160 
The soil boundary delineations and other data were transferred, 
from the field sheets to a base map of 1:25,000 scale which was prepa 
red by enlarging the relevant part of the Survey of India 1:63,360 topo- 
sheet. 
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 
The soil map for the whole area being too large in size (7 0 
cm x 35 cm) is not presented in full. However a section of this map 
presented in figure 1 would give the reader an idea of the type of soil 
boundaries and legend. It.may be mentioned that there were in all 29 
mapping units one of which was a miscellaneous land type; the other 
28 comprised soil phases of 9 sub groups falling under 4 great groups 
namely, "Chromusterts", "Haplustalfs", "Rhodustalfs" and "Ustorthents" 
which in turn fall under the three orders of "Vertisols", "Alfisols" and 
"Entisols". The phase criteria were based on one or more of the 
following features :- Slope, Soil Erosion, Stoniness and Rockiness and 
Field bunding. 
As already indicated, the systematic photo-interpretation invol 
ved study of a zig zag sample strip of about 250 meters width; it had 
an area of 295 ha; 123 observations were located within this area of 
295 ha, which works out to a high density of 42 per 100 ha. The sele 
ctive check of the photo interpreted soil map involved a study of 50 
soil observations spread over the whole survey area. It was found that 
all the 50 selective checks proved to be successful in the sense that 
the soil composition as predicted from the sample area findings was found 
to be correct. It should be mentioned that the density of soil obser 
vations over the whole survey area (excluding the sample strip observa 
tions) is of the order of 0.28 per 100 ha. 
Intensive Check Area 
The soil map pertaining to the Intensive Check Area is 
presented in Figure 1. As already explained this test was done for 
the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the photo interpreted soil map 
through closely spaced soil observations of a density even higher than 
normally used in detailed surveys. A study of the figure would reveal 
that no change had to be made in respect of 21 soil boundary delinea 
tions out of a total of 26. Only 5 map units Nos.l to 5 show soil 
compositions different from the predicted ones. These are discussed 
in the following section with reference to Fig. 1 presented in the 
next page.