scholarly journals Transfer functions for phosphorus and potassium soil tests and implications for the QUEFTS model

Geoderma ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 406 ◽  
pp. 115458
Author(s):  
Mirjam S. Breure ◽  
Elise Van Eynde ◽  
Bas Kempen ◽  
Rob N.J. Comans ◽  
Ellis Hoffland
Soil Research ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 527 ◽  
Author(s):  
CR Ahern ◽  
SE MacNish

Morphologically similar scrub and forest basalt soils were investigated for differences in soil phosphorus and potassium levels. Surface samples (0-10 cm) from 181 scrub and 111 forest sites were analysed for five soil tests: 0.05 M H2SO4-extractable phosphorus, 0.5 M NaHCO3- extractable phosphorus, 0.05 M HCl-extractable potassium, total phosphorus and total potassium by X-ray fluorescence. Highly significant differences (P <0.001) between scrub and forest soils were found for each soil test when all sites were assessed in terms of regional differences based on vegetation. These differences were then investigated further for each of the three common Great Soil Groups - black earths, euchrozems and lithosols - and then for six individual soil series common to both the scrub and forest areas. An unexplained geographic trend in phosphorus values previously reported (1972) in the same area could be accounted for by this difference between scrub and forest soils. Similar differences in soil phosphorus and potassium for scrub and forest soils on other parent materials are also discussed. It was clearly shown that the scrub means were always greater than the forest means for all five soil tests for all soils combined, each Great Soil Group and each soil series, and that there is a strong association between vegetation distribution and these soil differences.


Author(s):  
K.-H. Herrmann ◽  
E. Reuber ◽  
P. Schiske

Aposteriori deblurring of high resolution electron micrographs of weak phase objects can be performed by holographic filters [1,2] which are arranged in the Fourier domain of a light-optical reconstruction set-up. According to the diffraction efficiency and the lateral position of the grating structure, the filters permit adjustment of the amplitudes and phases of the spatial frequencies in the image which is obtained in the first diffraction order.In the case of bright field imaging with axial illumination, the Contrast Transfer Functions (CTF) are oscillating, but real. For different imageforming conditions and several signal-to-noise ratios an extensive set of Wiener-filters should be available. A simple method of producing such filters by only photographic and mechanical means will be described here.A transparent master grating with 6.25 lines/mm and 160 mm diameter was produced by a high precision computer plotter. It is photographed through a rotating mask, plotted by a standard plotter.


Author(s):  
Peter Rez

In high resolution microscopy the image amplitude is given by the convolution of the specimen exit surface wave function and the microscope objective lens transfer function. This is usually done by multiplying the wave function and the transfer function in reciprocal space and integrating over the effective aperture. For very thin specimens the scattering can be represented by a weak phase object and the amplitude observed in the image plane is1where fe (Θ) is the electron scattering factor, r is a postition variable, Θ a scattering angle and x(Θ) the lens transfer function. x(Θ) is given by2where Cs is the objective lens spherical aberration coefficient, the wavelength, and f the defocus.We shall consider one dimensional scattering that might arise from a cross sectional specimen containing disordered planes of a heavy element stacked in a regular sequence among planes of lighter elements. In a direction parallel to the disordered planes there will be a continuous distribution of scattering angle.


Author(s):  
Hannes Lichte

Generally, the electron object wave o(r) is modulated both in amplitude and phase. In the image plane of an ideal imaging system we would expect to find an image wave b(r) that is modulated in exactly the same way, i. e. b(r) =o(r). If, however, there are aberrations, the image wave instead reads as b(r) =o(r) * FT(WTF) i. e. the convolution of the object wave with the Fourier transform of the wave transfer function WTF . Taking into account chromatic aberration, illumination divergence and the wave aberration of the objective lens, one finds WTF(R) = Echrom(R)Ediv(R).exp(iX(R)) . The envelope functions Echrom(R) and Ediv(R) damp the image wave, whereas the effect of the wave aberration X(R) is to disorder amplitude and phase according to real and imaginary part of exp(iX(R)) , as is schematically sketched in fig. 1.Since in ordinary electron microscopy only the amplitude of the image wave can be recorded by the intensity of the image, the wave aberration has to be chosen such that the object component of interest (phase or amplitude) is directed into the image amplitude. Using an aberration free objective lens, for X=0 one sees the object amplitude, for X= π/2 (“Zernike phase contrast”) the object phase. For a real objective lens, however, the wave aberration is given by X(R) = 2π (.25 Csλ3R4 + 0.5ΔzλR2), Cs meaning the coefficient of spherical aberration and Δz defocusing. Consequently, the transfer functions sin X(R) and cos(X(R)) strongly depend on R such that amplitude and phase of the image wave represent only fragments of the object which, fortunately, supplement each other. However, recording only the amplitude gives rise to the fundamental problems, restricting resolution and interpretability of ordinary electron images:


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document