Assessing the Australian Soil Classification using cladistic analysis
Gregory P. L. Miltenyi A , Malte C. Ebach A and John Triantafilis A BA School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Australia, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: j.triantafilis@unsw.edu.au
Soil Research 53(7) 772-785 https://doi.org/10.1071/SR14323
Submitted: 18 November 2014 Accepted: 25 May 2015 Published: 27 October 2015
Abstract
The Australian Soil Classification (ASC) has its roots in both the Handbook of Australian Soils and the Factual Key. The scheme’s use of mutually exclusive characteristics has led to Soil Orders containing a diverse range of soils, such as the Dermosols. The extent of these groupings has resulted in classes of soils sharing greater relationships with soils from other classes than they do with soils in the same class. Situations such as this arise from artificial classifications and highlight the need for natural classifications. Natural classifications accurately represent what is occurring in nature and are desirable because they represent evidence of a common history, process or mechanism. This study uses cladistics, a robust biological method that uncovers natural classifications, to assess the naturalness of the ASC. The analysis has the secondary aims of identifying natural soil orders and establishing which characters and tiers require revision. Two measures commonly used in cladistics, consistency index (CI) and retention index (RI), are used along with confidence levels generated by bootstrapping. The cladistic analysis undertaken consisted of coding 113 morphological and non-morphological characters used to identify 13 of the 14 Soil Orders in ASC into binary and multi-state matrices and analysis using a parsimony cladistic algorithm. The results suggest that, because of its low CI (0.196), the ASC is not a natural classification. However, certain Soil Orders of Organosols, Podosls and Vertosols, which all registered high CI, are natural. The analysis also indicated which soil morphological characters and Soil Orders require revision in order to make the ASC more natural, namely, soil colour and characters located in the Great Groups as well as Soil Orders such as Chromosols, Ferrosols and Dermosols. We conclude that cladistics offers a new avenue in discerning relationships between soils and in assessing the accuracy of, and identifying where improvements can be made in, the classifications used to identify them.
Additional keywords: homology, natural classification, clades, soil characters, soil cladograms.
References
Arnold RW, Eswaran H (2010) Conceptual basis for soil classification: Lessons from the past. In ‘Soil classification: A global desk reference’. (Eds H Eswaran, R Ahrens, TJ Rice, BA Stewart) pp. 27–42. (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA)Avery BW (1973) Soil classification in the soil survey of England and Wales. Journal of Soil Science 24, 324–338.
| Soil classification in the soil survey of England and Wales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Basinski JJ (1959) The Russian approach to soil classification and its recent development. Journal of Soil Science 10, 14–26.
| The Russian approach to soil classification and its recent development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bockheim JG, Gennadiyev AN, Hartemink AE, Brevik EC (2014) Soil-forming factors and Soil Taxonomy. Geoderma 226–227, 231–237.
| Soil-forming factors and Soil Taxonomy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Brevik EC (1999) The soil science—geology connection. NDGS Newsletter Vol. 26, pp. 1–4.
Clark JM, Norell MA, Makovicky PJ (2002) Cladistic approaches to the relationships of birds to other theropod dinosaurs. In ‘Mesozoic birds: Above the heads of dinosaurs’. (Eds LM Chiappe, LM Witmer) pp. 31–60. (University of California Press Ltd: Oakland, CA, USA)
Coffey GN (1912) A study of the soils of the United States. Bureau of Soils Bulletin No. 85, pp. 23–38. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Davey BG, Russell JD, Wilson MJ (1975) Iron oxide and clay minerals and their relation to colours of red and yellow podzolic soils near Sydney, Australia. Geoderma 14, 125–138.
| Iron oxide and clay minerals and their relation to colours of red and yellow podzolic soils near Sydney, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaE2MXls1Oisrk%3D&md5=aa88348f7c1e9b9006ea42ce139063ddCAS |
Echeverry A, Silva-Romo G, Morrone JJ (2012) Tectonostratigraphic terrane relationships: A glimpse into the Caribbean under a cladistic approach. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 353–355, 87–92.
| Tectonostratigraphic terrane relationships: A glimpse into the Caribbean under a cladistic approach.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fitzpatrick RW, Powell B, McKenzie NJ, Maschmedt DJ, Schoknecht N, Jacquier DW (2010) Demands of soil classification in Australia. In ‘Soil classification: A global desk reference’. (Eds H Eswaran, R Ahrens, TJ Rice, BA Stewart) pp. 77–100. (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA)
Fraix-Burnet D, Choler P, Douzery EJ, Verhamme A (2006) Astrocladistics: a phylogenetic analysis of galaxy evolution I. Character evolutions and galaxy histories. Journal of Classification 23, 31–56.
| Astrocladistics: a phylogenetic analysis of galaxy evolution I. Character evolutions and galaxy histories.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goloboff P, Farris S, Nixon K (2000) TNT (Tree analysis using New Technology) Version 1. Cladistics.com TNT. Available at: www.cladistics.com/aboutTNT.html
Gray JM, Murphy BW (2002) Parent material and soil distribution. Natural Resource Management 5, 2–12.
Hennig W (1966) ‘Phylogenetic systematics.’ (University of Illinois Press: Urbana, IL, USA)
Hewitt AE (1992) New Zealand Soil Classification. Scientific Report No. 19. DSIR Land Resources, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
Isbell R (1992) A brief history of national soil classification in Australia since the 1920s. Australian Journal of Soil Research 30, 825–842.
| A brief history of national soil classification in Australia since the 1920s.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Isbell R (2002) ‘The Australian Soil Classification.’ Revised edn (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Kitching I, Forey P, Humphries C, Williams D (1998) ‘Cladistics: The theory and practice of parsimony analysis.’ (Oxford University Press: New York)
Marbut CF (1951) ‘Soil classification: Life and work of C.F. Marbut.’ (Artcraft Press: Columbia, MO, USA)
Mazaheri SA, Koppi AJ, McBratney AB (1995) A fuzzy allocation scheme for the Australian Great Soil Groups Classification system. European Journal of Soil Science 46, 601–612.
| A fuzzy allocation scheme for the Australian Great Soil Groups Classification system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McKenzie NJ, Austin MP (1989) Utility of the factual key and soil taxonomy in the lower Macquarie Valley, NSW. Australian Journal of Soil Research 27, 289–311.
| Utility of the factual key and soil taxonomy in the lower Macquarie Valley, NSW.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nixon KC, Davis JI (1991) Polymorphic taxa, missing values and Cladistic analysis. Cladistics 7, 233–241.
| Polymorphic taxa, missing values and Cladistic analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Northcote KH (1971) ‘A factual key for the recognition of Australian soils.’ (Rellim Technical Publications: Glenside, S. Aust.)
Northcote KH (1984) ‘Soils, soil morphology and soil classification: training course lectures.’ (Rellim Technical Publications: Glenside, S. Aust.)
Pimentcl RA, Riggins R (1987) The nature of cladistic data. Cladistics 3, 201–209.
| The nature of cladistic data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rexová K, Frynta D, Zrzavý J (2003) Cladistic analysis of languages: Indo-European classification based on lexicostatistical data. Cladistics 19, 120–127.
Schuh RT, Brower AVZ (2010) ‘Biological systematics: principles and applications.’ 2nd edn (Cornell University Press: New York)
Siebert DJ (1992) Tree statistics; trees and ‘confidence’; consensus trees; alternatives to parsimony; character weighting; character conflict and its resolutions. In ‘Cladistics: A practical course in systematics’. (Eds PL Forey, CJ Humphries, IJ Kitching, RW Scotland, DJ Siebert, DM Williams) pp. 72–88. (Oxford University Press: New York)
Soil Survey Staff (2010) ‘Keys to Soil Taxonomy.’ 11th edn (USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Washington, DC)
Stace HCT (1968) ‘A handbook of Australian soils.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Wilkins JS, Ebach MC (2014) ‘The nature of classification: relationships and kinds in the natural sciences.’ (Palgrave Macmillan: New York)
