Full TGIF Record # 76605
Item 1 of 1
Web URL(s):https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1017915114685
    Last checked: 09/27/2017
    Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website
    Notes: Guide page
Publication Type:
i
Refereed
Author(s):Morgan, Kelly T.; Parsons, Lawrence R.; Wheaton, T. Adair
Author Affiliation:Citrus Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Lake Alfred, FL
Title:Comparison of laboratory- and field-derived soil water retention curves for a fine sand soil using tensiometric, resistance and capacitance methods
Source:Plant and Soil. Vol. 234, No. 2, July 2001, p. 153-157.
# of Pages:5
Publishing Information:Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Keywords:TIC Keywords: Comparisons; Soil water retention; Sand; Soil types; Analytical methods; Soil water potential; Resistance; Soil water content; Sandy soils
Abstract/Contents:"The approximate range from 100 to 50% of plant-available water in Apopka fine sand (loamy, siliceous, hyperthermic Grossarenic Paleudult) is 0.08-0.04 cm3 cm-3 soil water content (θ) or -5 to -15 kPa of soil water matric potential (Ø). This narrow range of plant-available soil water is extremely dry for most soil water sensors. Knowledge of the soil water retention curves for these soils is important for effective irrigation of crops in fine sand soils of subtropical and tropical regions of the world. The primary objective of this study was to compare sandy soil water retention curves in the field as measured by tensiometer and resistance block Ø values and capacitance sensor θ. The second objective was to compare these curves to one developed on a Florida fine sand soil using a pressure plate apparatus. Tensiometer and resistance block Æ values were compared to θ values from capacitance sensors calibrated gravimetrically. The effective range of both tensiometers and resistance sensors in fine sand soils is between -5 and -20 kPa Ø. Soil water potential values for both sensors were within 2 kPa of the mean for each sensor. Change in Ø was similar over the range of 0.04-0.08 cm3 cm-3 θ. Curves for the two new sensores were different by 4 kPa at 0.04 cm3 cm-3 θ. The relationship between Ø and θ were similar to 10-20, 20-30 and 40-50 cm depths. This was not true for a laboratory determined soil water retention curve for the same soil type. These differences are significant in soils with very low water holding capcities. Differences between laboratory- and field-determined retention curves could be due to a combination of entrapped air in the field soil and/or alteration in bulk density in the laboratory samples."
Language:English
References:11
Note:Graphs
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Morgan, K. T., L. R. Parsons, and T. A. Wheaton. 2001. Comparison of laboratory- and field-derived soil water retention curves for a fine sand soil using tensiometric, resistance and capacitance methods. Plant Soil. 234(2):p. 153-157.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=76605
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 76605.
Choices for finding the above item:
Web URL(s):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1017915114685
    Last checked: 09/27/2017
    Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website
    Notes: Guide page
Find Item @ MSU
MSU catalog number: SB 13 .P55
Find from within TIC:
   Digitally in TIC by record number.
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)