Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimation of Water Retention at Low Matric Suctions Using the Micromorphological Characteristics of Soil Pores

  • MINERALOGY AND MICROMORPHOLOGY OF SOILS
  • Published:
Eurasian Soil Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to characterize the soil pore area distribution (SPAD) and estimate the high energy soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) using the two-dimensional (2D) image analysis method. Totally, 24 undisturbed soil samples taken from different horizons of six soil profiles (from surface to 1 m), were studied for micromorphological and physical characteristics including SWCC. The undisturbed samples were impregnated with a mixture of polyester resin plus fluorescent dye diluted with styrene. To determine the SPAD, the 2D images were analyzed using ImageJ software. The Laplace equation was also used to transform the estimated SPAD to SWCC using the mean equivalent diameter for each pore area class, and the estimated SWCC was compared to the SWCC which had been measured by a pressure plate/membrane apparatus. The results showed that, in matric suctions from 0 to 1000 cm of water column, the 2D image analysis method could determine the quantity of the pores which retain water. The macro-pores had almost circular shapes, while the finer pores exhibited more elliptical shapes and less circularity. The Feret diameter (R) and minimum Feret diameter (r) of the pores were significantly different from the Feret diameter of a circular cross-section. Therefore, the assumption of circularity of soil pores, which links SWCC to SPAD, could add uncertainty to the obtained results, particularly at high matric suctions resulting from thin pores. More accurate assessment and pore visibility techniques seemed to be necessary for better determination of the soil pores characteristics such as orientation, connectivity, and functioning and the differences in diameter, volume of the pores throughout the pores.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. S. Anderson, “Tomography-measured macropore parameters to estimate hydraulic properties of porous media,” Procedia Comput. Sci., 649–654 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.09.069

  2. J. M., Beraldo, F. d. A. Scannavino Junior, and P. E. Cruvinel, “Application of x-ray computed tomography in the evaluation of soil porosity in soil management systems,” SciELO Brasil, (2014). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162014000600012

  3. K. Beven, “Micro-, meso-, macroporosity and channeling flow phenomena in soils,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 1245–1245 (1981). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1981.03615995004500060051x

  4. G. Blake and K. Hartge, Particle Density. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods (1986), pp. 377–382. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.3340050110

  5. R. Brewer, “Fabric and mineral analysis of soils,” Soil Sci. 100, 73 (1964).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. W. Brutsaert, “Probability laws for pore size distributions,” Soil Sci. 101, 85–92 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-196602000-00002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. K. Cazelles, W. Otten, P. C. Baveye, and R. E. Falconer, “Soil fungal dynamics: parameterisation and sensitivity analysis of modelled physiological processes, soil architecture and carbon distribution,” Ecol. Modell., 165–173 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.08.008

  8. M. Cercioglu, S. H. Anderson, R. P. Udawatta, and S. I. Haruna, “Effects of cover crop and biofuel crop management on computed tomography-measured pore parameters,” Geoderma, 80–88 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.01.005

  9. E. Childs and N. Collis-George, “Interaction of water and porous materials. Soil geometry and soil-water equilibria,” Discuss. Faraday Soc., 78–85 (1948). https://doi.org/10.1039/DF9480300078

  10. S.S.G.T. Committee, S.S.S.O, America, Glossary of Soil Science Terms (ASA-CSSA-SSSA.0891188517, 2008).

  11. M. Cooper, R. S. Boschi, V. B. d. Silva, and L. F. S. d. Silva, “Software for micromorphometric characterization of soil pores obtained from 2-D image analysis,” Sci. Agric., 388–393 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-9016-2015-0053

  12. N. Dal Ferro, A. Berti, O. Francioso, E. Ferrari, G. Matthews, and F. Morari, “Investigating the effects of wettability and pore size distribution on aggregate stability: the role of soil organic matter and the humic fraction,” Eur. J. Soil Sci., 152–164 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2012.01427.x

  13. A. Dexter, E. Czyż, G. Richard, and A. Reszkowska, “A user-friendly water retention function that takes account of the textural and structural pore spaces in soil,” Geoderma, 243–253 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2007.11.010

  14. A. R. Dexter, “Soil physical quality: part I. Theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth,” Geoderma, 201–214 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2003.09.004

  15. C. Ditzler, K. Scheffe, and H. Monger, “Soil science division staff,” in Soil Survey Manual. USDA Handbook (2017), Vol. 603. https://nrcspad.sc.egov.usda.gov/ DistributionCenter.

  16. J. C. Echeverría, M. T. Morera, C. Mazkiarán, and J. Garrido, “Characterization of the porous structure of soils: adsorption of nitrogen (77 K) and carbon dioxide (273 K), and mercury porosimetry,” Eur. J. Soil Sci., 497–503 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2389.1999.00261.x

  17. R. E. Falconer, A. N. Houston, W. Otten, and P. C. Baveye, “Emergent behavior of soil fungal dynamics: Influence of soil architecture and water distribution,” Soil Sci., 111–119 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1097/SS.0b013e318241133a

  18. S. Filimonova, H. Knicker, and I. Kögel-Knabner, “Soil micro-and mesopores studied by N2 adsorption and 129Xe NMR of adsorbed xenon,” Geoderma, 218–228 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2005.01.018

  19. G. W. Gee and D. Or, “Particle size analysis,” in Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 4: Physical Methods, Ed. by J. H. Dane and G. C. Topp (Soils Science Society of America, Book Series No. 5, Madison, 2002), pp. 255–293.

  20. M. Hajnos, J. Lipiec, R. Świeboda, Z. Sokołowska, and B. Witkowska-Walczak, “Complete characterization of pore size distribution of tilled and orchard soil using water retention curve, mercury porosimetry, nitrogen adsorption, and water desorption methods,” Geoderma, 307–314 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.01.010

  21. I. Håkansson and J. Lipiec, “A review of the usefulness of relative bulk density values in studies of soil structure and compaction,” Soil Tillage Res., 71–85 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(99)00095-1

  22. A. N. Houston, W. Otten, R. Falconer, O. Monga, P. C. Baveye, and S. M. Hapca, “Quantification of the pore size distribution of soils: assessment of existing software using tomographic and synthetic 3D images,” Geoderma, 73–82 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.03.025

  23. IUSS Working Group WRB, World Reference Base for Soil Resources. International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps, 4th Ed. (International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS), Vienna, 2022).

  24. N. S. Jangorzo, F. Watteau, and C. Schwartz, “Evolution of the pore structure of constructed Technosols during early pedogenesis quantified by image analysis,” Geoderma, 180–192 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2013.05.016

  25. S. Juarez, N. Nunan, A.-C. Duday, V. Pouteau, S. Schmidt, S. Hapca, R. Falconer, W. Otten, and C. Chenu, “Effects of different soil structures on the decomposition of native and added organic carbon,” Eur. J. Soil Biol., 81–90 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2013.06.005

  26. Y. Li, S. He, X. Deng, and Y. Xu, “Characterization of macropore structure of Malan loess in NW China based on 3D pipe models constructed by using computed tomography technology,” J. Asian Earth Sci., 271–279 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.12.028

  27. C. Liu, B. Shi, J. Zhou, and C. Tang, “Quantification and characterization of microporosity by image processing, geometric measurement and statistical methods: application on SEM images of clay materials,” App-l. Clay Sci., 97–106 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2011.07.022

  28. D. C. Marchini, T. C. Ling, M. C. Alves, S. Crestana, S. N. Souto Filho, and O. G. de Arruda, “Organic matter, water infiltration and tomographic images of latosol in reclamation under different managements/Materia organica, infiltracao e imagens tomograficas de latossolo em recuperacao sob diferentes tipos de manejo,” Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental, 574–581 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v19n6p574-580

  29. C. Moran, A. Koppi, B. Murphy, and A. McBratney, “Comparison of the macropore structure of a sandy loam surface soil horizon subjected to two tillage treatments,” Soil Use Manage., 96–102 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.1988.tb00743.x

  30. F. J. Munoz-Ortega, F. S. J. Martínez, and F. C. Monreal, “Volume, surface, connectivity and size distribution of soil pore space in CT images: comparison of samples at different depths from nearby natural and tillage areas,” Pure Appl. Geophys., 167–179 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-0897-5

  31. J. R. Nimmo, “Porosity and Pore Size Distribution,” in Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment, Ed. by D. Hillel, (Elsevier, London, 2004), Vol. 3, pp. 295–303.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M. R. Nunes, D. L. Karlen, and T. B. Moorman, “Tillage intensity effects on soil structure indicators—a US meta-analysis,” Sustainability, 2071 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052071

  33. M. Pagliai and N. Vignozzi, “Image analysis and microscopic techniques to characterize soil pore system,” in Physical Methods in Agriculture (Springer, 2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0085-8_2

  34. M. Pansu and J. Gautheyrou, Handbook of Soil Analysis (2006).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. S. Passoni, F. d. S. Borges, L. F. Pires, S. d. C. Saab, and M. Cooper, “Software Image J to study soil pore distribution,” Ciência e Agrotecnologia, 122–128 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-70542014000200003

  36. N. Pelak and A. Porporato, “Dynamic evolution of the soil pore size distribution and its connection to soil management and biogeochemical processes,” Adv. Water Resour., 103384 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103384

  37. L. Pires, M. Cooper, F. Cássaro, K. Reichardt, O. Bacchi, and N. Dias, “Micromorphological analysis to characterize structure modifications of soil samples submitted to wetting and drying cycles,” Catena, 297–304 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2007.06.003

  38. L. F. Pires, K. Reichardt, M. Cooper, F. A. Cássaro, N. M. Dias, and O. O. Bacchi, “Pore system changes of damaged Brazilian oxisols and nitosols induced by wet-dry cycles as seen in 2-D micromorphologic image analysis,” Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 151–161 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0001-37652009000100016

  39. D. Piron, G. Pérès, V. Hallaire, and D. Cluzeau, “Morphological description of soil structure patterns produced by earthworm bioturbation at the profile scale,” Eur. J. Soil Sci. Biol., 83–90 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2011.12.006

  40. E. Rabot, M. Wiesmeier, S. Schlüter, and H.-J. Vogel, “Soil structure as an indicator of soil functions: a review,” Geoderma, 122–137 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.11.009

  41. W. S. Rasband, ImageJ (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, 1997). http://imagej.nih.gov/ij.

    Google Scholar 

  42. A. J. Ringrose-Voase, “Measurement of soil macropore geometry by image analysis of sections through impregnated soil,” Plant Soil, 27–47 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02185563

  43. A. J. Ringrose-Voase and C. Nys, “One-dimensional image analysis of soil structure. 11. Interpretation of parameters with respect to four forest soil profiles,” J. Soil Sci. 41, 513–527 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1990.tb00083.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. A. J. Ringrose-Voase and P. Bullock, “The automatic recognition and measurement of soil pore types by image analysis and computer programs,” J. Soil Sci. 35, 673–684 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1984.tb00624.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. K. Sakai, “Determination of pore size and pore size distribution: 2. Dialysis membranes,” J. Membr. Sci. 96, 91–130 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(94)00127-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. S. Schmidt, A. G. Bengough, P. J. Gregory, D. V. Grinev, and W. Otten, “Estimating root–soil contact from 3D X-ray microtomographs,” Eur. J. Soil Sci., 776–786 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2012.01487.x

  47. G. İ. Sezer, K. Ramyar, B. Karasu, A. B. Göktepe, and A. Sezer, “Image analysis of sulfate attack on hardened cement paste,” Mater. Des. 224–231 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2006.12.006

  48. J. Tomasella, M. G. Hodnett, and L. Rossato, “Pedotransfer functions for the estimation of soil water retention in Brazilian soils,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 327–338 (2000). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.641327x

  49. I. G. Torre, R. J. Heck, and A. M. Tarquis, “MULTIFRAC: an ImageJ plugin for multiscale characterization of 2D and 3D stack images,” SoftwareX 12, 100574 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2020.100574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. C. L. Tseng, M. C. Alves, and S. Crestana, “Quantifying physical and structural soil properties using X-ray microtomography,” Geoderma, 78–87 (2018a). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.11.042

  51. C. L. Tseng, M. C. Alves, D. M. B. P. Milori, and S. Crestana, “Geometric characterization of soil structure through unconventional analytical tools,” Soil Tillage Res., 37–45 (2018b). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2018.03.018

  52. M. Tuller, D. Or, and D. Hillel, “Retention of water in soil and the soil water characteristic curve,” in Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment (2004), pp. 278–289.

  53. R. P. Udawatta, S. H. Anderson, C. J. Gantzer, and S. Assouline, “Computed tomographic evaluation of earth materials with varying resolutions,” in Soil–Water–Root Processes: Advances in Tomography and Imaging (2013), pp. 97–112. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaspecpub61.c5

  54. C. M. Vaz, I. C. De Maria, P. O. Lasso, and M. Tuller, “Evaluation of an advanced benchtop micro-computed tomography system for quantifying porosities and pore-size distributions of two Brazilian Oxisols,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 832–841 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2010.0245

  55. C. M. P. Vaz, M. de Freitas Iossi, J. de Mendonça Naime, A. Macedo, J. M. Reichert, D. J. Reinert, and M. Cooper, “Validation of the Arya and Paris water retention model for Brazilian soils,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 577–583 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.0104

  56. K. Watanabe and M. Flury, “Capillary bundle model of hydraulic conductivity for frozen soil,” Water Resour. Res., (2008). https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007012

  57. T. Wei, W. Fan, N. Yu, and Y. N. Wei, “Three-dimensional microstructure characterization of loess based on a serial sectioning technique,” Eng. Geol., 105265 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105265

  58. M. Wilson and B. Maliszewska-Kordybach, Soil Quality, Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Security in Central and Eastern Europe (Springer Science & Business Media.0792363779, 2000).

  59. Y. Xiong, A. Ola, S. M. Phan, J. Wu, and C. E. Lovelock, “Soil structure and its relationship to shallow soil subsidence in coastal wetlands,” Estuaries Coasts, 2114–2123 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-019-00659-2

  60. D. Yang, L. Yunguo, L. Shaobo, X. Huang, L. Zhongwu, T. Xiaofei, Z. Guangming, and Z. Lu, “Potential benefits of biochar in agricultural soils: a review,” Pedosphere, 645–661 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(17)60375-8

  61. M. Zaffar and L. Sheng-Gao, “Pore size distribution of clayey soils and its correlation with soil organic matter,” Pedosphere, 240–249 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60009-1

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors acknowledge the research affairs of the University of Tehran for their assistance in conducting this research.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of soil science, Faculty of Agriculture, College of Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Tehran, 3158-777871, Karaj, Iran

    A. Bakhshi

  2. University of Zanjan, 38791-45371, Zanjan, Iran

    A. Bakhshi

  3. Department of soil science, Faculty of Agriculture, Colege of Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Tehran, 3158-777871, Karaj, Iran

    A. Heidari, M. H. Mohammadi & E. Ghezelbash

Authors
  1. A. Bakhshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Heidari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. H. Mohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Ghezelbash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Heidari.

Ethics declarations

The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bakhshi, A., Heidari, A., Mohammadi, M.H. et al. Estimation of Water Retention at Low Matric Suctions Using the Micromorphological Characteristics of Soil Pores. Eurasian Soil Sc. 56, 1751–1764 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229323600549

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064229323600549

Keywords:

Search

Navigation