Plant available water predicted by a flux-based approach

被引:11
作者
Abreu de Melo, Marina Luciana [1 ]
Inforsato, Leonardo [1 ]
Rodrigues Pinheiro, Everton Alves [2 ]
van Lier, Quirijn de Jong [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Ctr Nucl Energy Agr, Soil Phys Lab, POB 96, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[2] Fed Univ Tocantins, BR-77402970 Gurupi, Tocantins, Brazil
基金
瑞典研究理事会; 巴西圣保罗研究基金会;
关键词
Field capacity; Wilting point; Limiting point; Flux-criterion; Matric flux potential; Residual transpiration; FIELD-CAPACITY; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; POLYMER TENSIOMETERS; RETENTION PROPERTIES; UPTAKE MODEL; SOIL; EVAPORATION; EXTRACTION; LIMIT;
D O I
10.1016/j.geoderma.2022.116253
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
Plant available water (PAW) is an important indicator of soil suitability for crop growth and biomass production. Total available water (TAW) is defined as the difference between the water content at field capacity (FC) and at wilting point (WP). The readily available water (RAW) is a fraction of TAW defined as the water content between FC and the limiting point (LP). The challenge in determining TAW and RAW lies in the correct determination of FC, WP, and LP. We propose a process-based approach to address the issue, referenced as flux-based method (FBM). Five scenarios were used to assess the FBM: (1) generic soil-plant-atmosphere conditions, from which sensitivity analyses were performed; (2) a maize crop on several soils to compare the predictions of the FBM and the traditional FAO method; (3) mean plant-atmosphere conditions to map PAW from soil texture using the FBM and the FAO method; (4) a field experiment with a fully irrigated soybean crop; and (5) a field experiment with a common bean crop under water deficit. Resulting flux-based TAW and RAW showed high sensitivity to root length density and soil hydraulic parameters. The FBM tended to predict higher water contents at FC than the FAO method for maize crop scenarios. Texture triangles to predict TAW and RAW showed that the differences between the predictions of FBM and FAO are mostly due to the distinct values for FC, and for the LP, respectively. For both observed scenarios of soybean and common bean crops, the predictions of the FBM were plausible with time series of observed data. The FBM allows predicting PAW in Van Genuchten - Mualem type soils for different FC flux criteria, soil depths, root densities, and dynamic potential transpiration rates.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 83 条
[1]   Prediction of soil water retention properties after stratification by combining texture, bulk density and the type of horizon [J].
Al Majou, H. ;
Bruand, A. ;
Duval, O. ;
Le Bas, C. ;
Vautier, A. .
SOIL USE AND MANAGEMENT, 2008, 24 (04) :383-391
[2]  
Allen R., 2020, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. 6th Decennial National Irrigation Symposium, 6-8, P2020, DOI DOI 10.13031/IRRIG.2020-070
[3]  
Allen R. G., 1998, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper
[4]   Increasing water use and water use efficiency in dryland wheat [J].
Angus, JF ;
van Herwaarden, AF .
AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 2001, 93 (02) :290-298
[5]   The concept of field capacity revisited: Defining intrinsic static and dynamic criteria for soil internal drainage dynamics [J].
Assouline, Shmuel ;
Or, Dani .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2014, 50 (06) :4787-4802
[6]  
Bhattacharya A, 2019, CHANGING CLIMATE AND RESOURCE USE EFFICIENCY IN PLANTS, P111, DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-816209-5.00003-9
[7]   Errors in Water Retention Curves Determined with Pressure Plates [J].
Bittelli, Marco ;
Flury, Markus .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 2009, 73 (05) :1453-1460
[8]   The ratio of heat losses by conduction and by evaporation from any water surface [J].
Bowen, IS .
PHYSICAL REVIEW, 1926, 27 (06) :779-787
[9]   Experimental determination and modelling of the soil water extraction capacities of crops of maize, sunflower, soya bean, sorghum and wheat [J].
Cabelguenne, M ;
Debaeke, P .
PLANT AND SOIL, 1998, 202 (02) :175-192
[10]   DEVELOPING JOINT PROBABILITY-DISTRIBUTIONS OF SOIL-WATER RETENTION CHARACTERISTICS [J].
CARSEL, RF ;
PARRISH, RS .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1988, 24 (05) :755-769