Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Particle size distribution models for soils of the humid tropics

  • SOILS, SEC 2 • GLOBAL CHANGE, ENVIRON RISK ASSESS, SUSTAINABLE LAND USE • RESEARCH ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Standardisation of particle size distribution (PSD) is a prerequisite to achieve compatibility of soil data among various countries with different texture classification systems. Therefore, several mathematical models have been proposed to accurately represent PSD. Previous studies evaluated the performance of such models to describe PSD of soils from temperate regions. This study aims at evaluating the performance of models for describing PSD of soils from the humid tropics based on a large dataset.

Materials and methods

A dataset of 1,412 soils from Central Africa representing 11 different FAO Soil Groups was used. Ten PSD models with two to four fitting parameters were selected: simple log-normal (LN_2p), van Genuchten-type1 (VG_2p), van Genuchten-type2 (vG_3p), Fredlund-type1 (F_3p), Fredlund-type2 (F_4p), Weibull (W_3p), Skaggs (Sk_3p), Gompertz-type1 (G_2p), Gompertz-type2 (G_4p) and Andersson (A_4p). The fitting performance of the PSD models was evaluated by three statistical indices: the adjusted coefficient of determination, the Akaike information criterion and the relative error. Clustered columns and box plots were also used to get more insights. The predictive ability of the best PSD models was tested using a leave-one-out method and 1:1 plots.

Results and discussion

A table of initial values for the fitting parameters of each PSD model was provided for future applications. Some models like VG_2p, VG_3p, Sk_3p and G_4p were not suitable to describe PSD of soils in the humid tropics. On the other hand, F_3p, F_4p, W_3p and A_4p models showed outstanding fitting performance. The fitting performance of PSD models was also dependent of the textural class, the broad textural group and the bimodal character of the soil. For the most frequent textural classes in the dataset, the F_3p and A_4p models were the best closely followed by the W_3p model. While the F_3p model performed better than the A_4p model for coarse-textured soils, the opposite was observed for fine-textured soils. The W_3p model showed acceptable fitting performance for fine, medium and coarse-textured soils. The performance of the PSD models was found to be better for bimodal soils, which are common in the humid tropics, than for unimodal soils.

Conclusions

Great differences in fitting and prediction performance were found between the PSD models. Soil texture as well as the bimodal character of the soil significantly affect their respective performance. Some models like VG_2p, VG_3p, Sk_3p and G_4p are not suitable to describe PSD of soils of the humid tropics. On the other hand, F_3p, F_4p, W_3p and A_4p models showed outstanding fitting performance. Therefore, they are highly recommended in order to get a better description of the PSD of soils of the humid tropics.

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1973) Information theory and an extension of maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csáki F (eds) Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Akadémia Kiado’, Budapest, pp 267–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson S (1990) Markfysikaliska undersökningar i odlad jord, XXVI. Om mineraljordens och mullens rumsutfyllande egenskaper. En teoretisk studie. (In Swedish). Swedish University of agricultural sciences, Uppsala, p 70

    Google Scholar 

  • Arya LM, Paris JF (1981) A physicoempirical model to predict the soil-moisture characteristic from particle-size distribution and bulk-density data. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45:1023–1030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assouline S, Tessier D, Bruand A (1998) A conceptual model of the soil water retention curve. Water Resour Res 34:223–231. doi:10.1029/97WR03039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagarello V, Provenzano G, Sgroi A (2009) Fitting particle size distribution models to data from Burundian soils for the BEST procedure and other purposes. Biosyst Eng 104:435–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bah AR, Kravchuk O, Kirchhof G (2009) Fitting performance of particle-size distribution models on data derived by conventional and laser diffraction techniques. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73:1101–1107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bellocchi G, Rivington M, Donatelli M, Matthews K (2010) Validation of biophysical models: issues and methodologies. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 30:109–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird NRA, Perrier E, Rieu M (2000) The water retention function for a model of soil structure with pore and solid fractal distributions. Eur J Soil Sci 51:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bittelli M, Campbell GS, Flury M (1999) Characterization of particle-size distribution in soils with a fragmentation model. Soil Sci Soc Am J 63:782–788

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Botula YD, Cornelis WM, Baert G, Van Ranst E (2012) Evaluation of pedotransfer functions for predicting water retention of soils in Lower Congo (D.R. Congo). Agr Water Manage 111:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouma J (1989) Using soil survey data for quantitative land evaluation. Adv Soil Sci 9:177–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan GD (1989) Applicability of the simple lognormal model to particle-size distribution in soils. Soil Sci 147:155–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan GD, Grewal KS, Robson AB (1993) Improved models of particle-size distribution - an illustration of model comparison techniques. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:901–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carsel RF, Parrish RS (1988) Developing joint probability-distributions of soil-water retention characteristics. Water Resour Res 24:755–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelis WM, Ronsyn J, Van Meirvenne M, Hartmann R (2001) Evaluation of pedotransfer functions for predicting the soil moisture retention curve. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:638–648

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Condappa D, Galle S, Dewandel B, Haverkamp R (2008) Bimodal zone of the soil textural triangle: common in tropical and subtropical regions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 72:33–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO-UNESCO (1974) Soil map of the world. Volume I: legend. UNESCO, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Illescas CP, Porporato A, Laio F, Rodriguez-Iturbe I (2001) The ecohydrological role of soil texture in a water-limited ecosystem. Water Resour Res 37:2863–2872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finke PA (1995) Soil inventarization: from data collection to providing information (in Dutch). In: Buurman P, Sevink J (eds) From soil map to information system. Wageningen Press, pp. 111–125, Wageningen, the Netherlands

  • Fredlund MD, Fredlund DG, Wilson GW (2000) An equation to represent grain-size distribution. Can Geotech J 37:817–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle-size analysis. In: Klute JH (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1, 2nd edn. Agron. Monogr.9:383–411. ASA and SSSA, Madison

  • Gimenez D, Rawls WJ, Pachepsky Y, Watt JPC (2001) Prediction of a pore distribution factor from soil textural and mechanical parameters. Soil Sci 166:79–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Handreck KA (1983) Particle-size and the physical-properties of growing media for containers. Commun Soil Sci Plan 14:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haverkamp R, Parlange J-Y (1986) Predicting the water retention curve from a particle size distribution: 1. Sandy soils without organic matter. Soil Sci 142:325–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillel D (1980) Fundamentals of soil physics. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodnett MG, Tomasella J (2002) Marked differences between van Genuchten soil water-retention parameters for temperate and tropical soils: a new water-retention pedo-transfer functions developed for tropical soils. Geoderma 108:155–180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang SI (2004) Effect of texture on the performance of soil particle-size distribution models. Geoderma 123:363–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang SI, Powers SE (2003) Lognormal distribution model for estimating soil water retention curves for sandy soils. Soil Sci 168:156–166

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang SI, Lee KP, Lee DS, Powers SE (2002) Models for estimating soil particle-size distributions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1143–1150

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang SI, Yun EY, Ro HM (2011) Estimation of soil water retention function based on asymmetry between particle- and pore-size distributions. Eur J Soil Sci 62:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaky J (1944) Soil mechanics. (In Hungarian). Egyetemi Nyomda, Budapest

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamagne M (1963) Contribution à l’étude des sols au Congo oriental. PEDOLOGIE XIII(2):271–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Jauhiainen M (2004) Relationships of particle size distribution curve, soil water retention curve and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and their implications on water balance of forested and agricultural hillslopes. Dissertation, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

  • Jin Z, Dong YS, Qi YC, Liu WG, An ZS (2011) Characterizing variations in soil particle-size distribution along a grass-desert shrub transition in the Ordos Plateau of Inner Mongolia, China. Land Degrad Dev. doi:10.1002/ldr.1112

  • Jing’an C, Guojiang W (1999) Sediment particle size distribution and its environmental significance in Lake Erhai, Yunnan Province. Chin J Geochem 4(18):314–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson NL, Kotz S (1970) Distributions in statistics. Continuous univariate distributions, vol. 1. Wiley, New York, Vol. 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolev B, Rousseva S, Dimitrov D (1996) Derivation of soil water capacity parameters from standard soil texture information for Bulgarian soils. Ecol Model 84:315–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kravchenko A, Zhang RD (1998) Estimating the soil water retention from particle-size distributions: a fractal approach. Soil Sci 163:171–179

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lima JEFW, Silva EM (2007) Seleção de modelos para o traçado de curvas granulométricas de sedimentos em suspensão em rios. Rev Bras Eng Agríc Ambient 11:101–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minasny B, Hartemink AE (2011) Predicting soil properties in the tropics. Earth Sci Rev 106:52–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moeys J, Shangguan W (2010) Soil texture: Functions for soil texture plot, classification and transformation. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/soiltexture/. Accessed 21 May 2012

  • Nemes A, Rawls WJ (2004) Soil texture and particle-size distribution as input to estimate soil hydraulic properties. In: Pachepsky YA, Rawls WJ (eds) Development of pedotransfer functions. Elsevier, Amsterdam in Soil Hydrology 30:47–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemes A, Wosten JHM, Lilly A, Voshaar JHO (1999) Evaluation of different procedures to interpolate particle-size distributions to achieve compatibility within soil databases. Geoderma 90:187–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachepsky YA, Polubesova TA, Hajnos M, Sokolowska Z, Jozefaciuk G (1995) Fractal parameters of pore surface-area as influenced by simulated soil degradation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 59:68–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pachepsky YA, Radcliffe DE, Selim HM (2003) Scaling methods in soil physics. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Puckett WE, Dane JH, Hajek BF (1985) Physical and mineralogical data to determine soil hydraulic-properties. Soil Sci Soc Am J 49:831–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shangguan W (2012) An investigation of soil particle-size distribution models for the conversion of soil texture classification from ISSS and Katschinski’s to FAO/USDA System. Paper presented at PEDOFRACT VII Workshop on Scaling in Particulate and Porous Media: Modeling and Use in Predictions. A Coruña, Spain

  • Shangguan W, Dai YJ, Liu BY, Ye AZ, Yuan H (2012) A soil particle-size distribution dataset for regional land and climate modelling in China. Geoderma 171:85–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva EM, Lima JEFW, Rodrigues LN, Azevedo JA (2004) Comparação de modelos matemáticos para o traçado de curvas granulométricas. Pesqui Agropecu Bras 39:363–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Skaggs TH, Arya LM, Shouse PJ, Mohanty BP (2001) Estimating particle-size distribution from limited soil texture data. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:1038–1044

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith P et al (1997) A comparison of the performance of nine soil organic matter models using datasets from seven long-term experiments. Geoderma 81:153–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su YZ, Zhao HL, Zhao WZ, Zhang TH (2004) Fractal features of soil particle size distribution and the implication for indicating desertification. Geoderma 122:43–49

    Google Scholar 

  • van Genuchten MTh (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:892–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Genuchten MTh, Leij FJ, Yates SR (1991) The RETC code for quantifying the hydraulic functions of unsaturated soils. USDA, US Salinity Laboratory, Riverside, CA. United States Environmental Protection Agency, document EPAr600r2-91r065

  • Vaz CMP, Iossi MD, Naime JD, Macedo A, Reichert JM, Reinert DJ, Cooper M (2005) Validation of the Arya and Paris water retention model for Brazilian soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:577–583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vazquez EV, Ferreiro JP, Miranda JGV, Gonzalez AP (2008) Multifractal analysis of pore size distributions as affected by simulated rainfall. Vadose Zone J 7:500–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang D, Fu BJ, Zhao WW, Hu HF, Wang YF (2008) Multifractal characteristics of soil particle size distribution under different land-use types on the Loess Plateau, China. Catena 72:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Q, Borkovec M, Sticher H (1993) On particle-size distributions in soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:883–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Greenwood DJ, Rowell DL, Wadsworth GA, Burns IG (2000) Statistical methods for evaluating a crop nitrogen simulation model, N_ABLE. Agr Syst 64:37–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao P, Shao MA, Horton R (2011) Performance of soil particle-size distribution models for describing deposited soils adjacent to constructed dams in the China Loess Plateau. Acta Geophys 59:124–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang J, Jin Y, Miyazaki T (2001) Estimating water retention characteristic from soil particle-size distribution using a nonsimilar media concept. Soil Sci 166:308–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers who considerably improved the quality of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Soil Management, Soil Physics Unit, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653 (B), 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Yves-Dady Botula & Wim M. Cornelis

  2. Department of Geology and Soil Science, Laboratory of Soil Science, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281 (S8), 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Yves-Dady Botula & Eric Van Ranst

  3. Department BIOT, University College Ghent, Voskenslaan 270 (B), 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Geert Baert

  4. Department of Natural Resources Management, University of Kinshasa, Campus Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo

    Paul Mafuka

Authors
  1. Yves-Dady Botula
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wim M. Cornelis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Geert Baert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Mafuka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eric Van Ranst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wim M. Cornelis.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Ying Ouyang

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 20.6 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 106 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Botula, YD., Cornelis, W.M., Baert, G. et al. Particle size distribution models for soils of the humid tropics. J Soils Sediments 13, 686–698 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-012-0635-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-012-0635-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation