1968
DOI: 10.1097/00010694-196808000-00012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of the Point-Count Method to Problems of Soil Morphology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1970
1970
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For each horizon, soil thickness was recorded and 400-g samples were obtained for laboratory determination of permanent wilting point (PWP) and field capacity (FC) to estimate soil water retention capacity (Richards 1941). Percentage of stones of each soil horizon was estimated using the point-count method described by Daniels et al (1968). The soil water holding capacity was defined in Eq.…”
Section: Soil Water Holding Capacitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each horizon, soil thickness was recorded and 400-g samples were obtained for laboratory determination of permanent wilting point (PWP) and field capacity (FC) to estimate soil water retention capacity (Richards 1941). Percentage of stones of each soil horizon was estimated using the point-count method described by Daniels et al (1968). The soil water holding capacity was defined in Eq.…”
Section: Soil Water Holding Capacitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively, the point counting approach allows to extract information easily and to estimate the fractions of LUC from the APs as applied by e.g. Bellhouse (1981) and Daniels et al (1968). In this technique, different land covers that occur under the points of a grid superimposed on an area are being identified and counted (Bellhouse, 1981).…”
Section: Land Use/cover Analysis By the Point Counting Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The fractions of the LUC classes, described as the density or weight of LUC, were calculated for each scene (AP and GE) as the ratio of the total number of points for each class to the total number of points of all LUC counted per AP/GE (Daniels et al, 1968). Points where the LUC is unknown or invisible on APs due to the clouds or damage of the photographs were excluded from further analyses and the corresponding points on GE omitted, too.…”
Section: Data Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The foregoing discussion of sampling error suggests that a single sherd is capable of reliably representing the ceramic vessel from which it was derived in a comparative petrographic analysis so long as we allow for an error factor of ±3.5 percent. While this conclusion must be tentative, pending experimentation with a wider range of ceramic pastes, it nonetheless is supported strongly in the literature on estimating the theoretical reliability of point-count analyses (Daniels et al 1968;[Vol. 54, No.…”
Section: Sources Of Error In Point-count Analysismentioning
confidence: 94%
“…As a result of the work of Chayes (1954,1956), which demonstrated that areal measurements provide unbiased estimates of the relative volumes of rock constituents, point counting (or modal analysis) has become a standard technique in geology for estimating rock composition. In addition, applications of the technique have been used effectively by soil scientists to estimate constituents of soil horizons (Daniels et al 1968) and by biologists to estimate the volumes of structural units in tissue samples (Weibel and Elias 1967). The widespread acceptance of this technique in a number of disciplines has prompted some recent applications to archaeological ceramics as well (e.g., Braun 1982;Garrett 1986;Hantman and Plog 1982;Plog 1980;Rose and Fournier 1981;Rugge and Doyel 1980;Steponaitis 1983;Tankersley and Meinhart 1982).…”
Section: A Technique For the Quantitative Analysis Of Ceramic Thin Sementioning
confidence: 99%