{"title":"土壤保水曲线实验室测量方法的改进","authors":"Nathaniel Parker, 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":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves\",\"authors\":\"Nathaniel Parker, 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}","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
摘要
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。
Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves
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.