Next Article in Journal
HyperNCMD: A Scene-Adaptive Clutter Measurement Density Estimator for Radar Tracking via Hypernetworks and Normalizing Flows
Previous Article in Journal
Progress and Prospects of Diurnal Temperature Cycle Models: From Isotropic to Anisotropic
Previous Article in Special Issue
Change Patterns of Ecological Vulnerability and Its Dominant Factors in Mongolia During 2000–2022
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science

by
Nikolaos L. Tsakiridis
1,
Uta Heiden
2 and
Nikolaos Tziolas
3,*
1
Faculty of Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
2
German Aerospace Center, The Remote Sensing Technology Institute, Münchener Str. 20, 82234 Wessling, Germany
3
Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Department of Soil, Water and Ecosystem Sciences, Institute of Food and Ecosystem Sciences, University of Florida, Immokalee, FL 34120, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2026, 18(10), 1540; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18101540
Submission received: 17 April 2026 / Accepted: 12 May 2026 / Published: 13 May 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science)
Soil is the foundation of terrestrial life, underpinning ecosystem services, food production, and climate regulation. The accurate characterization of soil properties at regional to global scales is both a scientific and societal priority. Remote sensing (RS) provides the observational backbone for such characterization. When combined with artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) algorithms, it enables the large-scale, temporally consistent mapping and monitoring of diverse soil attributes that would otherwise remain inaccessible. Our Special Issue, entitled “Remote Sensing Advances for Soil Properties”, aimed to highlight novel methodologies and workflows for estimating and monitoring soil properties utilizing Earth observation data. It attracted nine contributions spanning a wide thematic and methodological spectrum, from AI-driven digital soil mapping (DSM) and uncertainty quantification to erosion modeling and ecological vulnerability assessment.
In an era defined by the urgency of climate change mitigation, the twin imperatives of carbon farming and climate-smart agriculture have brought soil organic carbon (SOC) to the center of policy agendas. Hence, two contributions address large-scale SOC estimation. Kalopesa et al. [1] present a multimodal data fusion framework that combines near-infrared (NIR) spectral recordings from a low-cost handheld sensor with open geospatial covariates derived from RS, including landform descriptors, climate layers, and vegetation indices. Their results demonstrate that a hybrid convolutional neural network–extreme gradient boosting (CNN-XGBoost) architecture substantially outperforms traditional ML methods, reaching an R2 of 0.72. The CNN-derived spectral features have been recognized as the dominant predictors, and rainfall data provided the most informative climatic contribution. Kakhani et al. [2] approach SOC estimation from a different perspective, addressing the insufficiently addressed challenge of uncertainty. By integrating conformal prediction with a random forest model trained on the European Land Use and Coverage Area frame Survey (LUCAS) soil dataset, they generate statistically rigorous uncertainty intervals for SOC estimates across seven different ecosystems. Their framework outperforms conventional uncertainty quantification approaches, such as quantile versions of gradient boosting and linear regression. In that regard, their approach provides end users with informative prediction sets that identify samples associated with higher modeling uncertainty, offering clear value for operational soil monitoring services. However, a critical need still exists for SOC monitoring approaches that can reliably track changes in soil health while supporting sustainable agriculture and emerging carbon market opportunities [3]. Contributions to this Special Issue highlight the potential of combining proximal sensing, remote sensing, and machine learning to improve SOC estimation and support more scalable soil monitoring frameworks, while also emphasizing the need for broader validation before operational deployment.
Three-dimensional DSM at the national scale is addressed by Stumpf et al. [4], who present a comprehensive framework for Switzerland, targeting clay content, SOC, pH, and potential cation exchange capacity. Applying Quantile Regression Forest to link a national soil database with covariates derived from light detection and ranging-based elevation models, multitemporal satellite imagery, and climate rasters, they achieve overall model accuracy (R2 ranging from 0.64 to 0.76) for the four properties. Their analysis reveals that multiscale terrain covariates are universally influential, while bare soil reflectance is a primary driver for SOC, confirming the supporting role of spectral and topographic information in DSM workflows. The challenge of mapping soil properties beyond bare soil pixels is addressed by Baby George et al. [5], who propose a composite mapping strategy applied to AVIRIS-NG airborne hyperspectral data over agricultural fields in India. By classifying pixels according to their bare soil fractional cover using spectral unmixing and fitting class-specific regression models for clay content, they extend the mapped area by 42.4% relative to strict bare-soil-only approaches. The study further demonstrates the feasibility of transferring this framework to spaceborne hyperspectral missions, such as the DLR Earth Sensing Imaging Spectrometer and PRISMA successors, which will deliver similar spectral datasets at the global scale.
Moving from soil properties to the topic of degradation, we received two relevant studies. Polovina et al. [6] present an innovative application of RS for soil erosion mapping over Bosnia and Herzegovina. They introduce a novel approach for deriving the coefficient of erosion types and extent (φ) in the erosion potential method by applying the bare soil index to a ten-year Landsat time series processed via the Google Earth Engine [7]. The resulting fractional bare soil cover maps achieve an overall accuracy of 85.79% and a Kappa statistic of 0.82, demonstrating that freely available multispectral satellite archives, when combined with temporal compositing strategies, can provide valuable results. These products can reliably support regional erosion monitoring and decision-making for torrent flood defense. Similarly, Han et al. [8] assessed ecological vulnerability at a national scale. They proposed a holistic indicator integrating multiple soil and land degradation signals in Mongolia. Using Moderate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)-derived data spanning from 2000 to 2022, they introduce a new RS-based ecological vulnerability index with an accuracy of 89.39%. Their analysis reveals that Mongolia is classified as moderately vulnerable (mean index 1.57) with a center of vulnerability shifting southwestward, driven predominantly by maximum temperature at high altitudes and in arid regions, and by precipitation in eastern and central zones. The application of the geographical detector and gravity center model provides a methodological blueprint for tracking the temporal dynamics of ecological vulnerability under climate change scenarios.
Collectively, the nine contributions to this Special Issue document the breadth and depth of current research at the intersection of RS and soil science. They reflect a discipline increasingly defined by data fusion across spectral, spatial, and temporal scales, where the application of AI architectures seems capable of exploiting this data richness. Moreover, three works highlighted a growing emphasis on uncertainty quantification and operational transferability. Challenges remain, however, including the need for harmonized, open, and well-curated ground truth soil datasets [9], as well as the reconciliation of satellite-derived products with the inherently three-dimensional nature of soil systems. Future advances in spaceborne hyperspectral missions, multimodal data fusion [10,11], and soil physics-informed ML models [12] are expected to progressively address these limitations, further closing the gap between laboratory-scale soil science and global Earth observation.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft preparation, N.L.T.; writing—review and editing, N.L.T., U.H. and N.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AIArtificial intelligence
CNNConvolutional neural network
DSMDigital soil mapping
LUCASLand Use and Coverage Area frame Survey
MIRMid-infrared
MLMachine learning
MODISModerate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
NIRNear-infrared
RSRemote sensing
SOCSoil organic carbon

References

  1. Kalopesa, E.; Tziolas, N.; Tsakiridis, N.L.; Safanelli, J.L.; Hengl, T.; Sanderman, J. Large-Scale Soil Organic Carbon Estimation via a Multisource Data Fusion Approach. Remote Sens. 2025, 17, 771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kakhani, N.; Alamdar, S.; Kebonye, N.M.; Amani, M.; Scholten, T. Uncertainty Quantification of Soil Organic Carbon Estimation from Remote Sensing Data with Conformal Prediction. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Vanderheyden, L.; Gayot, N.; Van den Broeck, G. What monitoring, reporting & verification (MRV) systems can reduce costs and enhance scalability of carbon farming? J. Environ. Manag. 2026, 401, 128885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Stumpf, F.; Behrens, T.; Schmidt, K.; Keller, A. Exploiting Soil and Remote Sensing Data Archives for 3D Mapping of Multiple Soil Properties at the Swiss National Scale. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 2712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Baby George, E.; Gomez, C.; Kumar, N.D. Adapting Prediction Models to Bare Soil Fractional Cover for Extending Topsoil Clay Content Mapping Based on AVIRIS-NG Hyperspectral Data. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Polovina, S.; Radić, B.; Ristić, R.; Milčanović, V. Application of Remote Sensing for Identifying Soil Erosion Processes on a Regional Scale: An Innovative Approach to Enhance the Erosion Potential Model. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 2390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gorelick, N.; Hancher, M.; Dixon, M.; Ilyushchenko, S.; Thau, D.; Moore, R. Google Earth Engine: Planetary-Scale Geospatial Analysis for Everyone. Remote Sens. Environ. 2017, 202, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Han, J.; Guo, B.; Pan, L.; Han, B.; Xu, T. Change Patterns of Ecological Vulnerability and Its Dominant Factors in Mongolia During 2000–2022. Remote Sens. 2025, 17, 1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hengl, T.; Consoli, D.; Tian, X.; Nauman, T.W.; Nussbaum, M.; Isik, M.S.; Parente, L.; Ho, Y.-F.; Simoes, R.; Gupta, S.; et al. OpenLandMap-soildb: Global soil information at 30 m spatial resolution for 2000–2022+ based on spatiotemporal machine learning and harmonized legacy soil samples and observations. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2026, 18, 989–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Huang, H.; He, W.; Zhang, H.; Xia, Y.; Zhang, L. STFDiff: Remote Sensing Image Spatiotemporal Fusion with Diffusion Models. Remote Sens. 2024, 111, 102505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhu, X.X.; Xiong, Z.; Wang, Y.; Stewart, A.J.; Heidler, K.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, Z.; Dujardin, T.; Xu, Q. On the foundations of Earth foundation models. Commun. Earth Environ. 2026, 7, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Minasny, B.; Bandai, T.; Ghezzehei, T.A.; Huang, Y.-C.; Ma, Y.; McBratney, A.B.; Ng, W.; Norouzi, S.; Padarian, J.; Rudiyanto; et al. Soil Science-Informed Machine Learning. Geoderma 2024, 452, 117094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tsakiridis, N.L.; Heiden, U.; Tziolas, N. Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science. Remote Sens. 2026, 18, 1540. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18101540

AMA Style

Tsakiridis NL, Heiden U, Tziolas N. Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science. Remote Sensing. 2026; 18(10):1540. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18101540

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tsakiridis, Nikolaos L., Uta Heiden, and Nikolaos Tziolas. 2026. "Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science" Remote Sensing 18, no. 10: 1540. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18101540

APA Style

Tsakiridis, N. L., Heiden, U., & Tziolas, N. (2026). Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science. Remote Sensing, 18(10), 1540. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18101540

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop