Spain
Linkage of profiles in SPADE-1 to the soil map
Total number of
STUs
Dominating
STUs
Profiles in
SPADE-1
220
72
25
Dominating
STUs linked to
profiles before
review (eststulk)
47 %
34 out 72
Dominating
STUs linked to
profiles after
review
33-57% (58 %)
24-41 (42) out of
72
Links before review (34):
There are no links in the EST_PROF database. The EST_STULK (estimated profile to STU linking
table) however contains 34 “explicit” links to dominant STUs (in which 4 of them are outside Spain
in France and Portugal). This leaves 30 links between SPADE-1 and dominant STUs within Spain.
All of the proposed links in the EST_STULK turned out to be correct, allthough some minor
corrections in the database were needed.
New links (23):
Of the 30 exsplicit links that were given 22 can be used without corrections. The remaining 8 need
corrections (see below). In addition 1 “implicit” links can be made. The remaining 10 implicit links
that can be carried out also need corrections (see below). One new profile can be added from the
measured profile database (MEAS_PROF.dbf). This profile can be linked to a dominant STU in the
soil map. This means that there are 24 matching links.
2 Profiles (ES9 & ES21) could be linked to dominant STUs since they apparently have the correct
soil type name and dominant surface textural class. However the texture data in the EST_HOR did
not match the code for the dominant surface textural class. The corrections needed to fit the correct
dominant surface textural class are considered too big to be carried out, since other parameters such
as water retention, CEC etc. would also need correction.
Links after minor corrections in the database (18): The possible links are links where corrections
in the database are needed before there is a match between a profile and a dominant STU.
Profile ES4 to the dominant STUs 340740, 340743 & 342193: Profile ES4 is suggested linked to
the two dominant STUs. The profile is listed as having the soil type name “Bh-2”. However the
texture data in EST_HOR qualifies for the dominant surface textural class “1”. The values in the
texture fields however need only minor correction before it can be classified as “2” (medium). The
percentage of sand need to be adjusted from 65% to 64%. These minor corrections should not affect
other parameters such as CEC, water retention etc. The actual corrections can be viewed in report
on EST_HOR or EST_PROF.
Profile ES6 to the dominant STUs 340696 and 340699: Profile ES6 is suggested linked to the
two dominant STUs. The profile is listed as having the soil type name “Vc-4”. However the texture
data in EST_HOR qualifies for the dominant surface textural class “2”. The values in the texture
fields however need only minor correction before it can be classified as “4” (fine). The percentage
1
of clay need to be increased from 33% to 36%. These minor corrections should not affect other
parameters such as CEC, water retention etc. The actual corrections can be viewed in report on
EST_HOR or EST_PROF.
Profile ES8 to the dominant STUs 340719 and 340722: Profile ES8 is suggested linked to the
two dominant STUs. The profile is listed as having the soil type name “Xy-3”. However the texture
data in EST_HOR qualifies for the dominant surface textural class “4”. No dominant STUs
however has the soil type name “Xy-3” or “Xy-4”. Two dominant STUs however have the soil type
name “Xy-2”. The values in the texture fields however need only minor correction before it can be
classified as “2” (medium). The percentage of clay need to be adjusted from 38% to 35%. The
percentage of sand also need to be increased from 6% to 15% These minor corrections should not
affect other parameters such as CEC, water retention etc. The actual corrections can be viewed in
report on EST_HOR or EST_PROF.
Profile ES12 to the dominant STU 340809: Profile ES12 has the soil type name Lo-2. However
the texture data in EST_HOR qualifies for the dominant surface textural class “3”. No dominant
STUs however have the soil type name “Lo-3”. Two dominant STUs however have the soil type
name “Lo-2”. When the texture classes are added up the total percentage of the surface horizons is
85% instead of 100%. Therefore the remaining 15% are put in the texture fields for sand. This will
give a total percentage of sand of 22% instead of 7%. The dominant surface textural class will now
be classified as “2” (medium). The actual corrections can be viewed in report on EST_HOR or
EST_PROF.
NB: In addition profile ES12 can be linked to 4 dominant STUs in Portugal with the soil type “Lo2”.
Profile ES13 to the dominant STU 340841: Profile ES13 has the soil type name “Aog-1”. This
soil type does however not exist (CEC,85). If the soil type name is altered to “Ag-1” it can be
linked to the dominant STU 340841.
Profile ES14 to the dominant STU 340843: Profile ES14 has the soil type name “Od-9”. However
no dominant STUs in the soil map have this soil type. The STU 340843 instead has the dominant
surface textural class “0” (meaning: no information). “9” (organic) is really the correct dominant
surface textural class for organic soils. It is however easier to correct the dominant surface textural
class of profile ES14 in the SPADE database.
Profile ES15 to the dominant STU 340819 & 340826: Profile ES15 was incorrectly named “Lck2”. This soil type does not exist. The soil type is changed to “Lkc-2”. When changed the profile can
be linked to the dominant STU 340819 and 340826.
Profile ES16 to the dominant STU 340702: Profile ES16 is suggested linked to the dominant STU
mentioned. The profile is listed as having “Zg-4”. However the texture data in EST_HOR qualifies
for the dominant surface textural class “5”. The values in the texture fields however need only
minor correction before it can be classified as “4” (fine). The percentage of clay need to be adjusted
from 61% to 60%. These minor corrections should not affect other parameters such as CEC, water
retention etc. The actual corrections can be viewed in report on EST_HOR or EST_PROF.
2
Profile ES17 to the dominant STUs 340805 & 340807: Profile ES17 is listed as “Lcr-3”.
However the texture data in EST_HOR shows that the dominant surface textural class really should
be “2” (medium). This also means that the profile can be linked to the two listed STUs.
Profile ES18 to the dominant STU 340839: Profile ES18 has the soil type name “We-1”.
However the sum of the texture data in EST_HOR only gives 50%. The values are not corrected as
a weighted average, but in a way so that the texture data supports the dominant surface textural
class “1”.
Profile ES22 to the dominant STU 340837: Profile ES22 is suggested linked to the dominant STU
listed above. The profile is listed as having the soil type name “Phf-2”. However the texture data in
EST_HOR qualifies for the dominant surface textural class “1” (coarse). The values in the texture
fields however need only minor correction before it can be classified as “2” (medium). The
percentage of total sand need to be adjusted from 66% to 64%. These minor corrections should not
affect other parameters such as CEC, water retention etc. The actual corrections can be viewed in
report on EST_HOR or EST_PROF.
Profile ES24 to the dominant STU 340685: Profile ES24 originally had the soil type name “Th2”. However no dominant STUs in the soil map has this soil type name. A review of the data in
MEAS_PROF (measured profile database) reveals that the same profile here has the soil type name
“To-2”. The soil type name of profile ES24 is therefore altered to “To-2”. This means that it can be
linked to the dominant STU 340685.
The following table lists the dominant STU of each SMU. It also lists suggested links made by the
author of the profile. The column to the far right lists to which profile the dominant STU are linked
in the “NEW_EST_STULK.dbf”.
dominant STU to profile link table
SMU
Dom
STU
340196
340197
340198
340201
340202
340203
340204
340205
340206
340207
340208
340209
340654
340655
340658
340672
340677
340679
340680
340682
340685
340688
340691
340693
Profile and
soil type
according to
eststulk.dbf
164 (Ic, 2)
146 (Id, 1)
170 (Qc, 1)
150 (U, 2)
165 (Vp, 4)
165 (Vp, 4)
Soiltype
according to
Stu_sgdbe.dbf
(CEC,85)
Jc, 2
Jc, 3
Ie, 2
Ic, 2
Id, 1
Qc, 1
Ql, 1
U, 2
To, 2
To, 3
Vp, 4
Vp, 4
3
Land
use
Profile – to dom. STU link
12/3
14/2
1/0
4/0 (X)
4/2 (X)
5/0 (X)
5/0
5/1 (X)
5/0 (X)
5/0
3/5 (X)
1/5
164 (ES19)
146 (ES1)
170 (ES25)
150 (ES5)
169 (ES24) (Th-2 -> To-2)
165 (ES20)
165 (ES20)
340210
340211
340212
340213
340214
340215
340216
340217
340218
340219
340220
340222
340225
340226
340227
340228
340229
340230
340231
340232
340233
340234
340235
340236
340237
340238
340239
340240
340241
340245
340246
340247
340249
340250
340696
340699
340714
340702
340703
340707
340711
340715
340717
340719
340722
340723
340740
340743
340747
340750
340753
340759
340761
340764
340767
340771
340774
340777
340779
340781
340784
340786
340788
340805
340807
340809
340819
340822
340251
340252
340254
340255
340256
340257
340580
340581
340582
340583
340584
340823
340826
340837
340839
340841
340843
340653
342157
342161
342164
342167
151 (Vc, 4)
151 (Vc, 4)
161 (Zg, 4)
152 (Xk, 2)
152 (Xk, 2)
152 (Xk, 2)
152 (Xk, 2)
149 (Bh, 2)
149 (Bh, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
164 (Ic, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
157 (Lo, 2)
155 (Bk-2)
363 (Bk-2)
167 (Phf, 2)
-
Vc, 4
Vc, 4
Bk, 3
Zg, 4
Xk, 3
Xk, 2
Xk, 2
Xk, 2
Xk, 2
Xy, 2
Xy, 2
Rc, 2
Bh, 2
Bh, 2
Bk, 2
E, 3
Be, 2
Ic, 2
Bk, 4
Bk, 4
Bk, 2
Bk, 4
Bk, 4
Bk, 3
Bk, 3
Bk, 2
Bk, 2
Bk, 2
Bk, 3
Lcr, 2
Lcr, 2
Lo, 2
Lkc, 2
Bk, 2
15/0 (X)
3/5 (X)
3/0
11/0 (X)
3/0
3/0 (X)
3/3 (X)
3/0 (X)
21/0 (X)
3/3 (%)
3/3 (%)
3/3 (X)
5/1 (X)
5/1 (X)
3/0 (X)
5/2
5/0
5/0 (X)
3/0
3/0
3/0 (X)
3/2
3/2
3/2
3/2
5/0 (%)
3/0 (X)
3/0 (X)
3/2
3/4 (X)
3/4 (X)
5/0 (%)
3/0 (X)
3/0 (X)
151 (ES6)
151 (ES6)
161 (ES16)
152 (ES7)
152 (ES7)
152 (ES7)
152 (ES7)
153 (ES8)
153 (ES8)
149 (ES4)
149 (ES4)
155 (ES10)
166 (E-2) (ES21)
154 (Be-1) (ES9)
164 (ES19)
155 (ES10)
155 (ES10)
155 (ES10)
155 (ES10)
162 (Lcr, 2)(ES17)
162 (Lcr, 2)(ES17)
157 (ES12)
160 (Lck, 2)(ES15)
155 (ES10)
Lv, 1
Lkc, 2
Phf, 2
We, 1
Ag, 1
Od, 0
Je, 2
Jc, 2
Lc, 4
Jc, 4
Zo, 2
3/2
3/1 (X)
4/0 (X)
3/0 (%)
3/0 (%)
4/0 (X)
3/0 (X)
12/3
3/5
3/3
3/3
160 (Lck, 2)(ES15)
167 (ES22)
163 (We, 1) (ES18)
158 (ES13) (Aog -> Ag)
159 (Od, 9) (ES14)
(ES26)
-
4
340585
340586
340587
340588
340589
340590
340591
340592
340593
340594
340595
340596
342211
342212
342213
342169
342172
342175
342178
342181
342183
342186
342188
342191
342193
342197
342201
340001
340008
340015
155 (Bk, 2)
155 (Bk, 2)
156 (Lc, 2)
149 (Bh, 2)
150 (U, 2)
147 (Id, 1)
-
Re, 2
Be, 2
Rd, 1
Rd, 2
Bk, 2
Bk, 2
Lc, 2
Rc, 2
Bk, 2
Bh, 2
U, 2
Id, 1
Re, 2
Rd, 2
Rd, 2
4/0
20/2
5/0
5/1
3/0 (X)
3/0 (X)
3/2 (X)
3/1
3/0 (X)
5/1 (X)
5/1 (X)
4/2 (X)
20/2
20/2
20/2
Explicit link via est_stulk.dbf
22
Explicit link where correction
are needed
Implicit link
8
Possible link
10
No link possible
28
Imported from MEAS_PROF
1
1
Correct soil type, but dominant 2
surface textural class can not be
corrected.
Land use: 35/42 = 83%
5
155 (ES10)
155 (ES10)
156 (ES11)
155 (ES10)
149 (ES4)
150 (ES5)
147 (ES2)
-