1954
DOI: 10.2136/sssaj1954.03615995001800030003x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some Empirical Relations of Soil‐Moisture Tensions

Abstract: An analysis was made to compare methods of designating soil mositure tension for an entire irrigation season. Using the field data from a sugar‐beet irrigation experiment, seasonal values for soil‐moisture tension at a given depth were calculated as a simple mean of all readings, and as a mean of the tensions just prior to each irrigation. These values were found to correlate closely with mean tensions calculated similarly to Taylor's mean integrated tension for a single depth. Yields were found to correlate e… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1967
1967
1967
1967

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Various methods have been proposed for combining soilmoisture suctions into single values to relate to plant response. These include the use of arithmetic means of suctions (Miller, 1954), integration over depth and time (Taylor,195z), and various weightings of mean suction based on root distribution (Taylor, 1965), while Webster (1966) has argued for the use of geometric means of suctions. For this work geometric mean suctions at each depth were weighted on the basis of the estimated distribution of roots in the profile.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various methods have been proposed for combining soilmoisture suctions into single values to relate to plant response. These include the use of arithmetic means of suctions (Miller, 1954), integration over depth and time (Taylor,195z), and various weightings of mean suction based on root distribution (Taylor, 1965), while Webster (1966) has argued for the use of geometric means of suctions. For this work geometric mean suctions at each depth were weighted on the basis of the estimated distribution of roots in the profile.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%