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 Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Haverkamp, R. Articles by Ross, P. J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Haverkamp, R. Articles by Ross, P. J. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Haverkamp, R. Articles by Ross, P. J. Related Collections Water Retention/Capillary Pressure Inverse Procedures/Parameter Estimation Soil Physics

Soil Physics

Soil Water Retention

I. Introduction of a Shape Index

^a Laboratoire d'Etude des Transferts en Hydrologie et Environnement, LTHE (UMR 5564, CNRS, INPG, UJF, IRD), BP 53X, 38041, Grenoble, Cedex 9, France
^b Instituto Mexicano de Tecnología del Agua (IMTA), Paseo Cuauhnáhuac 8532, Col. Progresso 62550 Jiutepec, Morelos, Mexico
^c Dep. of Civil Engineering, California State Univ., Long Beach, CA 90840, USA
^d CSIRO Land and Water, Indooroopilly, Qld. 4067, Australia

^* Corresponding author (haverkamp{at}hydrowide.com)

Knowledge of soil water retention is fundamental to quantify the flow of water and dissolved substances in the subsurface. Water retention is often quantified with models fitted to observed retention points. Interpretation and conversion of parameters from different models is subjective and prone to error. We examined 461 retention curves from the UNSODA database and 660 from the GRIZZLY database. Parameters of the Brooks-Corey (BC) and van Genuchten (vG) equations were fitted to the retention data. The shape parameters in these functions (, m, and n) are closely correlated to soil texture and may be predicted with so-called pedotransfer functions (PTFs). Among the scale parameters, the saturated water content _s proved to be a robust fitting parameter regardless of parameterization. Reliable optimization of the residual water content _r is more difficult; without any constraint it was negative for 54.4% of the GRIZZLY samples, and its value was strongly correlated to the shape parameters. The BC- and vG-shape parameters are often converted assuming = mn, which is incorrect when or mn is large (e.g., > 0.8). To facilitate the interpretation, conversion, and optimization of retention parameters, we introduce a water retention shape index P. This index constitutes an integral measure of the slope of the retention curve and characterizes the retention behavior of a particular soil with a single number. A value for the index can be estimated directly from retention data. For the majority of the samples P ranged between 0 and 0.4; rarely did P exceed 3, which is the maximum expected for fractal behavior. The value for P was related to soil texture: fine-textured soils tend to have smaller values than coarse-textured soils. The shape index provides a benchmark for conversion and comparison of parameters.

Abbreviations: BC, Brooks-Corey Model • PTF, pedotransfer function • RMSE, root mean square error • vG, van Genuchten Model

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Minasny and A. B. McBratney Estimating the Water Retention Shape Parameter from Sand and Clay Content Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., June 8, 2007; 71(4): 1105 - 1110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. J. Leij, R. Haverkamp, C. Fuentes, F. Zatarain, and P. J. Ross Soil Water Retention: II. Derivation and Application of Shape Index Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., October 27, 2005; 69(6): 1891 - 1901. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]