HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Schaetzl, R. J. Articles by Isard, S. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Schaetzl, R. J. Articles by Isard, S. A. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Schaetzl, R. J. Articles by Isard, S. A. Related Collections Soil Thermal Properties Soil Geomorphology and Geography Soil Classification and Mapping

Pedology

Modeling Soil Temperatures and the Mesic-Frigid Boundary in the Central Great Lakes Region, 1951–2000

^a Dep. of Geography, Michigan State Univ., 128 Geography Bldg., East Lansing, MI 48824-1117
^b Moscow Service Center, 220 East 5th St., Moscow, ID83843-2977
^c Dep. of Plant Pathology, 205 Buckhout Lab. Universtiy Park, PA 16802

^* Corresponding author (soils{at}msu.edu)

Understanding the spatial and temporal variation in soil temperatures is important to classification, land use, and management. To that end, mean annual soil temperature (MAST) data for Wisconsin and Michigan were modeled to (i) determine the effects of the Great Lakes and their snowbelts on soil temperatures, and (ii) better estimate the location of the boundary between the mesic and frigid soil temperature regimes in this region. The location of the mesic-frigid (M-F) line is particularly difficult to determine where east-west gradients in air temperature cross north-south trends in snowfall due to Lake Michigan. Additionally, the soil temperature regime of several Great Lakes' peninsulas near the M-F line is in question. To determine the accuracy of our soil temperature model, soil temperature data output from it were compared with data derived from thermocouples implanted in soils at 39 sites in northern Michigan that had been collecting data several times daily for more than 6 yr. Error statistics for the model show that it has essentially no mean bias when examined on an annual basis or for winter, and only a bias of 0.1°C for the warm season. The M-F line in Wisconsin and Michigan is slightly north of most previously estimated locations, and is strongly influenced by the snowbelt in southern Michigan. Soils in deep snow areas stay warmer in winter than do soils inland, increasing their MAST and forcing the M-F line north of where air temperatures alone might have placed it. Lake-effect areas also stay cold longer into the spring season, and cool down more slowly in fall. Soil temperatures in these areas are, therefore, more moderated on an annual basis, as indicated by coefficients of variation.

Abbreviations: CV, coefficient of variation • MAAT, mean annual air temperature • MAST, mean annual soil temperature • MBE, mean biased error • M-F, mesic-frigid • MLRA, major land resource area • NRCS, Natural Resources Conservation Service • NWS, National Weather Service • PE, potential evapotranspiration • RMSE, root mean squared error • SCS, Soil Conservation Service • UP, upper peninsula