification system. The second most detailed pattern of soil cover is on the soil map in WRB system (Figure 3). It has large areas of Cryosol unit including the Russian Cryozem order and all the permafrost-affected soils with gleyic, spodic and cambic features. However, the large areas of Histosols in the northern latitudes are shown on this map, as according to WRB the peat soils with permafrost are Histosols. As for Soil maps in the US Soil Taxonomy (Figure 4) and in the Canadian classification system (Figure 5) they are with lower diversity of soil cover because of less number of orders than WRB and Russian system. The Soil Taxonomy has no special orders of soils with redox features (Gleysols) and alkaline clay-differentiated 838-4

5 soils (Solonetz) but it has soil orders of Mollisols and Alfisols that are much wider than their analogues in WRB, Russian and Canadian systems. That is why there are wider areas of Inceptisols (brown) (Aquepts are the analogue of Gleysols), Alfisols (light green) and Mollisols (dark green). Canadian classification system has Solonetz and Gleysol orders but it has not Andosols and a very wide order of Brunisols, including a lot of soils with mollic (Melanic Brunisols) and umbric (Sombric Brunisols) horizons. That is why the Brunisols (brown color) on the map in Canadian systems are very widespread. As for permafrost-affected soils the areas of both Gelisols of the Soil Taxonomy and Cryosols of Canadian system are very close, as the diagnostic criteria for these orders are similar. Figure 3 Soil map of Northern Russia in WRB system

6 Figure 4 Soil map of Northern Russia in Soil Taxonomy (2 nd edition). Figure 5 Soil map of Northern Russia in Canadian Soil Classification system. But the NCSD allows creating the maps on the lower classification levels. And it is shown on the soil map of Russia for permafrost-affected soils in WRB system (Figure 6) and Soil Taxonomy (Figure 7), that both of these systems reflect the real diversity of northern soils very good on the lower classification levels (the 3 rd -4 th subunit level of WRB and subgroup level of the Soil Taxonomy)

7 Figure 6 Cryosols, Gelic and Cryic subunits of Russia in WRB system. Figure 7 Gelisols of Russia at Subgroup level of Soil Taxonomy (2 nd edition). Unfortunately, it is impossible to illustrate all the parts of NCSD because of lack of space in this paper, but our general analysis lets us to make the conclusion that all classification systems reflect rather adequately the soil covers of all northern countries. The only place where national systems (Russian and especially Canadian one) do not 838-7

8 work well is the southern parts of Mongolia and East Kazakhstan with large areas of arid soils, absent in Russia and Canada. So, most of soils of the North have the same understanding of their genesis and, consequently, the similar place in different classification systems, in spite of the fact that the names and classification levels can be different (e.g. WRB Podzols ~ US Spodosols ~ Canadian Podzols ~ Russian Al-Fe-humic soils, but part of Russian Al-Fehumic soils are WRB and Canadian Cryosols, as they have permafrost within 1 m). At the same time, the transitional soils, for example, having both cambic and spodic features, in one classification are correlated as Al-Fe-humic soils (Russian podburs), but in other ones-as soils with metamorphic Bm or Bw horizon (US Dystrocryepts, or Canadian Dystric Brunisols). As it was said earlier WRB and Russian classification pay much more attention if the soils are calcareous or not than US and Canadian systems. As for permafrost-affected soils, WRB is in the middle of the Russian and US/Canadian approaches. One more problem elucidated by this work is the usage of the same term for differently defined soils or horizons in different systems-podzols, mollic, sombric, etc. But in spite of all the named problems, the soil maps produced from NCSD in different classification systems have much in common and can be widely used. These maps in four classification systems are a solid basis for exchange of information on use of soil resources, on management of environmental problems, global modeling etc. The large number of users not involved in problems of soil classifications can use any of this map and the data from Northern Circumpolar Soil Database. Conclusions 1. The Northern Circumpolar Soil Database encompassing the territories of the northern USA, Canada, Greenland, Northern Europe, Russia, Mongolia and East Kazakhstan derived from numerous sources was developed. 2. Using this database a set of four Northern Circumpolar Soil Maps was generated-in WRB, Soil Taxonomy, Canadian and Russian classification systems. 3. All these maps have the similar (zonal) pattern of soil covers in spite of using of different soil names and various classification priorities. 4. WRB and Russian systems better reflect the soil diversity on the order level than Soil Taxonomy and Canadian systems, as they have more orders, but the latter ones are also adequate on the lower levels. 5. All four systems have differences and they are equally distant from each other and all of them have problems that could be solved in closer international cooperation of soil scientists of different countries. References Arnalds, O. and E.Gretarsson Generalized Soil Map of Iceland. 2 nd ed. Agricultural Research Institute (Rala), Reykjavik, Iceland. European Soil Bureau The European Soil Database, Version 1.0. CD-ROM. Ispra, Italy. Dorzhgotov, D. and N.A. Nogina The Soil Map of Mongolia. Atlas of Mongolia. Ulan Bator. (Scale 1:3,000,000). FAO/UNESCO Soil Map of the World. Rome. (Scale 1:5,000,000)

9 FAO/ISRIC/ISSS, World Reference Base for Soil Resources. FAO Soils Bulletin No. 84. FAO, Rome. 88 p. Fridland, V.M., ed Soil Map of the RSFSR. V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Institute, Moscow. (Scale 1:2,500,000). Houghton J.T., L.G. Meira Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg and K. Maskell, eds Climate Change The Science of Climate Change. IPCC. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. xii+572 pp. Jakobsen, B.H. and A.Eiby Soil Map of Greenland: II. International Conference on Cryopedology. Syktyvkar. Russia. Naumov, E.M Soil Map of the North-East of Eurasia. V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Institute, Moscow. (Scale 1:2,500,000). Post, W.M., W.R. Emanuel, P.J. Zinke and A.G. Stangerverger Soil carbon pools and world life zones. Nature 298: Shishov, L.L., V.D. Tonkonogov, I.I. Lebedeva and M.I. Gerasimova Russian Soil Classification System. V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, Moscow. 221 p. Soil Classification Working Group The Canadian System of Soil Classification. 3 rd ed. Research Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Publication p. Soil Survey Staff Soil Taxonomy: a Basic Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. 2 nd ed. Agriculture Handbook 436. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington. 869 p. Tarnocai, C. and B. Lacelle The soil organic carbon digital database of Canada. research branch. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Canada. US Soil Conservation Service The State Soil Geographic Database, STATSGO. NRCS, USDA. Uspanov, U.U., ed Soil map of the Kazakh SSR. GUGK, Moscow. (Scale 1:2,500,000)