Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes: A Spatially Explicit Approach to Support Sustainable Soil Management

Table 1

Analysed soil chemical and physical properties of 60 sampling points (𝑛=60) at each of three depths from the study area in northern Victoria, south-eastern Australia. Data were produced through conventional analysis methods as well as mid-infrared spectroscopy*.

Soil properties	Min	Max	Mean	SD	Median
Organic carbon (%)^a
0–10 cm	0.3	4.5	1.3	0.8	1.2
10–20 cm	0.2	2.4	0.8	0.4	0.7
20–30 cm	0.1	1.6	0.6	0.3	0.5
pHCaCl2^b
0–10 cm	5.4	8.7	7.1	0.7	7.1
10–20 cm	5.6	9.3	7.5	0.7	7.6
20–30 cm	5.2	9.3	7.7	0.9	7.8
EC (dS/m)^c
0–10 cm	0.04	5.46	0.68	1.01	0.27
10–20 cm	0.05	9.80	1.09	1.62	0.49
20–30 cm	0.04	10.72	1.60	2.08	0.75
Clay (%)^d
0–10 cm	6	60	40	10	42
10–20 cm	11	61	43	10	46
20–30 cm	6	61	46	12	49
Sand (%)^d
0–10 cm	25	93	48	13	45
10–20 cm	17	84	43	14	38
20–30 cm	16	93	39	17	35
Bulk density (g/cm^3)
0–10 cm	1.0	1.6	1.3	0.1	1.3
10–20 cm	1.2	1.6	1.4	0.1	1.4
20–30 cm	1.2	1.6	1.4	0.1	1.4

aDry combustion and Walkley-Black methods [41].
bpH in 0.01 M CaCl₂, 1 : 5 extraction ratio [42].
cEC in 1 : 5 water extraction ratio [43].
dHydrometer method [44].
∗Conventional analysis methods were applied to 61 reference samples (i.e., 61 out of the 180 study samples), and MIR spectroscopy was used to predict properties in the remaining samples.