42  Patty, Joe, Kasia, Nora Check-in 25MAR2025

Date: March 25, 2025

42.1 Attendees

  • Nora Pearson
  • Patty Burns
  • Kasia Ulanowski
  • Joseph Brennan

42.2 Questions from Kasia Regarding Pedon Descriptions

42.2.1 Human Transported Material (HTM) Classification

  • Question: When material is moved within the same field (e.g., filling drainage ditches with soil from the same field), should it be classified as HTM?
  • Consensus:
    • Patty confirmed that strictly speaking, any soil moved from its original location, even within the same field, is considered HTM
    • Joe recommended generally treating all human-altered material as human-transported for simplicity
    • The team agreed to follow this approach for consistency

42.2.2 Missing Artifact Sheet

  • A pedon description notes artifacts (‘U’ suffix) but the artifact description sheet is missing
  • This was from early June fieldwork when the team was still learning to document artifacts
  • Decision: Keep the ‘U’ notation as recorded and add a text note about the missing artifact sheet

42.3 Diagnostic Features List & Initial Concept Spreadsheet

42.3.1 Anthropogenic Conditions Classification

  • The team discussed how to incorporate anthropogenic conditions into landscape categories
  • Current approach separates “anthropogenic conditions” from natural landscapes (Anoka sandplain, till, outwash, etc.)
  • Decision:
    • Keep anthropogenic conditions as a separate section at the top of the diagnostic features list
    • Add an “anthropogenic conditions” bullet point within each landscape category
    • Users will reference the anthropogenic conditions section when completing descriptions for any landscape

42.3.2 Aquic Conditions Criteria

  • Nic previously suggested specific documentation of “depth to common or many depletions”
  • Decision:
    • Retain “aquic conditions” but add clarifying parenthetical text specifying “depth to common/many redox depletions” as the criteria
    • Few and faint depletions would not qualify as aquic conditions
    • For some classifications (entisols), over 50% depletion may be needed

42.3.3 Initial Concepts Approach

Patty shared her spreadsheet organizing soil concepts by geomorphic surface: - Organized by geomorphic surfaces: river systems, Anoka sand plain, glacial fluvial (outwash), loamy till, etc. - Within each surface, concepts are further divided (e.g., river systems include soils on risers, dry soils on treads, wet soils on treads, river bottoms) - Spreadsheet includes columns for diagnostic characteristics: slope, surface texture, aquic conditions, drainage class, etc. - These will help differentiate between concepts and establish ranges for each

42.3.4 Working with HTM-Affected Soils

  • Each native soil concept may have HTM-affected variants
  • Team will track the thickness and prevalence of HTM across sites
  • If enough HTM-affected examples exist in a particular concept, they may create an “HTM-affected phase” for that concept

42.3.5 Concept Boundaries and Categorization

  • Joe noted that concepts will naturally have overlapping characteristics
  • Some diagnostic attributes may be more important for differentiation (e.g., aquic conditions)
  • Drainage classes will vary by landscape. For example, wet in a sand/gravel landscape may correspond to moderately well-drained, while in a till landscape it may be poorly drained.
  • The team will refine concepts as patterns emerge from the data

42.4 Modeling Discussion

42.4.1 Using Diagnostic Features in Modeling

Joe explained how diagnostic features are used in modeling: - Each pedon represents a point on the landscape with measurable features (e.g., depth to aquic conditions) - Models correlate these features with environmental covariates - Different diagnostic features can be modeled separately (depth to aquic conditions, depth to carbonates, lithologic discontinuities) - These separate models can then be stacked to build a final classification - Not all diagnostic features would be modeled, but collecting a comprehensive list allows flexibility

42.4.2 Potential HTM Modeling

  • The team discussed potentially modeling HTM distribution based on:
    • Land use intensity
    • Distance from known contributors to respread
    • RUSI (Rapid Urban Site Index) variables collected during fieldwork
    • LiDAR measurements of distance to roads/buildings

42.5 Project Status and Next Steps

42.5.1 Pedon Entry Status Update

  • Approximately 90 pedons have been entered into NASIS
  • About 90 more pedons remain to be entered
  • 50 pedons have been entered but not yet transferred to the Excel spreadsheet
  • Kasia has been processing many of these entries
  • The team aims to complete all entries by the end of April

42.5.2 Next Steps for Concept Development

  • Nora will start populating her version of the diagnostic features spreadsheet, working with pedons that have been QC’d by Ryder
  • She will focus on one geographic area at a time to better identify patterns
  • Patty will continue refining the rule-based ranges for each concept
  • The team will remain flexible about adding or modifying concepts as they analyze more data

42.5.3 Geomorphic Surface Guide

  • Patty has edited the Region 10 geomorphic guide to focus on landscapes relevant to the urban project
  • This will help keep geomorphic descriptions more uniform
  • The guide includes a flowchart to help users determine which landform classification to use
  • This will be especially helpful for undergraduates who haven’t been to the sites and don’t have easy GIS access

42.6 Additional Resources

  • Nora and Ava have created a “cheat sheet” with relevant soil taxonomy information
  • Joseph mentioned the Illustrated Guide to Soil Taxonomy as a helpful resource
  • The Survey123 guide contains linked resources used by the team

42.7 Upcoming Meetings

  • April 8th meeting with Randy at 10:30 AM (replaces regular small group meeting)
    • Patty will contact Randy about possibly rescheduling as Nora will be at soil judging competition in Texas
    • Potential alternative date: April 15th
  • Next small group meeting: April 22nd (Earth Day) at 9:30 AM
    • Nora will send a new Zoom link for this meeting

42.8 Action Items

  1. Kasia:
    • Email Randy or Ryder with specific questions about the missing artifact sheet
    • Continue processing pedon entries
  2. Nora:
    • Meet with Nic separately to gather input on diagnostic features list
    • Transfer the 50 entered pedons to Excel
    • Begin populating diagnostic features spreadsheet with QC’d pedons
    • Add Patty’s edited geomorphic guide to the team’s resources
    • Put taxonomy cheat sheet into Box and share with Patty
    • Send new Zoom link for April 22nd meeting
  3. Patty:
    • Add “depth of organic matter/organic matter depth” to concept spreadsheet
    • Add clarification about “common/many redox depletions” to aquic conditions
    • Talk to Randy about potentially rescheduling the April 8th meeting
    • Upload edited geomorphic guide to Box
  4. All:
    • Continue refining concepts based on data patterns
    • Identify areas where additional concepts may be needed