Aggregate lab data for the LINCOLN soil series. This aggregation is based on all pedons with a current taxon name of LINCOLN, and applied along 1-cm thick depth slices. Solid lines are the slice-wise median, bounded on either side by the interval defined by the slice-wise 5th and 95th percentiles. The median is the value that splits the data in half. Five percent of the data are less than the 5th percentile, and five percent of the data are greater than the 95th percentile. Values along the right hand side y-axis describe the proportion of pedon data that contribute to aggregate values at this depth. For example, a value of "90%" at 25cm means that 90% of the pedons correlated to LINCOLN were used in the calculation. Source: KSSL snapshot (updated 2020-03-13). Methods used to assemble the KSSL snapshot used by SoilWeb / SDE
Pedons used in the lab summary:
MLRA | Lab ID | Pedon ID | Taxonname | CI | NSSL / NASIS Reports | Link To SoilWeb GMap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
77E | 93P0693 | 93OK059008 | Lincoln | 6 | Primary | Supplementary | Taxonomy | Pedon | Water Retention | Correlation | Andic Soil Properties | 36.6836128,-99.8302765 |
Monthly water balance estimated using a leaky-bucket style model for the LINCOLN soil series. Monthly precipitation (PPT) and potential evapotranspiration (PET) have been estimated from the 50th percentile of gridded values (PRISM 1981-2010) overlapping with the extent of SSURGO map units containing each series as a major component. Monthly PET values were estimated using the method of Thornthwaite (1948). These (and other) climatic parameters are calculated with each SSURGO refresh and provided by the fetchOSD function of the soilDB package. Representative water storage values (“AWC” in the figures) were derived from SSURGO by taking the 50th percentile of profile-total water storage (sum[awc_r * horizon thickness]) for each soil series. Note that this representation of “water storage” is based on the average ability of most plants to extract soil water between 15 bar (“permanent wilting point”) and 1/3 bar (“field capacity”) matric potential. Soil moisture state can be roughly interpreted as “dry” when storage is depleted, “moist” when storage is between 0mm and AWC, and “wet” when there is a surplus. Clearly there are a lot of assumptions baked into this kind of monthly water balance. This is still a work in progress.
Siblings are those soil series that occur together in map units, in this case with the LINCOLN series. Sketches are arranged according to their subgroup-level taxonomic structure. Source: SSURGO snapshot (updated 2024-10-24), parsed OSD records (updated 2025-02-20) and snapshot of SC database (updated 2025-02-20).
Select annual climate data summaries for the LINCOLN series and siblings. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of median values. Source: SSURGO map unit geometry and 1981-2010, 800m PRISM data (updated 2024-10-23).
Geomorphic description summaries for the LINCOLN series and siblings. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of proportions and relative hydrologic position within an idealized landform (e.g. top to bottom). Most soil series (SSURGO components) are associated with a hillslope position and one or more landform-specific positions: hills, mountain slopes, terraces, and/or flats. Proportions can be interpreted as an aggregate representation of geomorphic membership. The values printed to the left (number of component records) and right (Shannon entropy) of stacked bars can be used to judge the reliability of trends. Small Shannon entropy values suggest relatively consistent geomorphic association, while larger values suggest lack thereof. Source: SSURGO component records (updated 2024-10-23).
There are insufficient data to create the 3D mountains figure.
Soil series competing with LINCOLN share the same family level classification in Soil Taxonomy. Source: parsed OSD records (updated 2025-02-20) and snapshot of the SC database (updated 2025-02-20).
Select annual climate data summaries for the LINCOLN series and competing. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of median values. Source: SSURGO map unit geometry and 1981-2010, 800m PRISM data (updated 2024-10-23).
Geomorphic description summaries for the LINCOLN series and competing. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of proportions and relative hydrologic position within an idealized landform (e.g. top to bottom). Proportions can be interpreted as an aggregate representation of geomorphic membership. Most soil series (SSURGO components) are associated with a hillslope position and one or more landform-specific positions: hills, mountain slopes, terraces, and/or flats. The values printed to the left (number of component records) and right (Shannon entropy) of stacked bars can be used to judge the reliability of trends. Shannon entropy values close to 0 represent soil series with relatively consistent geomorphic association, while values close to 1 suggest lack thereof. Source: SSURGO component records (updated 2024-10-23).
There are insufficient data to create the 2D hillslope position figure.
There are insufficient data to create the 3D hills figure.
There are insufficient data to create the 3D mountains figure.
There are insufficient data to create the 3D terrace figure.
There are insufficient data to create the 3D flats position figure.
Soil series sharing subgroup-level classification with LINCOLN, arranged according to family differentiae. Hovering over a series name will print full classification and a small sketch from the OSD. Source: snapshot of SC database (updated 2025-02-20).
Click a link below to display the diagram. Note that these diagrams may be from multiple survey areas.
Soils on bottom lands and terraces, and the underlying materials of soil association 7 (Soil Survey of Prowers County, Colorado; 1966).
Cross sections showing relationships of the soils to the landscape and to the underlying geologic formations in Prowers County. The upper cross section shows relationships in the western part of the county, and the lower shows those in the eastern part of the county (Soil Survey of Prowers County, Colorado; 1966).
Typical pattern of soils and parent material in the Albion-Shellabarger association (Soil Survey of Comanche County, Kansas; 1989).
Typical cross section of the valley of the Arkansas River (Soil Survey of Finney County, Kansas; 1965).
Relationships of soils in association 5 (Soil Survey of Grant County, Kansas; 1969).
Approximate geologic cross section through the central part of Gray County and the general location of soils on the landscape (Soil Survey of Gray County, Kansas; 1968).
Approximate geologic cross section (north and south) through central Greeley County (Soil Survey of Greeley County, Kansas; 1961).
Cross section of the valley of White Woman Creek in Greeley County (Soil Survey of Greeley County, Kansas; 1961).
Geologic profile extending in a north-south direction through the central part of Hamilton County (Soil Survey of Hamilton County, Kansas; 1961).
Geologic cross section of the western part of the county. (Based on plate 6 of "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Morton Co., Kans." (6).) (Soil Survey of Morton County, Kansas; 1963.)
Cross section of association 2 along White Woman Creek (Soil Survey of Wichita County, Kansas; 1965).
Typical pattern of soils and underlying material in the Eda-Devol-Lovedale general soil map unit (Soil Survey of Woods County, Oklahoma; 2003).
Parent material and parent rock of most of the soils in Beaver County, and their position on the landscape (Soil Survey of Beaver County, Oklahoma; August 1962).
Typical landscape in the central and eastern part of Cimarron County: Associations 1, 2, 3, and 5 (Soil Survey of Cimarron County, Oklahoma; June 1960).
Typical landscape in the northwestern part of Cimarron County: Associations 3, 4, and 5 (Soil Survey of Cimarron County, Oklahoma; June 1960).
Typical pattern of Pratt, Tivoli, and associated soils (Soil Survey of Cotton County, Oklahoma; December 1963).
Typical pattern of most of the soils in association 5 (Soil Survey of Dewey County, Oklahoma; December 1963).
Major soils of associations 1, 2, 3, and 11 (Soil Survey of Ellis County, Oklahoma; April 1966).
Major soils of associations 7, 8, and 10 (Soil Survey of Ellis County, Oklahoma; April 1966).
A schematic drawing showing a normal pattern of soils formed on alluvial plains and on windblown sands. The typical slope range is given for each soil (Soil Survey of Harper County, Oklahoma; June 1960).
A diagram showing typical relief in the southern part of Love County and the relative position of the soils in associations 1, 3, and 6 (Soil Survey of Love County, Oklahoma; September 1966).
Soil associations in the central part of the county (Soil Survey of Major County, Oklahoma; October 1968).
Cross section along a line extending across the middle of the county from the western to the eastern boundary (Soil Survey of Major County, Oklahoma; October 1968).
Typical pattern of soils in associations 6, 7, and 9 (Soil Survey of Roger Mills County, Oklahoma; August 1963).
Typical pattern of the soils in association 3, Texas County, Okla (Soil Survey of Texas County, Oklahoma; July 1961).
Typical pattern of soils of the Port association (Soil Survey of Woodward County, Oklahoma; November 1963).
Typical pattern of soils of the Lincoln-Las Animas association (Soil Survey of Woodward County, Oklahoma; November 1963).
Typical pattern of the Grandfield-Shrewder-Devol and Delwin-Nobscot general soil map units (Soil Survey of King County, Texas; 2007).
Pattern of soils and underlying material in the Grandfield-Gowen and Lincoln-Westola-Padgett general soil map units (Soil Survey of Young County, Texas; 2009).
Pattern of soils and underlying material in association 3 (Soil Survey of Lipscomb County, TX; 1975).
Relationship of soils in the Devol-Tivoli association to parent material and relief (Soil Survey of Wheeler County, TX; 1975).
Map units containing LINCOLN as a major component. Limited to 250 records.
Approximate geographic distribution of the LINCOLN soil series. To learn more about how this distribution was mapped, or to compare this soil series extent to others, use the Series Extent Explorer (SEE) application. Source: generalization of SSURGO geometry (updated 2024-10-30).