On the identifiability of soil hydraulic parameters in lysimeter experiments: a Bayesian perspective 

Author(s):  
Marleen Schübl ◽  
Giuseppe Brunetti ◽  
Christine Stumpp

<p>Groundwater recharge through the vadose zone is an important yet hard to quantify variable. It is estimated from lysimeter experiments or mathematical modelling. For the simulation of groundwater recharge rates with a physically based model soil hydraulic properties (SHPs) have to be inversely estimated because SHPs from laboratory experiments can only be poorly transferred to field conditions. Still, also the inverse estimation of SHPs, is associated with experimental and modeling uncertainties that propagate into the recharge prediction. New methods are thus required improving the inverse estimation of SHPs and reducing the uncertainty in groundwater recharge prediction. Therefore, this study aims to investigate how the assimilation of different types of soil water measurements for the inverse estimation of SHPs with the HYDRUS-1D software affects the estimated uncertainty. For this purpose, observations from a monolithic lysimeter experiment (i.e. lysimeter outflow, soil pressure head and volumetric soil water content at two different depths) have been combined in the different modeling scenarios and coupled with a Bayesian analysis to inversely estimate SHPs and assess their uncertainty. Posterior predictive checks showed that the simultaneous assimilation of outflow and soil pressure head led to the smallest uncertainty in groundwater recharge prediction. This represented a reduction in uncertainty compared to assimilating lysimeter outflow alone. Additional information provided by measurements of soil water content resulted in a reduced parameter uncertainty for residual and saturated water content, however, it did not further reduce the uncertainty in recharge prediction. Overall, this study shows the applicability of a Bayesian analysis for determining uncertainties in the inverse estimation of SHPs with lysimeter data and for the quantification of the associated uncertainty in groundwater recharge prediction. Based on our results for the investigated site, we recommend simultaneous assimilation of lysimeter outflow and soil pressure head measurements to minimize uncertainty in groundwater recharge prediction. However, a more comprehensive analysis is required to make a generally valid recommendation for other soils or climates.</p><p> </p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Ezequiel Scherger ◽  
Javier Valdes-Abellan ◽  
Claudio Lexow

<p>Having a numerical model able to predict soil water content correctly is a very useful tool for many different objectives. However, it depends on the correct election of the soil hydraulic properties (SHP) on which the simulations are based. Measuring SHP in laboratory is time and economic-consuming and their inference by soil water monitoring and inverse modelling is a smart alternative. </p><p>However, the resources needed to obtain copious data are sometimes unavailable and questions arise regarding what is the best monitoring strategy that let to obtain the best SHP with the fewest number of sensors.  When null or scarce data is present for some soil layers several solutions of the same problem are encountered. SHP estimations by inverse modeling could vary according to the data available and the vertical distribution of the measurement points.  The aim of this work is to evaluate different monitoring strategies to obtain an accurate hydraulic model with a limited number of observations depths. For this purpose, data monitored in an experimental plot in Bahía Blanca (Argentina) was used to run several inverse numerical simulations with the HYDRUS software.  Several scenarios of available data were considered: (1) six monitoring depths (6-MD) (30 cm, 60 cm, 90 cm, 120 cm, 150 cm, and 180 cm); (2) five monitoring depths (5-MD) subtracting the information from one soil depth at a time; (3) four monitoring depths (4-MD) subtracting the information from two soil depths, simultaneously. Each depth included soil water content, ϴ, and soil pressure head, h, measurements.</p><p>The best fit was achieved with the 6-MD strategy. The Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (EF) were 0.784 and 0.665 for the ϴ and h, respectively. Besides, the relative root mean square error (rRMSE) was 0.134 for ϴ and 0.127 for h. For the 5-MD strategy the best performance was achieved by removing the information from depths of 90 cm, 120 cm, or 150 cm. In those cases, EF was between 0.715-0.717 and rRMSE ranged from 0.132-0.133. Statistics reported a worse fit when removing data from the upper and the lower layers. For the 4-MD strategy, the best performance was accomplished by suppressing data from 90 cm and 120 cm (EF=0.707; rRMSE=0.135).</p><p>The observation points that had less weight in parameter prediction corresponded to the intermedium vadose zone. If data from the upper and lower boundaries of the soil profile are available, ϴ and h from the middle section could be predicted reasonably well, anyway. The inversely model SHP from the 5-MD and 4-MD strategies correctly represent field retention data points θ (h). If the optimal monitoring depths are recognized, the time, cost, and labor needed to a correctly soil manage practice will be greatly reduced. </p>


Biologia ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Horst Gerke ◽  
Rolf Kuchenbuch

AbstractPlants can affect soil moisture and the soil hydraulic properties both directly by root water uptake and indirectly by modifying the soil structure. Furthermore, water in plant roots is mostly neglected when studying soil hydraulic properties. In this contribution, we analyze effects of the moisture content inside roots as compared to bulk soil moisture contents and speculate on implications of non-capillary-bound root water for determination of soil moisture and calibration of soil hydraulic properties.In a field crop of maize (Zea mays) of 75 cm row spacing, we sampled the total soil volumes of 0.7 m × 0.4 m and 0.3 m deep plots at the time of tasseling. For each of the 84 soil cubes of 10 cm edge length, root mass and length as well as moisture content and soil bulk density were determined. Roots were separated in 3 size classes for which a mean root porosity of 0.82 was obtained from the relation between root dry mass density and root bulk density using pycnometers. The spatially distributed fractions of root water contents were compared with those of the water in capillary pores of the soil matrix.Water inside roots was mostly below 2–5% of total soil water content; however, locally near the plant rows it was up to 20%. The results suggest that soil moisture in roots should be separately considered. Upon drying, the relation between the soil and root water may change towards water remaining in roots. Relations depend especially on soil water retention properties, growth stages, and root distributions. Gravimetric soil water content measurement could be misleading and TDR probes providing an integrated signal are difficult to interpret. Root effects should be more intensively studied for improved field soil water balance calculations.


2007 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1275-1289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerd Schädler

Abstract Continuous time series of soil water content over a period of more than 9 months for a midlatitude sandy loam soil covered by grass are calculated with the Campbell and the van Genuchten soil hydraulic functions and the Clapp–Hornberger, Cosby et al., and Rawls–Brakensiek parameter sets. The results are compared with soil water content observed at several soil depths, and the water balance components are evaluated. The Campbell soil hydraulic functions are often used by meteorologists, whereas the van Genuchten functions are widespread among hydrologists. The simulations are performed with the “VEG3D” soil–vegetation model in stand-alone mode forced by on-site meteorological observations. The soil water content and meteorological observations were obtained within the Regional Climate Project (REKLIP) at a site in the Rhine valley in southern Germany with 10-min temporal resolution. Apart from the different soil hydraulic functions and parameter sets, the effects of different lower boundary conditions and initializations on the simulations are compared in terms of statistical quantities like mean error, bias, correlation coefficient, and least squares fit. Large differences between the various combinations are found. For the situation considered in this paper, the van Genuchten–Clapp–Hornberger, the Campbell–Cosby et al., and the van Genuchten–Rawls–Brakensiek combinations give the best overall agreement with the observations.


Soil Research ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 851 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. L. Libardi ◽  
P. L. Libardi ◽  
K. Reichardt ◽  
K. Reichardt

The method of Libardi to estimate soil hydraulic conductivity in the field, during the redistribution of soil water, is discussed and improved. It is shown that if the saturated soil water content is measured at the soil surface, values at any other depth can be calculated from the database used to compute hydraulic conductivity. Since the saturated soil water content is difficult to measure and critical to the establishment of the hydraulic conductivity functions, this is an important refinement of the method. It is also shown that the unit hydraulic gradient assumption, which is part of the methodology, does not introduce significant errors in the estimation of soil hydraulic conductivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document