An assessment of the BEST procedure to estimate the soil water retention curve: A comparison with the evaporation method

被引:35
|
作者
Castellini, Mirko [1 ]
Di Prima, Simone [2 ]
Iovino, Massimo [3 ]
机构
[1] Council Agr Res & Econ, Agr & Environm Res Ctr CREA AA, Via Celso Ulpiani 5, I-70125 Bari, Italy
[2] Univ Sassari, Agr Dept, Viale Italia 39, I-07100 Sassari, Italy
[3] Univ Palermo, Dept Agr Food & Forest Sci, Viale Sci, I-90128 Palermo, Italy
关键词
BEST (Beerkan estimation of soil transfer parameters) procedure; Wind evaporation method; Soil water retention; UNSATURATED HYDRAULIC-PROPERTIES; SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER; SANDY-LOAM SOIL; PHYSICAL QUALITY; INFILTRATION EXPERIMENTS; 3-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS; TRANSFER PARAMETERS; DISC INFILTROMETER; BEERKAN ESTIMATION; CONDUCTIVITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.01.014
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
The Beerkan Estimation of Soil Transfer parameters (BEST) procedure is an attractive, easy, robust, and inexpensive way for a complete soil hydraulic characterization but testing the ability of this procedure to estimate the water retention curve is necessary as relatively little information is available in the literature. In this investigation the soil water retention curve was predicted for four differently textured soils by applying three existing BEST algorithms (i.e., slope, intercept and steady) and the results compared with those measured by the standard Wind evaporation method. A sensitivity analysis of the infiltration constants, beta and gamma, was also carried out and their impact on the estimated retention curve scale parameter, h(g), was evaluated. BEST-slope underestimated the soil water retention for three of the four soils under consideration, providing relatively low root mean squared differences between estimated and measured data (0.0261 cm(3)cm(-3) <= RMSD <= 0.0483 cm(3)cm(-3)). For one site (PAL, sandy-loam soil), BEST-steady provided the lowest RMSD value (0.0893 cm(3)cm(-3)) among the considered algorithms, but the water retention was systematically overestimated as a consequence of a relatively higher difference between field and lab saturated soil water contents. A specific calibration performed for beta and gamma highlighted that: i) the water retention estimations by BEST-slope were more sensitive to beta than those obtained by BEST-intercept and BEST-steady; ii) with the exception of PAL soil, the lowest RMSD values were obtained with BEST-slope. Estimation of the soil water retention curve was not significantly worse when reference values of infiltration constants (beta = 0.6 and gamma = 0.75) were used as detected by negligible differences in RMSDs as compared to calibrated beta and gamma. Therefore, it was concluded that the BEST slope algorithm yielded predictions of water retention closer to the laboratory estimated ones than the alternative BEST algorithms (i.e. BEST-intercept and-steady). For these algorithms, the less accurate estimates of the water retention data were attributed to h(g) overestimations due to the independence of the retention curve scale parameter from gamma.
引用
收藏
页码:82 / 94
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Inverse laplace transform to fit soil water retention curve and estimate the pore size distribution
    Cardinali, Marcelo Camponez do Brasil
    Miranda, Jarbas Honorio
    Moraes, Tiago Bueno
    SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2024, 244
  • [22] An Approach to Estimate Wetting Path of Soil-Water Retention Curve from Drying Path
    Johari, A.
    Nejad, A. Hooshmand
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-TRANSACTIONS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, 2018, 42 (01) : 85 - 89
  • [23] Determination of Soil-Shrinkage Curve Using Transient Water Evaporation Method
    Dong, Yi
    Wang, Lun
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS, 2021, 21 (05)
  • [24] Reproducibility of the wet part of the soil water retention curve: a European interlaboratory comparison
    Guillaume, Benjamin
    Boukbida, Hanane Aroui
    Bakker, Gerben
    Bieganowski, Andrzej
    Brostaux, Yves
    Cornelis, Wim
    Durner, Wolfgang
    Hartmann, Christian
    Iversen, Bo V.
    Javaux, Mathieu
    Ingwersen, Joachim
    Lamorski, Krzysztof
    Lamparter, Axel
    Mako, Andras
    Soriano, Ana Maria Mingot
    Messing, Ingmar
    Nemes, Attila
    Pomes-Bordedebat, Alexandre
    van der Ploeg, Martine
    Weber, Tobias Karl David
    Weihermueller, Lutz
    Wellens, Joost
    Degre, Aurore
    SOIL, 2023, 9 (01) : 365 - 379
  • [25] Modeling of soil water retention curve and differential soil water capacity
    Poluektov, R.A.
    Terleev, V.V.
    Meteorologiya i Gidrologiya, 2002, (11): : 93 - 101
  • [26] A conceptual model of the soil water retention curve
    Assouline, S
    Tessier, D
    Bruand, A
    WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1998, 34 (02) : 223 - 231
  • [27] Determination of the soil water retention curve with tensiometers
    Lourenco, Sergio
    Gallipoli, Domenico
    Toll, David
    Evans, Fred
    Medero, Gabriela
    EXPERIMENTAL UNSATURATED SOIL MECHANICS, 2007, 112 : 95 - +
  • [28] A new equation for the soil water retention curve
    Kuang, X.
    Jiao, J. J.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 2014, 65 (04) : 584 - 593
  • [29] A conceptual model of the soil water retention curve
    Unite de Science du Sol, INRA, Versailles, France
    不详
    Water Resour. Res., 2 (223-231):
  • [30] Closing the Loop of the Soil Water Retention Curve
    Lu, N.
    Alsherif, N.
    Wayllace, A.
    Godt, J. W.
    JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, 2015, 141 (01)