Field-saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) is an important parameter used to estimate field water requirements in irrigation systems, although it is widely considered to be difficult to determine. In this study, we conducted 27 field infiltration tests with a double-ring infiltrometer to determine Kfs in agricultural fields during the dry season in Myanmar. However, Kfs values estimated by fitting the Philip model (Soil Sci 84(3):257–264, 1957. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-195709000-00010) to the measured data produced negative values for many fields. The aims of this study were the following: (1) to select an infiltration model applicable to irrigable fields for which parameter Kfs of the Philip model obtained negative values, (2) to identify factors causing erroneous Kfs values, and (3) to present a method of obtaining valid Kfs values in a case study conducted in Myanmar. Using the data obtained, the performance of five models, Philip, Swartzendruber (Water Resour Res 23(5):809–817, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR023i005p00809), Brutsaert (Water Resour Res 13(2):363–368, 1977. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR013i002p00363), Mezencev (Meteorol Hidrol 3:33–40, 1948), and Horton (Proc Soil Sci Soc Am 5:339–417, 1940), were assessed by examining fitting quality and estimates of Kfs values. The results showed the following: (1) The Horton model was the most useful, as it showed the better fitting of parameters; (2) factors that produced negative Kfs values were deformation of the infiltration curve due to the magnitude of initial infiltration caused by drying of the soil; and (3) nonnegative Kfs values were obtained by rejecting an initial infiltration period, determined by improving the cumulative linearization approach of the Philip model. The revised Kfs was overestimated in comparison with reference values, so a formula for applying revised Kfs was presented.
Infiltration model Field-saturated hydraulic conductivity Initial infiltration Double-ring infiltrometer
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Dr. Khin Mar Htay, Department of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Irrigation, Myanmar, and their staff for generous assistance in the field test and laboratory test. We would also like to express our gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
This study was funded by operational expenses under Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences Research project on “Development of agricultural technologies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related risks in developing countries”.
Anderson TW (1958) An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
Ardia D, Boudt K, Carl P, Mullen KM, Peterson BG (2011) Differential evolution with DEoptim. R J 3(1):27–34Google Scholar
Di Prima S, Lassabatere L, Rodrigo-Comino J, Marrosu R, Pulido M, Angulo-Jaramillo R, Úbeda X, Keesstra S, Cerdà A, Pirastru M (2018) Comparing transient and steady-state analysis of single-ring infiltrometer data for an abandoned field affected by fire in Eastern Spain. Water 10(4):514. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10040514Google Scholar
Reynolds WD, Elrick DE, Youngs EG (2002) Single-ring and double-or-concentric-ring infiltrometer. In: Dane JH, Topp GC (eds) Methods of soil analysis. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 821–826Google Scholar