Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4516
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4516
07 Sep 2026
 | 07 Sep 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for SOIL (SOIL).

Dynamic vegetation–soil–water feedbacks as an under-recognised source of structural uncertainty in digital soil mapping

Odunayo David Adeniyi, Yushu Xia, Calogero Schillaci, Jamal-Eddine Ouzemou, Fuat Kaya, Abdelhakim Amazirh, and Michael Maerker

Abstract. Digital soil mapping (DSM) produces spatially continuous soil information for land-use planning, carbon accounting, and Earth system analysis, resting on the SCORPAN framework and its use of remote-sensing and terrain covariates as indicators of soil-forming processes. Similar approaches estimate ecological and hydrological conditions from vegetation, moisture, and climate data. Two assumptions receive little scrutiny: that soil-covariate relationships stay constant in space and time, and that covariates act as independent predictors. In reality vegetation, soil, and water form a coupled system in which each influences the others, and the strength and even the direction of these interactions vary across landscapes and shift over time. We argue that these dynamic relationships are an important but under-recognised source of structural uncertainty, distinct from the sampling, measurement, and model-fitting error usually partitioned in DSM. Drawing on wetlands, drylands, sloping farmland, burned watersheds, drought-affected forests, and thawing permafrost, we show how the feedbacks break the assumptions behind DSM, why the same problem affects land-surface, ecological, and hydrological models, and how mapping might be made feedback-aware.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Odunayo David Adeniyi, Yushu Xia, Calogero Schillaci, Jamal-Eddine Ouzemou, Fuat Kaya, Abdelhakim Amazirh, and Michael Maerker

Status: open (until 19 Oct 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Odunayo David Adeniyi, Yushu Xia, Calogero Schillaci, Jamal-Eddine Ouzemou, Fuat Kaya, Abdelhakim Amazirh, and Michael Maerker
Odunayo David Adeniyi, Yushu Xia, Calogero Schillaci, Jamal-Eddine Ouzemou, Fuat Kaya, Abdelhakim Amazirh, and Michael Maerker

Viewed

Total article views: 50 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
40 9 1 50 2 3
  • HTML: 40
  • PDF: 9
  • XML: 1
  • Total: 50
  • BibTeX: 2
  • EndNote: 3
Views and downloads (calculated since 07 Sep 2026)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 07 Sep 2026)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 50 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 50 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 08 Sep 2026
Download
Short summary
Soil maps help to track carbon storage, water availability, and land health, often using visible surface features such as plants to reveal what is happening underground. Plants, soil, and water are known to constantly influence each other, yet mapping methods rarely account for how this shifts those signals across places and over time. This study shows why current mapping methods may fail in rapidly changing environments and suggests ways to improve their reliability.
Share