“…For example, studies have been widely carried out on segmentation of X‐ray CT images (Baveye et al, ; Iassonov, Gebrenegus, & Tuller, ; Schlüter, Sheppard, Brown, & Wildenschild, ) involving image resolution selection (Sleutel et al, ; Wildenschild et al, ), representative elementary area identification (San José Martínez, Caniego, García‐Gutiérrez, & Espejo, ), and optimal thresholding methods (Elliot & Heck, ; Smet, Plougonven, Leonard, Degré, & Beckers, ; Wang, Kravchenko, Smucker, & Rivers, ); quantification and reconstruction of the pore structure (Marcelino, Cnudde, Vansteelandt, & Carò, ) such as characterization of macropores (Garbout, Munkholm, & Hansen, ; Luo, Lin, & Schmidt, ), extraction of three‐dimensional (3D) typical pore parameters (Al‐Raoush & Willson, ; Luo, Lin, & Li, ), and assessing the spatial variability of soil structure (Carducci, Zinn, Rossoni, Heck, & Oliveira, ); as well as the relationship between pore characteristics and soil functions (Helliwell et al, ) including correlations with soil physical properties (Anderson, Gantzer, Boone, & Tully, ; Munkholm, Heck, & Deen, ) and explanation of the hydraulic conductivity (Luo, Lin, & Halleck, ; Naveed et al, ; Paradelo et al, ; Tracy et al, ). Although the majority of current case studies focus on naturally cultivated soils, there are still some reports confirming that images extracted from X‐ray CT are effective in quantifying pore characteristics of unnaturally soils such as reconstructed, degraded, and reclaimed soils (Dowuona, Taina, & Heck, ; Langmaack, Schrader, Rapp‐Bernhardt, & Kotzke, ; Li, Shao, & Jia, ; Wang, Guo, Bai, & Yang, ). Langmaack et al () reported an interesting case performing X‐ray CT method to study the soil structure rehabilitation of degraded soil caused by compaction.…”