HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ratliff, L. F. Articles by Cassel, D. K. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Ratliff, L. F. Articles by Cassel, D. K. Agricola Articles by Ratliff, L. F. Articles by Cassel, D. K.

Field-Measured Limits of Soil Water Availability as Related to Laboratory-Measured Properties¹

ABSTRACT

Accurate evaluation of the soil water reserves available for plant use is vital in developing optimum water management for crop production in marginally dry regions. Laboratory estimates of the upper and lower limits of soil water availability used to calculate the soil water reservoir often deviate significantly from the limits measured in the field. To make a unified and broad assessment of the accuracy of laboratory measurements for estimating field soil water, we obtained and evaluated a comprehensive data base of field-measured upper and lower limits of the soil water reservoir. The field-measured upper limit was taken as the water content at which drainage from a prewetted soil had practically ceased. The lower limit was taken as the water content of the soil at which plants were practically dead or dormant as a result of the soil water deficit. These field-measured limits were compared to laboratory measurements at –0.33 and –15 bar made on samples removed from each field site. A total of 401 observations were available for the comparisons of –15 bar measurements to the field-measured lower limits and 282 observations of –0.33 bar measurements were available for comparison with the field-measured upper limit. Variation often existed within a soil series at a particular site for the field-measured upper and lower limits. However, the differences between the field-measured limits, the total available water reservoir, were relatively constant. Crop species caused only minor differences in the lower limit water content for the upper part of the soil profile where root length density was apparently above some critical limit. However, some annuals extracted water to greater depths than others. The laboratory estimates of the upper limit obtained by –0.33 bar water contents were significantly less than the field-measured drained upper limit for sands, sandy loams, and sandy clay loams and were significantly more than field measurements for silt loams, silty clay loams, and silty clays. The laboratory estimates of the lower limit obtained by –15 bar water content measurements were significantly less than field lower limit measurements for sands, silt loams, and sandy clay loams and significantly more than field observations for loams, silty clays, and clays. Because our study included relatively few measurements of loamy sands, silts, sandy clays, and clays, it was difficult to generalize about differences in field-measured and laboratory-estimated water limits for those textures. The results suggest that if absolute accuracy is necessary in water balance calculations, laboratory-estimated soil water limits should be used with caution and field-measured limits, if available, would be preferred.

¹ Contribution from the USDA, SCS, and ARS in cooperation with the Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Texas A & M Univ.

² Soil Scientist, USDA-SCS, and Soil Scientist, USDA-ARS, Temple, TX 76503; and Professor of Soil Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27650 (formerly Visiting Scientist, USDA-ARS, Temple, TX 76503).

Received for publication June 22, 1982. Accepted for publication February 14, 1983.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. X. Lopez-Cedron, K. J. Boote, J. Pineiro, and F. Sau Improving the CERES-Maize Model Ability to Simulate Water Deficit Impact on Maize Production and Yield Components Agron. J., February 26, 2008; 100(2): 296 - 307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Nielsen, M. F. Vigil, and J. G. Benjamin Forage Yield Response to Water Use for Dryland Corn, Millet, and Triticale in the Central Great Plains Agron. J., June 5, 2006; 98(4): 992 - 998. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Miao, D. J. Mulla, W. D. Batchelor, J. O. Paz, P. C. Robert, and M. Wiebers Evaluating Management Zone Optimal Nitrogen Rates with a Crop Growth Model Agron. J., April 11, 2006; 98(3): 545 - 553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. R. Sinclair Theoretical Analysis of Soil and Plant Traits Influencing Daily Plant Water Flux on Drying Soils Agron. J., June 17, 2005; 97(4): 1148 - 1152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Vanderlinden, J. V. Giraldez, and M. Van Meirvenne Soil Water-Holding Capacity Assessment in Terms of the Average Annual Water Balance in Southern Spain Vadose Zone J., May 12, 2005; 4(2): 317 - 328. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Nielsen and M. F. Vigil Legume Green Fallow Effect on Soil Water Content at Wheat Planting and Wheat Yield Agron. J., April 27, 2005; 97(3): 684 - 689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. C. Purcell, T. R. Sinclair, and R. W. McNew Drought Avoidance Assessment for Summer Annual Crops Using Long-Term Weather Data Agron. J., November 1, 2003; 95(6): 1566 - 1576. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. T. Gan, P. R. Miller, B. G. McConkey, R. P. Zentner, F. C. Stevenson, and C. L. McDonald Influence of Diverse Cropping Sequences on Durum Wheat Yield and Protein in the Semiarid Northern Great Plains Agron. J., March 1, 2003; 95(2): 245 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Nielsen, M. F. Vigil, R. L. Anderson, R. A. Bowman, J. G. Benjamin, and A. D. Halvorson Cropping System Influence on Planting Water Content and Yield of Winter Wheat Agron. J., September 1, 2002; 94(5): 962 - 967. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Nielsen Production Functions for Chickpea, Field Pea, and Lentil in the Central Great Plains Agron. J., May 1, 2001; 93(3): 563 - 569. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. R. Sinclair and R. C. Muchow System Analysis of Plant Traits to Increase Grain Yield on Limited Water Supplies Agron. J., March 1, 2001; 93(2): 263 - 270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Cárcova, G. A. Maddonni, and C. M. Ghersa Long-Term Cropping Effects on Maize: Crop Evapotranspiration and Grain Yield Agron. J., November 1, 2000; 92(6): 1256 - 1265. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A. D. Halvorson, A. L. Black, J. M. Krupinsky, S. D. Merrill, B. J. Wienhold, and D. L. Tanaka Spring Wheat Response to Tillage System and Nitrogen Fertilization within a Crop-Fallow System Agron. J., March 1, 2000; 92(2): 288 - 294. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M.-C. Fortin and D. E. Moon Errors Associated with the Use of Soil Survey Data for Estimating Plant-Available Water at a Regional Scale Agron. J., November 1, 1999; 91(6): 984 - 990. [Abstract] [Full Text]