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

This Article 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 (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Brouwer, J. Articles by Anderson, H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Brouwer, J. Articles by Anderson, H. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Brouwer, J. Articles by Anderson, H.

DIVISION S-1-SOIL PHYSICS

Water Holding Capacity of Ironstone Gravel in a Typic Plinthoxeralf in Southeast Australia

^a Dep. of Plant Science, Wageningen Univ. and Research Centre, Haarweg 333, 6709 RZ Wageningen, The Netherlands, present address: Brouwer Environmental and Agricultural Consultancy, Wildekamp 32, 6721 JD Bennekom, The Netherlands
^b Dep. of Primary Industry, P.O. Box 219, Maryborough, Qld 4650, Australia

brouwbar{at}bos.nl

Water retention by coarse fragments in the soil is often ignored in agronomic and water balance studies. Following the calculation of inexplicably high water retention by the fine earth fraction, water contents at -20 and -1500 kPa and apparent bulk density were determined for remnant pisolithic ironstone gravel samples isolated from soils on the Dundas Tableland in southeast Australia. The volumetric water content of the ironstone gravel at -1500 kPa was found to vary between 0.12 and 0.24 m³ m^-3, while at -20 kPa it varied between 0.16 and 0.36 m³ m^-3. Available water holding capacity (AWHC) of the ironstone gravel varied between 0.03 and 0.15 m³ m^-3. Both the AWHC and the water content at -1500 kPa of the ironstone gravel showed significant increases with depth. Magnetic ironstone gravel, found almost exclusively in the A and E horizons, was much denser than nonmagnetic ironstone gravel (average 3.38 vs. 2.64 Mg m^-3), but had similar water retention characteristics. Ignoring the water retention characteristics of the ironstone gravel would have led to overestimation of the AWHC of the bulk soil by a factor 1.08 to 1.67 for various horizons. For the combined top 1.0 m of the soil, ignoring the water held by the ironstone gravel would have led to an estimated AWHC of 162 mm, while in fact it was only 129 mm. Water balance studies of soils with ironstone gravel clearly need to take into account the water holding characteristics of that gravel.

Abbreviations: AWHC, available water holding capacity

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. K. Tokunaga, T. K. Tokunaga, K. R. Olson, and J. Wan Moisture Characteristics of Hanford Gravels: Bulk, Grain-Surface, and Intragranular Components Vadose Zone J., August 1, 2003; 2(3): 322 - 329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]