Reexamination of the Field Capacity Concept in a Brazilian Oxisol

Lier, Quirijn de Jong van; Wendroth, Ole

doi:10.2136/sssaj2015.01.0035

Cited by 30 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Field experiments (e.g., Brito et al, 2011;de Jong van Lier and Wendroth, 2015) using the method of fluxedbased estimation and simulation studies (e.g., Twarakavi et al, 2009) show that it may take several days for a saturated soil profile to reach FC. For example, Brito et al (2011) observed that it took 52-205 h to reach FC (defined as the soil water content at a flux rate of 0.01 mm d −1 ) and that time was a function of soil texture and profile depth.…”

Section: Estimating Field Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Scheduling irrigation using an approach based on the van Genuchten model

Liang

Liakos

Wendroth

et al. 2016

Agricultural Water Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Estimating Field Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Scheduling irrigation using an approach based on the van Genuchten model

Liang

Liakos

Wendroth

et al. 2016

Agricultural Water Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The organic matter content of the soil samples was determined using the loss on ignition method (Nelson & Sommers, 1996) (Table 1). Plant available water capacity (PAWC) was computed as the difference in the volumetric water contents at field capacity taken at −10 kPa (θ −10 ) (e.g., de Jong van Lier & Wendroth., 2016; Krueger et al., 2015) and permanent wilting point taken at −1,500 kPa (θ −1,500 ). To avoid introducing additional uncertainty that could affect the comparison of the different methods, we refrained from fitting a soil water retention model to compare SWRCs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves

Parker

Patrignani

2023

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 3 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 cm 3 cm −3 for −33 kPa and a MAD of 0.083 cm 3 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.

show abstract

“…Although there is general consensus that FC implies a near‐hydrostatic hydration state that prevails after gravity drains the profile, there is no unified method to define this state or to estimate FC. Indeed, three different methods can be distinguished, and FC is often estimated through the following: attainment of some constant matric pressure head in soil during drainage; values of −1/2, −1/3, −1/5, −1/10, and −1/20 bar of water pressure were proposed (Basche and DeLonge (), De Jong van Lier and Wendroth (), White (), Romano and Santini (), and Cassel and Nielsen ()); passage of a specific drainage time following thorough wetting; periods of 1, 2, and 3 days have been suggested (Reynolds () and Twarakavi et al ()); and finally, realization of a small drainage flux; a range from 0.01 to 1 mm/day was deemed possible depending on various interpretations (Sun and Yang (), Twarakavi et al (), Meyer and Gee () and Nachabe ()). …”

Section: Fc In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Capillary Length and Field Capacity in Draining Soil Profiles

Aldrees

Nachabe

2019

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The capillary length (λs) and time (ts) are dynamic scalars that emerge routinely in the infiltration problem when gravitational and pressure gradients forces are involved. During drainage, however, capillary gradients oppose gravity and retain soil moisture close to surface. In this case, the pull of capillary gradients increases with drainage time and offsets gravity resulting in a quasi‐hydrostatic pressure distribution and negligibly small drainage flux in the profile. In this paper, it is proposed to anchor the dynamic concept of field capacity—the attainment of a small negligible drainage flux—in the physics of soil moisture redistribution as influenced by gravity and capillary forces. Similar to infiltration, this dynamic approach grounds the concept of field capacity in soil hydrology and allows its estimation from readily measured intrinsic physical characteristics such as λs, ts, and Ks. Finally, we exploit an analytical solution by Broadbridge and White (1988, https://doi.org/10.1029/WR024i001p00145) to track the drainage front as soil water redistributes in an initially saturated soil profile. While initially large, the downward migrating drainage front decelerates with time reaching near steady state condition at t ≈ 1,000ts. Quasi‐hydrostatic pressure matric head and water content profiles develop above the drainage front.

show abstract

Reexamination of the Field Capacity Concept in a Brazilian Oxisol

Cited by 30 publications

References 25 publications

Scheduling irrigation using an approach based on the van Genuchten model

Scheduling irrigation using an approach based on the van Genuchten model

Revisiting laboratory methods for measuring soil water retention curves

Capillary Length and Field Capacity in Draining Soil Profiles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About