Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves

Nathaniel Parker, Andres Patrignani
{"title":"Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves","authors":"Nathaniel Parker,&nbsp;Andres Patrignani","doi":"10.1002/saj2.20504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Traditional laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves (SWRCs) typically consist of suction tables, pressure cells, and pressure plate apparatus (i.e., traditional methods). However, technological advancement has resulted in newer methods based on precision mini-tensiometers and dew point water potential meters (i.e., modern methods). This study investigated the discrepancy between SWRCs measured using traditional and modern methods in three soil textures. Our results showed that SWRCs from both traditional and modern methods were similar at the wet end (i.e., matric potentials 0 to −10 kPa) and at the dry end (−500 to −1,500 kPa) of the SWRC, with an average mean absolute difference (MAD) across all three soils of 0.033 and 0.017 cm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>−3</sup>, respectively. The largest discrepancy between methods was consistently observed at moderate tensions of −33 and −70 kPa for the three soils, with an average MAD of 0.059 cm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>−3</sup> for −33 kPa and a MAD of 0.083 cm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>−3</sup> for −70 kPa. Plant available water capacity differed by up to 20% between the traditional and modern methods in a clay loam soil. While previous studies have mostly focused on the dry end of the SWRC, our study suggests that additional research comparing traditional and modern methods is required at moderate (−70 and −500 kPa) tension levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":101043,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America","volume":"87 2","pages":"417-424"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings - Soil Science Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/saj2.20504","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditional laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves (SWRCs) typically consist of suction tables, pressure cells, and pressure plate apparatus (i.e., traditional methods). However, technological advancement has resulted in newer methods based on precision mini-tensiometers and dew point water potential meters (i.e., modern methods). This study investigated the discrepancy between SWRCs measured using traditional and modern methods in three soil textures. Our results showed that SWRCs from both traditional and modern methods were similar at the wet end (i.e., matric potentials 0 to −10 kPa) and at the dry end (−500 to −1,500 kPa) of the SWRC, with an average mean absolute difference (MAD) across all three soils of 0.033 and 0.017 cm3 cm−3, respectively. The largest discrepancy between methods was consistently observed at moderate tensions of −33 and −70 kPa for the three soils, with an average MAD of 0.059 cm3 cm−3 for −33 kPa and a MAD of 0.083 cm3 cm−3 for −70 kPa. Plant available water capacity differed by up to 20% between the traditional and modern methods in a clay loam soil. While previous studies have mostly focused on the dry end of the SWRC, our study suggests that additional research comparing traditional and modern methods is required at moderate (−70 and −500 kPa) tension levels.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
土壤保水曲线实验室测量方法的改进
测量土壤保水曲线(swrc)的传统实验室方法通常由吸力台、压力池和压力板装置(即传统方法)组成。然而,技术进步导致了基于精密微型张力计和露点水势计(即现代方法)的新方法。研究了三种土壤质地下传统方法与现代方法测量的SWRCs的差异。结果表明,传统方法和现代方法的SWRC在湿端(即基质电位0至- 10 kPa)和干端(- 500至- 1,500 kPa)的SWRC相似,三种土壤的平均绝对差(MAD)分别为0.033和0.017 cm3 cm - 3。在- 33和- 70 kPa的中等张力下,三种土壤的平均MAD为- 33 kPa时的0.059 cm3 cm - 3, - 70 kPa时的平均MAD为0.083 cm3 cm - 3。在粘土壤土中,传统方法和现代方法的植物有效水量差异高达20%。虽然以前的研究主要集中在SWRC的干端,但我们的研究表明,在中等(- 70和- 500 kPa)张力水平下,需要对传统和现代方法进行更多的比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Oxidation dynamics and leaching behavior of elemental sulfur fertilizers in tropical soils with contrasting textures Interactive effects of no-till, cereal rye, and softwood pine-derived biochar on soil health of a no-till northern soybean system Lignin-based amendments improve wheat growth and water use efficiency in acidic soils under deficit irrigation Effects of eucalyptus thinning on soil chemical attributes in an unfertilized silvopastoral system 6 years after thinning Repeated use of anion-exchange membranes in soils alters the membrane surface and phosphate-P exchange capacity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1