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

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (12) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Das, B. S. Articles by Inskeep, W. P. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Das, B. S. Articles by Inskeep, W. P. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Das, B. S. Articles by Inskeep, W. P.

DIVISION S-1-SOIL PHYSICS

Nitrate Concentrations in the Root Zone Estimated Using Time Domain Reflectometry

^a Land Resources and Environmental Sciences Dep., Montana State Univ., P.O. Box 173120, Bozeman, MT 59717-3120 USA

jwraith{at}montana.edu

Improved ability to monitor soil water and ionic chemical distributions in field soils will contribute to better land management opportunities. We evaluated the potential to use time domain reflectometry (TDR) to simultaneously estimate volumetric soil water content (), soil solution electrical conductivity (_w), and soil nitrate concentrations in an irrigated peppermint (Mintha piperita L.) field using simple models and calibration methods. Two models and three calibration approaches for estimating _w from TDR were compared to _w obtained from soil cores and soil solution samplers at three depths, and over a wide range in applied KNO₃. The applied N rates were well within those commonly used in peppermint production. Soil nitrate concentrations were estimated based on TDR _w predictions and a simple linear calibration of _w vs. nitrate concentration and then compared to independent soil core measurements. Estimates of _w and nitrate concentrations using TDR exhibited similar pattern, magnitude, and variance to those based on direct soil measurements. The Mualem and Friedman (1991) model (MF), which is based on soil water retention measurements, provided _w and nitrate estimates in better agreement with soil cores than did the Rhoades et al. (1976) model. Our results suggest that simple physical–conceptual models combined with laboratory or field parameter estimation methods may be suitable for automated real-time field monitoring.

Abbreviations: DOY, day of year • MF, Mualem and Friedman (1991) model • RRP, Rhoades, Raats, and Prather (1976) model • SEM, standard error of mean • TDR, time domain reflectometry

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. L. Corwin and S. M. Lesch Application of Soil Electrical Conductivity to Precision Agriculture: Theory, Principles, and Guidelines Agron. J., May 1, 2003; 95(3): 455 - 471. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. S. Long, J. M. Wraith, and G. Kegel A heavy-duty time domain reflectometry soil moisture probe for use in intensive field sampling Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., March 1, 2002; 66(2): 396 - 401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Wraith and D. Or Soil Water Characteristic Determination from Concurrent Water Content Measurements in Reference Porous Media Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., November 1, 2001; 65(6): 1659 - 1666. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]