SSSAJ Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 36:555-561 (1972)
© 1972 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bruce, R. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bruce, R. R.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Bruce, R. R.

Hydraulic Conductivity Evaluation of the Soil Profile from Soil Water Retention Relations1

R. R. Bruce2

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of the water content-suction relation applicable to field soil horizons that differ widely in texture was considered. Except for coarse-textured, organic matter-deficient horizons, it is concluded that soil water retention of sieved samples is significantly modified and does not represent the natural soil volume. Water content-suction data from measurements on carefully procured core samples of each horizon of a Typic Hapludult adequately represent their water retention characteristics. Using appropriate water content-suction data, the hydraulic conductivity-water content relation calculated by published procedures was compared with hydraulic conductivity measured on similar samples by a transient outflow procedure. The calculated hydraulic conductivity-water content relations for coarse grained systems or systems having a relatively narrow range of pore size and well-defined bubbling pressure was sufficiently accurate for many purposes. However, to obtain a useful evaluation of the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity of fine-textured horizons with a very wide range of pore size and a poorly defined bubbling pressure, the Marshall or Millington and Quirk methods had to be matched at a water content in the 0.1- to 0.3-bar range. Indiscriminate use of such methods of calculating hydraulic conductivity is inadvisable.


NOTES

1 Contribution from the Southern Branch, Soil & Water Conservation Research Division, ARS, USDA, in cooperation with the Univ. of Georgia Agr. Exp. Sta.

2 Research Soil Scientist, USDA, Watkinsville, Ga. 30677.

Received for publication October 18, 1971. Accepted for publication March 1, 1972.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Vadose Zone Journal Journal of Plant Registrations
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 1972 by the Soil Science Society of America.