Decision support tools for soil carbon management in the Lake States

Metadata:
Identification_Information:
Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Nave, Lucas E.
Originator: DeLyser, Kendall
Originator: Domke, Grant M.
Originator: Janowiak, Maria K.
Originator: Ontl, Todd A.
Originator: Peters, Matthew P.
Originator: Sprague, Eric
Originator: Walters, Brian F.
Originator: Swanston, Christopher W.
Publication_Date: 2021
Title:
Decision support tools for soil carbon management in the Lake States
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster and vector digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Fort Collins, CO
Publisher: Forest Service Research Data Archive
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017
Description:
Abstract:
Scientists with the Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science and American Forests initiated a project in 2018 to produce a series of soil organic carbon (SOC) assessments addressing land use and forest management effects on SOC within several distinct ecoregions of the United States. The primary goal of these assessments was to produce decision support tools, such as maps and tables, which were in turn supported by robust, underlying peer-reviewed science products. The Lake States assessment is the second in this series and was completed in 2020-2021. Specifically, this assessment looked into how and where forestry, fires, and reforestation influence SOC across the ecoregion, and also summarized site-level tactics that may be used to mitigate probable losses or capitalize on gains in SOC, where relevant. Subsequently, key insights regarding forest harvest impacts were used, in conjunction with geographic information system analyses, to create the spatially explicit data and maps indicating where harvesting likely causes losses, gains, or no change in SOC. The underlying site characteristics driving these changes are included in this data publication, which covers the 22 ECOMAP 2007 Sections present in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin (and extending into portions of adjacent states). This file includes Land Type Associations and other spatially explicit surface geology information (e.g., surficial deposits) which were used to stratify the study region into assigned values of parent material, landform, and physiographic group. Also included is a 10-meter raster grid representing a unique combination of parent material, surface texture, and landforms to which forest harvest change classes and harvest scores have been assigned. Tabular data containing the ECOMAP 2007 Sections, Land Type Associations, surficial deposits, assigned parent material, landform, and physiographic group are also included along with the unique dominant soil surface texture values obtained from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRSC) National Soil Survey Geographic (NATSGO) database assigned to a broader class.
Purpose:
Produce decision support tools, such as maps and tables, supported by robust, underlying peer-reviewed science products within the Lake States assessment area to address land use and forest management effects on soil carbon (C). The dataset provides insights into how and where forestry, fires, and reforestation influence soil C across ecoregions, and summarize site-level tactics that may be used to mitigate probable losses or capitalize on gains in soil organic C.
Supplemental_Information:
For more information about the data included in this package as well as details regarding the data sources, methods, analyses, and insights into how and where forestry, fires, and reforestation influence soil C across the ecoregion, and also summarized site-level tactics that may be used to mitigate probable losses or capitalize on gains in SOC, where relevant, see Nave et al. (2021; https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356).

Original publication date was 04/20/2021. On 04/23/2021 metadata was updated to include reference to newly published Nave et al. (2021; https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356), which is referred to throughout this documentation as Nave et al. (2021). Additional minor metadata updates were made on 09/28/2021.
Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 2021
Currentness_Reference:
Ground condition
Status:
Progress: Complete
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: None planned
Spatial_Domain:
Description_of_Geographic_Extent:
The 22 ECOMAP Sections present in the upper Great Lake States of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin (and extending into portions of adjacent states) were used to define the geographic extent of soil data.
Bounding_Coordinates:
West_Bounding_Coordinate: -99.899561
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -82.372162
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 50.262608
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 39.699582
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: ISO 19115 Topic Category
Theme_Keyword: environment
Theme_Keyword: geoscientificInformation
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: National Research & Development Taxonomy
Theme_Keyword: Climate change
Theme_Keyword: Carbon
Theme_Keyword: Ecology, Ecosystems, & Environment
Theme_Keyword: Geology
Theme_Keyword: Soil
Theme_Keyword: Environment and People
Theme_Keyword: Decision making, public involvement
Theme_Keyword: Impact of people on environment
Theme_Keyword: Natural Resource Management & Use
Theme_Keyword: Forest management
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Theme_Keyword: forest harvest
Theme_Keyword: meta-analysis
Theme_Keyword: best management practice
Theme_Keyword: carbon management tactics
Theme_Keyword: soil vulnerability
Place:
Place_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Place_Keyword: Illinois
Place_Keyword: Indiana
Place_Keyword: Iowa
Place_Keyword: Michigan
Place_Keyword: Minnesota
Place_Keyword: North Dakota
Place_Keyword: Ohio
Place_Keyword: South Dakota
Place_Keyword: Wisconsin
Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints:
These data were collected using funding from the U.S. Government and can be used without additional permissions or fees. If you use these data in a publication, presentation, or other research product please include both of the following citations:

Nave, Lucas E.; DeLyser, Kendall; Domke, Grant M.; Janowiak, Maria K.; Ontl, Todd A.; Peters, Matthew P.; Sprague, Eric; Walters, Brian F.; Swanston, Christopher W. 2021. Decision support tools for soil carbon management in the Lake States. Fort Collins, CO: Forest Service Research Data Archive. https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017

Nave, Lucas E.; DeLyser, Kendall; Domke, Grant M.; Janowiak, Maria K.; Ontl, Todd A.; Sprague, Eric; Walters, Brian F.; Swanston, Christopher W. 2021. Land use and management effects on soil carbon in the Lake States, with emphasis on forestry, fire, and reforestation. Ecological Applications 31(6): e02356. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356
Point_of_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Matthew Peters
Contact_Organization: Northern Research Station
Contact_Position: Ecologist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 359 Main Road
City: Delaware
State_or_Province: OH
Postal_Code: 43015
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 740-368-0063
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: matthew.p.peters@usda.gov
Data_Set_Credit:
Funding for this project provided by USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station (NRS), Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science agreement 19-CR-11242306-096.
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Nave, Lucas E.
Originator: DeLyser, Kendall
Originator: Domke, Grant M.
Originator: Janowiak, Maria K.
Originator: Ontl, Todd A.
Originator: Sprague, Eric
Originator: Walters, Brian F.
Originator: Swanston, Christopher W.
Publication_Date: 2021
Title:
Land use and management effects on soil carbon in the Lake States, with emphasis on forestry, fire, and reforestation
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Ecological Applications
Issue_Identification: 31(6): e02356
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356
Back to Top
Data_Quality_Information:
Attribute_Accuracy:
Attribute_Accuracy_Report:
These data have been developed from various sources using standard geospatial practices to delineate unique ecological units defined by geologic, geomorphic, and topographic features. While the spatial resolution of the raster data layer provides very fine-scale information (e.g., 10 meters (m)) to better align with the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service soil geographic database sampling units, interpretation of potential changes in soil carbon should be placed in the broader context of the landscape, and the caveats below considered.

Please note: These data have been developed through a sequence of complementary tasks. Findings of the associated published paper (Nave et al. 2021) reflect the ability of the available data to address the questions of interest. Some questions (e.g., timeframes of soil C loss or recovery, effects of specific harvesting practices, predictions for specific combinations of site, soil, and forest type) could not be tested in a robust fashion due to data limitations. Thus, the findings of the paper are still generalizations, though they are at least generalizations that are more directly relevant to the soils, physiography, and forest management of the Lake States than past assessments at broader scales. At the same time, by synthesizing a considerable amount of independent data from the region (dozens of published papers, hundreds of USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) plots, thousands of soil pedons), the convergence of key findings across methods provides a greater level of confidence than broad generalizations (at one extreme) or site-specific studies (at the other).

For complete details on the methods used to develop the statistical findings see Nave et al. (2021), which can also be used as a bibliographic starting point for the development of soil C management tactics. The summary and tactics tables in Nave et al. (2021) were intended as a bridge between the detailed analyses and findings of the paper itself, and the ability to implement these findings into management using the map included in this data publication. In this regard, the map is best considered as a tool indicating the spatial distribution of risk (i.e., of soil C losses due to harvesting) versus opportunity (i.e., potential gains in soil C with harvesting). Where risks or opportunities exist, users of the map may consult the soil C tactics table for tangible options to mitigate those risks or enhance probability of achieving those opportunities. The map should be interpreted as a probabilistic tool, not a representation of relative or absolute changes in soil C stocks due to harvesting. Also, like other geospatial decision support tools, the map and associated GIS data carry with them underlying limitations of spatial resolution. Caution is suggested when applying the map at localized scales (e.g., individual timber sales or property parcels). Interpretation of detailed local geospatial resources (e.g., finer-level maps of soil parent material or texture) in the context of the findings of the paper may provide higher-confidence predictions of probable soil C change for specific projects. Site visits to validate maps are especially encouraged, as are monitoring activities, as both can refine the map and related tools through future versions. Where monitoring occurs, individual sites and projects will often fail to detect trends depicted by the map due to natural variability, sampling design or collection, or statistical limitations. Monitoring also will occasionally detect trends altogether different than represented on the map. These deviations from our probabilistic map based on regional data reflect the reality that many factors, on down to the site level and including the timing and execution of operations, ultimately work in concert to mediate management effects on soil C. In this regard, the map, tactics table, and inferences drawn in the paper are best used alongside other inputs into planning and decision making processes, and are likely most appropriate at scales between their coarsest-level GIS input (Land Type Association or surface geology polygons) and the ecological scale below which within-stratum data replication becomes limiting (ECOMAP Subsection). At the finer end of the scale continuum, users are advised to project harvest impacts as categorical classes (e.g., no change, gain) rather than numeric indices to protect against false confidence in detailed results; at larger scales, users may wish to project the map using the numeric harvest indices, as confidence in results increases with scale and data availability.
Logical_Consistency_Report:
See accuracy statement
Completeness_Report:
There are no missing data as far as we know.

Values of '_NULL_' represent areas with missing or incomplete data on landform, parent material, or soil texture, which could not be mapped.
Lineage:
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Lab
Methodology_Description:
A summary of the methods used to develop the data included in this publication can be found in \Supplements\Supplemental_Info.pdf (included in the data publication download) and in Nave et al. (2021). In brief, these methods included: 1) meta-analysis of published literature; 2) quantitative synthesis of soil and land use information from USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and FIA databases; 3) literature review; 4) development of SOC management decision-support menu; 4) geographic information system analysis to integrate items #1 - #3 into a map that can be used to help select menu options from #4.
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Nave, Lucas E.
Originator: DeLyser, Kendall
Originator: Domke, Grant M.
Originator: Janowiak, Maria K.
Originator: Ontl, Todd A.
Originator: Sprague, Eric
Originator: Walters, Brian F.
Originator: Swanston, Christopher W.
Publication_Date: 2021
Title:
Land use and management effects on soil carbon in the Lake States, with emphasis on forestry, fire, and reforestation
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Ecological Applications
Issue_Identification: 31(6): e02356
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Publication_Date: 2018
Title:
Gridded National Soil Survey Geographic (gNATSGO) Database for the conterminous United States
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: database
Publication_Information:
Publisher: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Other_Citation_Details:
Accessed 10/22/2018 (FY2019 official release)
Online_Linkage: https://nrcs.app.box.com/v/soils
Type_of_Source_Media: Online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 20181022
Source_Currentness_Reference:
Publication Date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
gNATSGO
Source_Contribution:
From the gridded NATSGO database the dominant surface texture classification was combined with parent material and landform values derived from the Land Type Associations.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: USDA Forest Service
Publication_Date: unknown
Title:
S_R09.NRIS_TEU_LandtypeAssoc_pl
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: database
Publication_Information:
Publisher: USDA Forest Service
Other_Citation_Details:
Accessed 10/17/2019
Type_of_Source_Media: Digital database File
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 20080902
Source_Currentness_Reference:
Publication Date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
LTA
Source_Contribution:
Polygons subdividing ECOMAP Subsections delineate Landtype Associations of the Eastern Region of the USDA Forest Service. Polygons were mapped at the 1:100000 scale representing unique terrestrial ecological information related to soils, geology, geomorphology, climate, and potential natural vegetation within Subsections.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: USDA Forest Service
Publication_Date: 2007
Title:
ECOMAP Sections
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data
Series_Information:
Series_Name: General Technical Report
Issue_Identification: WO-76
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Washington, DC
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
Other_Citation_Details:
Section descriptions from the cited publication by:

Cleland, D.T.; Freeouf, J.A.; Keys, J.E.; Nowacki, G.J.; Carpenter, C.A.; and McNab, W.H. 2007. Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections for the conterminous United States. Gen. Tech. Report WO-76D [Map on CD-ROM] (A.M. Sloan, cartographer). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, presentation scale 1:3,500,000; colored. Last update May 04, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2737/WO-GTR-76D
Online_Linkage: https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php?dsetParent=EcomapSections_2007
Type_of_Source_Media: Online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 20170504
Source_Currentness_Reference:
Publication Date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
ECOMAP Sections
Source_Contribution:
Polygons subdividing ECOMAP Provinces delineated using criteria outlined in the National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units (https://www.fs.fed.us/land/pubs/ecoregions/index.html) were intersected with the LTA layer to provide additional specificity to unique features across the region.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Corner, R. A.
Originator: Albert, D. A.
Originator: Austin, M. B.
Originator: DeLain, C. J.
Publication_Date: 1999
Title:
Landtype associations of northern Michigan section VII
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Lansing, MI
Publisher: Michigan Natural Features Inventory
Other_Citation_Details:
Six volume set and digital map. Details described in:

Albert, Dennis A.; Cohen, Joshua G.; Kost, Michael A.; Slaughter, Bradford S.; Enander, Helen D. 2008. Distribution maps of Michigan’s natural communities. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report No. 2008-01, Lansing, MI. 166 pp. https://mnfi.anr.msu.edu/reports/MNFI-Report-2008-01.pdf
Online_Linkage: http://www.dnr.state.mi.us/spatialdatalibrary/metadata/lta_sec7_metadata.htm#:~:text=Landtype Associations of Northern Lower Michigan (Section VII),that dominate the landscape at different geographic scales
Type_of_Source_Media: Online
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 1999
Source_Currentness_Reference:
Publication Date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
LTA Section 7
Source_Contribution:
Within the Northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan, Landtype Associations (LTA) were delineated across thirty-five counties at the 1:63360 scale representing combinations of slope classes, soil texture, and drainage classes derived from USDA soil survey and glacial landform map of Michigan (Farrand and Bell 1982). Landtype Associations within the Northern Lower Peninsula of the USDA Forest Service ECOMAP Sections were replaced by the LTAs mapped by Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI).

Farrand, W. R.; Bell, D. L. 1982. Quaternary Geology of Michigan. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Geological Survey. 1:500,000 paper map
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Data file creation:

The gridded NATSGO database was used to create a raster grid representing the dominant soil surface texture reported among mapping units within the study region. The resulting raster grid had a spatial resolution of 10 m and spatially aligned to the original NATSGO grid. Soil texture values were generalized into eight classes (Loamy sands; Clays, silty clays, & silty clay; Sandy loams & Clays; Loams; Sands; Silts & silt loams; Organic soils; and Other) (see \Data\SOC_mapping_SOC_mapping_Parent_Material_Groups.csv for details).
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation:
gNATSGO
Process_Date: 2021
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Merge Landtype Associations:

The ECOMAP Sections were intersected with the LTA features to identify and create unique combinations of features associated with individual ecological sections using the hierarchical framework. The LTA Section 7 features corresponded to one ECOMAP Section, the Northern Lower Peninsula (212H), and were used to replace only Landtype Association features within this Section that did not coincide with the administrative boundary of the Huron-Manistee National Forest. After merging these three files, attribute fields were checked and recalculated if needed to ensure accurate values. Values of landform, parent material, and physiographic group were assigned using the criteria described in the \Data\SOC_mapping_SOC_mapping_Parent_Material_Groups.csv file.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation:
LTA, ECOMAP Sections, LTA Section 7
Process_Date: 2021
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Creating soil parent material and surface texture grid:

Using the surface texture raster derived from the gNATSGO database as a template, the parent material and landform values assigned to the LTA features were rasterized at a 10-m resolution. These raster grids were combined with the surface texture raster to create 425 unique values of parent material, landforms, and surface texture. Values were assigned to forest harvesting score indicating the potential impacts on soil carbon based on a meta-analysis. The score ranged from -10 to +10 reflecting direction of change and confidence therein (no change, probable gain, tendency to lose, significant loss). All underlying tabular data, and rubrics for aggregating classes into generalized groups and assigning harvest impact indices, are provided as part of the decision support tool package to aid in advanced or site-specific uses, and for future product refinement.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation:
gNATSGO, LTA
Process_Date: 2021
Back to Top
Spatial_Data_Organization_Information:
Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: Vector
Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: Raster
Point_and_Vector_Object_Information:
SDTS_Terms_Description:
SDTS_Point_and_Vector_Object_Type: GT-polygon composed of chains
Point_and_Vector_Object_Count: 6853
Raster_Object_Information:
Raster_Object_Type: Grid Cell
Row_Count: 104805
Column_Count: 127125
Back to Top
Spatial_Reference_Information:
Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition:
Planar:
Map_Projection:
Map_Projection_Name: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N
Transverse_Mercator:
Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.9996
Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -81.0
Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 0.0
False_Easting: 500000.0
False_Northing: 0.0
Planar_Coordinate_Information:
Planar_Coordinate_Encoding_Method: coordinate pair
Coordinate_Representation:
Abscissa_Resolution: 0.000000002220024164500956
Ordinate_Resolution: 0.000000002220024164500956
Planar_Distance_Units: meter
Geodetic_Model:
Horizontal_Datum_Name: D North American 1983
Ellipsoid_Name: GRS 1980
Semi-major_Axis: 6378137.0
Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio: 298.257222101
Back to Top
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
Below you will find a list and description of the 7 files included in this data publication.

GEOSPATIAL DATA (4)

1. \Data\LakeStates_SOC.gdb: ESRI geodatabase containing 1) the ECOMAP_LandTypeAssociations feature class and 2) the raster data lta_parentmat_surface_landform. The ECOMAP_LandTypeAssociations feature class contains ECOMAP 2007 Sections and Land Type Associations. It contains assigned values of parent material, landform, and physiographic groups (see \Data\Lake_States_SOC_mapping.xlxs). The raster data lta_parentmat_surface_landform has a 10 meter (32.8 feet) grid size representing a unique combination of parent material, surface texture, and landforms to which forest harvest change classes and harvest scores have been assigned.

Feature class - ECOMAP_LandTypeAssociations

Variables include:

OBJECTID = Internal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.

Shape = Feature geometry.

FID_ECOMAP_Sections = Internal unique index value for each ECOMAP Section feature.

SECTION = Numeric identifier assigned to each ECOMAP Section that combines the Domain, Division, and Province identifiers.

DOMAIN_NAM (DOMAIN_NAME) = Name of the corresponding ECOMAP Domain containing the Section.

DIVISION_N (DIVISION_NAME) = Name of the corresponding ECOMAP Division containing the Section.

PROVINCE_N (PROVINCE_NAME) = Name of the corresponding ECOMAP Province containing the Section.

SECTION_NA (SECTION_NAME) = Name of the ECOMAP Section corresponding to the Section code.

LTA_Name = Name identifying the Landtype Association describing unique terrestrial ecological information.

Landform = Name describing the landform corresponding to the Landtype Association.

Parent_Material (Parent Material) = Name describing the parent material corresponding to the Landtype Association.

Physiographic_Group (Physiographic_Group) = Name of physiographic group assigned to the feature based on the landform and parent material field values.

AREA = Numerical value representing the area in square meters.

PERIMETER = Numerical value representing the perimeter distance in meters.

ACRES = Area of feature in acres.

Shape_Length = Numerical value representing the shape length.

Shape_Area = Numerical value representing the area.

*NOTE: The source of the next 9 variables is the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) ecologists.

ID = Internal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated. Source: MNFI ecologists

CODE (ECOCODE) = Code used by MNFI ecologists. Source: Code used by MNFI ecologists.

SUBSECTION = Subsection (there are 6 subsections in Section VII.) VII.1 Arenac, VII.2 Kalamazoo Interlobate, VII.3 Allegan, VII.4 Ionia, VII.5 Huron, VII.6 Saginaw Bay Lake Plain. Source: MNFI ecologists

SUBSECDES (SUBSECTION DESCRIPTION) = Name corresponding to the SUBSECTION field. Source: MNFI ecologists.

SUB_SUBSEC (SUB SUBSECTION) = Ecoregion sub_subsection. VII.1.1 Standish, VII.1.2 Wiggins Lake, VII.2.1 Cadillac, VII.2.2 Grayling Outwash Plain, VII.2.3 Vanderbilt Moraines, VII.5.1 Williamsburg, VII.5.2 Traverse City, VII.6.1 Onaway, VII.6.2 Stutsmanville, VII.6.3 Cheboygan. Source: MNFI ecologists.

SUB_SUBDES (SUB SUBSECTION DESCRIPTION) = Name corresponding to the SUB_SUBSECTION field. Source: MNFI ecologists.

DESCRIPTOR = Text description of LTA. Source: MNFI ecologists.

DESCRIP_CD (DESCRIPTOR CODE) = LTA description plus LTA identifier for map display. Source: MNFI ecologists.

DESCRIPCOD = LTA description plus LTA code for map display. Source: MNFI ecologists.


Raster Data - lta_parentmat_surface_landform

Variables include:

OBJECTID = Internal feature number. Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated. A unique numeric value corresponding to the combination of parent material, soil surface texture, and landform.

Value = A unique numeric value corresponding to the combination of parent material, soil surface texture, and landform.

Count = The number of grid cells within the dataset that have the same Value

lta_parent_mater (LTA Parent Material) = A unique identifier corresponding to the Parent_Material field.

surface_text (Surface Texture) = A unique identifier corresponding to the Surface_Texture_Grp field.

lta_landform (LTA Landform) = A unique identifier corresponding to the Landform field.

Parent_Material (Parent Material) = Soil parent material class values of '_NULL_', 'Aeolian / Lacustrine', 'Alluvium', 'Bedrock + Drift', 'Bedrock, Alluvium, Colluvium', 'Lacustrine', 'Outwash', 'Till', or 'Water' defined from landtype associations.

Surface_Texture_Grp (Surface Texture Group) = USDA NRCS NATSGO surface texture classes assigned to values of 'Clays, silty clays, & silty clay loams', 'Loams', 'Loamy sands', 'No Data', 'Organic soils', 'Other', 'Sands', 'Sandy loams & clays', or 'Silts & silt loams'.

Landform = Landform values of '_NULL_', 'Bedrock + Drift', 'Drumlin', 'Dune / Beach Ridge', 'Moraine', 'Plain', 'Valleys and Hills', or 'Water' defined from landtype associations.

PM_by_ST (Parent Material by Surface Texture) = The combination of parent material and surface texture.

HarvestChange (Harvest Change) = A categorical indication of change in soil organic carbon resulting from timber harvesting. Classes indicate no change, probable gain, tendency to lose, and significant loss.

HarvestScore (Harvest Score) = A numeric score corresponding to the Harvest Change class values ranging from -10 to 10 at 2.5 intervals.

NOTES = Descriptions of Harvest Change classes and Harvest Score values.


2. \Data\lta_landforms.lry: ESRI layer file associated with the lta_parentmat_surface_landform raster, symbolized to show the unique values of landforms.


3. \Data\lta_parent_material.lry: ESRI layer file associated with the lta_parentmat_surface_landform raster, symbolized to show the unique values of parent material.


4. \Data\lta_surface_texture.lry: ESRI layer file associated with the lta_parentmat_surface_landform raster, symbolized to show the unique values of soil surface texture.


TABULAR DATA (2)

5. \Data\SOC_mapping_Parent_Material_Groups.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text file containing the ECOMAP 2007 Sections, Land Type Associations (LTA), assigned parent material, landform, and physiographic group.

Variables include:

ECOMAP_Section = Name of ecomap section.

LTA_Name_GreatLakes = Name of Great Lakes LTA.

Assigned Landform = Name of landform, derived from LTA.

Assigned Parent Material = Name of parent material, derived from LTA.

Assigned Physiographic Group = Name of physiographic group assigned, based on landform and parent material.

SUBSECDES = Description of subsection.

SUB_SUBDES = Description of ecoregion subsection.

DESCRIPTOR = Description of LTA.


6. \Data\SOC_mapping_Soil_Texture_Groups.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII file containing the unique dominant soil surface texture values obtained from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRSC) National Soil Survey Geographic (NATSGO) database assigned to a broader class.

Variables include:

NATSGO Texture (texcl) = Detailed description of texture applicable to specified texture class. The full range of 140 surface soil texture classes from the USDA NRCS NATSGO database was compressed into 9 major surface soil texture class groups. The surface soil texture class groups were defined in the paper based upon the soil observational data available for analysis.

Assigned Texture Group = USDA NRCS NATSGO surface texture classes.

Class = Number assigned to Assigned Texture Group.


SUPPLEMENTAL FILES (1)

7. \Supplements\Supplemental_Info.pdf: Portable Document Format file containing background content about the project, supporting documentation related to the methodology, and recommended limitations for interpreting the information provided in the mapped data.
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
Nave, Lucas E.; DeLyser, Kendall; Domke, Grant M.; Janowiak, Maria K.; Ontl, Todd A.; Sprague, Eric; Walters, Brian F.; Swanston, Christopher W. 2021. Land use and management effects on soil carbon in the Lake States, with emphasis on forestry, fire, and reforestation. Ecological Applications 31(6): e02356: https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2356
Back to Top
Distribution_Information:
Distributor:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization: USDA Forest Service, Research and Development
Contact_Position: Research Data Archivist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 240 West Prospect Road
City: Fort Collins
State_or_Province: CO
Postal_Code: 80526
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: see Contact Instructions
Contact Instructions: This contact information was current as of September 2021. For current information see Contact Us page on: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS.
Resource_Description: RDS-2021-0017
Distribution_Liability:
Metadata documents have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness. Unless otherwise stated, all data and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. However, neither the author, the Archive, nor any part of the federal government can assure the reliability or suitability of these data for a particular purpose. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed for a user's application of these data or related materials.

The metadata, data, or related materials may be updated without notification. If a user believes errors are present in the metadata, data or related materials, please use the information in (1) Identification Information: Point of Contact, (2) Metadata Reference: Metadata Contact, or (3) Distribution Information: Distributor to notify the author or the Archive of the issues.
Standard_Order_Process:
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: ASCII
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
Comma-delimited ASCII text file (CSV)
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped with 7-Zip 19.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: GDB
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
ESRI geodatabase file
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped with 7-Zip 19.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: LYR
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
ESRI layer file
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped with 7-Zip 19.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: PDF
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
Portable Document Format file
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped with 7-Zip 19.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2021-0017
Fees: None
Back to Top
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date: 20210928
Metadata_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Luke Nave
Contact_Organization: University of Michigan
Contact_Position: Associate Research Scientist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 9133 Biological Rd.
City: Pellston
State_or_Province: MI
Postal_Code: 49769
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 231-539-8742
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: lukenave@umich.edu
Metadata_Standard_Name: FGDC Biological Data Profile of the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Metadata_Standard_Version: FGDC-STD-001.1-1999
Back to Top