Official Series Description


Lab Data Summary

Aggregate lab data for the LUDINGTON soil series. This aggregation is based on all pedons with a current taxon name of LUDINGTON, 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 LUDINGTON were used in the calculation. Source: KSSL snapshot . Methods used to assemble the KSSL snapshot used by SoilWeb / SDE

Click the image to view it full size.

Pedons used in the lab summary:

MLRALab IDPedon IDTaxonnameCINSSL / NASIS ReportsLink To SoilWeb GMap
8992P06021992WI019002Ludington6Primary | Supplementary | Taxonomy | Pedon | Water Retention | Correlation | Andic Soil Properties44.4405556,-90.746666
8940A5514S1973WI035001Ludington6Primary | Supplementary | Taxonomy | Pedon | Water Retention | Correlation | Andic Soil Properties44.7972183,-91.0845871

Water Balance

Monthly water balance estimated using a leaky-bucket style model for the LUDINGTON 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.

Click the image to view it full size.



Click the image to view it full size.

Sibling Summary

Siblings are those soil series that occur together in map units, in this case with the LUDINGTON series. Sketches are arranged according to their subgroup-level taxonomic structure. Source: SSURGO snapshot , parsed OSD records and snapshot of SC database .

Click the image to view it full size.

Select annual climate data summaries for the LUDINGTON series and siblings. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of median values. Source: SSURGO map unit geometry and 1981-2010, 800m PRISM data .

Click the image to view it full size.

Geomorphic description summaries for the LUDINGTON 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 .

Click the image to view it full size.

Click the image to view it full size.

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.

Competing Series

Soil series competing with LUDINGTON share the same family level classification in Soil Taxonomy. Source: parsed OSD records and snapshot of the SC database .

Click the image to view it full size.

Select annual climate data summaries for the LUDINGTON series and competing. Series are sorted according to hierarchical clustering of median values. Source: SSURGO map unit geometry and 1981-2010, 800m PRISM data .

There are insufficient data to create the annual climate figure.

Geomorphic description summaries for the LUDINGTON 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 .

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 LUDINGTON, 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 .

Block Diagrams

Click a link below to display the diagram. Note that these diagrams may be from multiple survey areas.

  1. WI-2010-11-08-03 | Clark County - 2000

    Pattern of soils and parent material in the Fairchild-Elm Lake-Ludington association (Soil Survey of Clark County, Wisconsin; 2000).

  2. WI-2012-03-23-09 | Jackson County - 2001

    Relationship of soils, topography, and parent material in the Merrillan-Veedum-Humbird association (Soil Survey of Jackson County, WI; 2001).

Map Units

Map units containing LUDINGTON as a major component. Limited to 250 records.

Map Unit Name Symbol Map Unit Area (ac) Map Unit Key National Map Unit Symbol Soil Survey Area Publication Date Map Scale
Ludington-Fairchild sands, 0 to 6 percent slopesLxB218884318892t7zywi01919941:20000
Ludington sand, 6 to 12 percent slopesLuC7525431888ghdwwi01919941:20000
Ludington sand, 1 to 6 percent slopesLuB72214318872t7zzwi01919941:20000
Ludington-Humbird complex, 12 to 20 percent slopesLyD1172431890ghdywi01919941:20000
Ludington and Humbird soils, 6 to 12 percent slopesLuC8328421795g4x9wi03519741:15840
Ludington and Humbird soils, 2 to 6 percent slopesLuB7894421794g4x8wi03519741:15840
Ludington sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes296B458124984172t7zzwi05319941:20000
Ludington-Fairchild sands, 0 to 6 percent slopes1296B290624984212t7zywi05319941:20000
Ludington sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes296B22324984182t7zzwi06320011:12000
Ludington sand, 1 to 6 percent slopesHuB6244264592t7zzwi14119711:20000

Map of Series Extent

Approximate geographic distribution of the LUDINGTON 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 .