测定土壤容重和含水量的两种方法的比较

J. D. Jabro, W. B. Stevens, W. Iversen
{"title":"测定土壤容重和含水量的两种方法的比较","authors":"J. D. Jabro, W. B. Stevens, W. Iversen","doi":"10.4236/ojss.2020.106012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Soil bulk density and moisture content are dynamic properties that vary with changes in soil and field conditions and have many agricultural, hydrological and environmental implications. The main objective of this study was to compare between a soil core sampling method (core) and the CPN MC-3 EliteTM nuclear gauge method (radiation) for measuring bulk density (ρB) and volumetric moisture content (θv) in a clay loam soil. Soil ρB and θv measurements were determined using the core and radiation methods at 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm soil depths. The mean values of soil ρB obtained using the core method (1.454, 1.492 g·cm−3) were greater than those obtained using the radiation method (1.343, 1.476 g·cm−3) at the 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm depths, respectively. Mean ρB and θv values averaged across both depths (referred to as the 0 - 20 cm depth) measured by the core method were 4.47% and 22.74% greater, respectively, than those obtained by the radiation method. The coefficients of variation (CV) of soil ρB values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths; however, the CV’s of ρB values for both methods were larger at the 0 - 10 cm depth than those measured at the 10 - 20 cm depth. Similarly, the CV values of soil θv values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths. There were significant differences between two methods in terms of ρB and θv, with the core method generating greater values than the radiation method at the 0 - 20 cm depth. These discrepancies between the two methods could have resulted from soil compaction and soil disturbance caused by the core and radiation techniques, respectively, as well as by other sources of error. Nevertheless, the core sampling method is considered the most common one for measuring ρB for many agricultural, hydrological and environmental studies in most soils.","PeriodicalId":57369,"journal":{"name":"土壤科学期刊(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Two Methods for Measuring Soil Bulk Density and Moisture Content\",\"authors\":\"J. D. Jabro, W. B. Stevens, W. Iversen\",\"doi\":\"10.4236/ojss.2020.106012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Soil bulk density and moisture content are dynamic properties that vary with changes in soil and field conditions and have many agricultural, hydrological and environmental implications. The main objective of this study was to compare between a soil core sampling method (core) and the CPN MC-3 EliteTM nuclear gauge method (radiation) for measuring bulk density (ρB) and volumetric moisture content (θv) in a clay loam soil. Soil ρB and θv measurements were determined using the core and radiation methods at 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm soil depths. The mean values of soil ρB obtained using the core method (1.454, 1.492 g·cm−3) were greater than those obtained using the radiation method (1.343, 1.476 g·cm−3) at the 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm depths, respectively. Mean ρB and θv values averaged across both depths (referred to as the 0 - 20 cm depth) measured by the core method were 4.47% and 22.74% greater, respectively, than those obtained by the radiation method. The coefficients of variation (CV) of soil ρB values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths; however, the CV’s of ρB values for both methods were larger at the 0 - 10 cm depth than those measured at the 10 - 20 cm depth. Similarly, the CV values of soil θv values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths. There were significant differences between two methods in terms of ρB and θv, with the core method generating greater values than the radiation method at the 0 - 20 cm depth. These discrepancies between the two methods could have resulted from soil compaction and soil disturbance caused by the core and radiation techniques, respectively, as well as by other sources of error. Nevertheless, the core sampling method is considered the most common one for measuring ρB for many agricultural, hydrological and environmental studies in most soils.\",\"PeriodicalId\":57369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"土壤科学期刊(英文)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"土壤科学期刊(英文)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1091\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2020.106012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"土壤科学期刊(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1091","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2020.106012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

土壤容重和含水量是随土壤和田间条件变化而变化的动态特性,具有许多农业、水文和环境影响。本研究的主要目的是比较土壤岩芯取样法(岩芯)和CPN MC-3 EliteTM核子计法(辐射)在粘壤土中测量体积密度(ρB)和体积含水量(θv)。在土壤深度0-10和10-20 cm处,使用岩心法和辐射法测定土壤ρB和θv。在0-10和10-20 cm深度处,使用芯法获得的土壤ρB的平均值(1.454,1.492 g·cm−3)分别大于使用辐射法获得的ρB的均值(1.343,1.476 g·cm–3)。岩心法测得的两个深度(称为0-20 cm深度)的平均ρB和θv值分别比辐射法测得值高4.47%和22.74%。在两个深度,岩芯法测得的土壤ρB值的变异系数(CV)均低于辐射法测得土壤ρB的变异系数;然而,两种方法的ρB值在0-10 cm深度处的CV均大于在10-20 cm深度处测得的CV。类似地,在两个深度,通过岩芯法测量的土壤θv值的CV值都低于通过辐射法测量的CV值。两种方法在ρB和θv方面存在显著差异,在0-20 cm深度处,岩心法产生的值大于辐射法。这两种方法之间的这些差异可能是由于岩心和辐射技术分别造成的土壤压实和土壤扰动,以及其他误差来源造成的。然而,在大多数土壤的许多农业、水文和环境研究中,岩芯取样法被认为是测量ρB最常见的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparing Two Methods for Measuring Soil Bulk Density and Moisture Content
Soil bulk density and moisture content are dynamic properties that vary with changes in soil and field conditions and have many agricultural, hydrological and environmental implications. The main objective of this study was to compare between a soil core sampling method (core) and the CPN MC-3 EliteTM nuclear gauge method (radiation) for measuring bulk density (ρB) and volumetric moisture content (θv) in a clay loam soil. Soil ρB and θv measurements were determined using the core and radiation methods at 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm soil depths. The mean values of soil ρB obtained using the core method (1.454, 1.492 g·cm−3) were greater than those obtained using the radiation method (1.343, 1.476 g·cm−3) at the 0 - 10 and 10 - 20 cm depths, respectively. Mean ρB and θv values averaged across both depths (referred to as the 0 - 20 cm depth) measured by the core method were 4.47% and 22.74% greater, respectively, than those obtained by the radiation method. The coefficients of variation (CV) of soil ρB values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths; however, the CV’s of ρB values for both methods were larger at the 0 - 10 cm depth than those measured at the 10 - 20 cm depth. Similarly, the CV values of soil θv values measured by the core method were lower than the CV values of those measured by the radiation method at both depths. There were significant differences between two methods in terms of ρB and θv, with the core method generating greater values than the radiation method at the 0 - 20 cm depth. These discrepancies between the two methods could have resulted from soil compaction and soil disturbance caused by the core and radiation techniques, respectively, as well as by other sources of error. Nevertheless, the core sampling method is considered the most common one for measuring ρB for many agricultural, hydrological and environmental studies in most soils.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
278
期刊最新文献
How Did Vinh Moc Village, Located near Vietnam DMZ, Protect Their Villagers from United States Air Force Bombardment during the Vietnam War? Contamination and Potential Risks of Heavy Metals in the Sediments of the Chari and Logon Rivers in N’Djamena, Chad Saigon River Valley: A Navigation, Trade, Mitigation, Invasion, Liberation, and Unification Pathway Effectiveness of Combined Biochar and Lignite with Poultry Litter on Soil Carbon Sequestration and Soil Health United States Secret War in Laos: Long-Term Environmental and Human Health Impacts of the Use of Chemical Weapons
×
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:481959085
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