Next Article in Journal
An Open-Source Code for Fluid Flow Simulations in Unconventional Fractured Reservoirs
Previous Article in Journal
A New Magma Type in the Continental Collision Zone. The Case of Capraia Island (Tuscany, Italy)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Geosciences
Volume 11
Issue 2
10.3390/geosciences11020105
geosciences-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements in a Loam Soil Covered by Native Vegetation: Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Upper Soil Layer

by
George Kargas
1,
Paraskevi A. Londra
1,* and
Kyriaki Sotirakoglou
2
1
Laboratory of Agricultural Hydraulics, Department of Natural Resources Management and Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural University of Athens, 75 Iera Odos, 11855 Athens, Greece
2
Laboratory of Mathematics and Theoretical Mechanics, Department of Natural Resources Management and Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural University of Athens, 75 Iera Odos, 11855 Athens, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Geosciences 2021, 11(2), 105; https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11020105
Submission received: 12 January 2021 / Revised: 16 February 2021 / Accepted: 21 February 2021 / Published: 22 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Soil Hydrology and Erosion Volume 2)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) of soil, especially of the upper soil layer, is a basic parameter for modeling water infiltration and solute transport in the soil. In the present study, spatial and temporal variability of Ks in the upper soil layer of a loam soil, which was covered by native vegetation for 20 years and had not undergone any cultivation treatment, is investigated. Saturated hydraulic conductivity of 76 undisturbed soil samples, taken twice a year at the dry (37 soil samples) and rainy periods (39 soil samples), was measured using a constant head method. The study reveals that Ks values exhibit significant spatial variability over the two time periods of measurement and follow a lognormal distribution with a coefficient of variation greater than 70%. On the contrary, there was no statistically significant seasonal variability of Ks between summer (dry period) and winter (rainy period) sampling (p > 0.05), and, therefore, there was no significant temporal variability of Ks. The outcome of this study indicated that hydrological models have to include more process understanding in terms of natural variability.

1. Introduction

Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) expresses the soil’s ability to transport water under saturated conditions and is a key parameter in water movement and solute transport models in soil. In addition, the Ks of the upper soil layer plays an important role in the distribution of rainwater infiltration and surface runoff [1].
Usually, in hydrological modeling, the value of Ks is considered constant. However, hydraulic conductivity depends on soil structure, which could vary in both space and time. Any change in the surface soil layer caused by natural factors, such as rainfall, growth and decay of plant roots, shrinking and swelling, or human interventions, such as cultivation treatments, wheel-traffic compaction, etc., can lead to changes in soil porosity. These changes can seriously affect hydraulic conductivity and consequently soil water storage. Especially, efforts to incorporate the temporal variability of soil hydraulic properties in modeling studies are quite rare [2,3].
The various cultivation treatments in the surface soil layer can significantly affect the pore size distribution with a direct effect on its hydraulic properties, mainly in a relatively small water pressure heads range close to saturation [4,5,6,7,8]. Many researchers have reported that the soil cultivation treatment leads to an increase in the hydraulic conductivity [9,10,11], while others reported that it leads to a decrease [5,12,13,14]. The type of cultivation treatment plays a crucial role in which trend will prevail in the soil.
For the determination of Ks in the field or the laboratory, various techniques and devices are used. Regardless of the measurement method, the value of Ks is representative of the specific place and time at which the measurement was carried out. Saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements have been observed to change spatially following lognormal distribution [8,15,16,17,18]. However, the relationship between Ks and other soil properties, such as soil texture, soil bulk density, and organic matter, is not strong enough to permit accurate estimations of Ks [19].
With regard to the temporal variability of Ks, many researchers came to the conclusion that, in agricultural soils, Ks has a seasonal variation, meaning that it is expected to decrease as cultivation progresses and soil is compacted and pores are blocked [18,20,21].
Some of the research studies have investigated the seasonal behavior of Ks (temporal variability) based only on one-year measurements [17,18], assuming that Ks follows a constant circular pattern, where influencing factors may change periodically. However, when the measurements of Ks are taken for many years, a periodic behavior occurs only in certain cases [22,23], while more often, a clear and constant periodicity is absent [16,23,24].
Strudley et al. [25] studied 80 papers on the effects of several factors that affect the hydraulic properties of agricultural soils (e.g., cultivation, soil compaction, irrigation, soil texture, soil organic matter, residue management, climate, and topography) and concluded that a general rule cannot be applied, since studies results are too contradictory. Strudley et al. [25] proposed that the data collection should be strengthened in order to clarify spatial and temporal trends, and that seasonal/annual measurements should be performed to clarify short-term changes. In addition, he indicated that other secondary factors may affect Ks measurements. Among those secondary factors, there are some related to soil biological activity, which is relatively unexplored and could partly explain the observed temporal variability of Ks. Indeed, the growth of roots, the decomposition of dead roots, and the earthworms affect the networks of macro-pores, which can significantly change the Ks in space and time [26,27,28]. Finally, there are indications that soil biochemical activity due to bacteria, roots, and fungi can significantly affect the hydraulic behavior of soil [28,29,30,31].
While many studies have investigated the effect of different types of soil cultivation treatments on the spatial and temporal variability of Ks, the effect of various natural non-anthropogenic factors on Ks in the case of uncultivated agricultural soils has not been investigated in depth.
Fuentes et al. [24] found that Ks values in a natural prairie in the Palouse region of Washington State were much higher than those from soils that had undergone conventional tillage and no-tillage, and the temporal variability of Ks was pronounced. This phenomenon was attributed to the expansion of soil pores caused by wetter soil conditions.
Zhou et al. [32] examined four different land uses in four land series in the USA and found that in the case of woodland treatment, there was no obvious temporal change of Ks compared to the other three uses and attributed this situation to the absence of human intervention and existence of permanent vegetation.
Bormann and Klaassen [17] examined three land uses (grassland, crops, and forest) in two typical Northern German soil types: Podzol and Stagnosol, in relation to their hydraulic and hydrological properties. Among these properties was the saturated hydraulic conductivity. The seasonal variability of the soil hydrological characteristics was estimated using four sampling replications in 2006. The results showed that land use affects the KS value, and significantly, spatial variability of Ks was observed. Regarding seasonal variability of Ks, this was not statistically significant at the 5% probability level but was significant at the 10% level in 50% of all cases.
From the abovementioned, it seems that the issue of temporal variability of Κs remains open, especially in the cases of agricultural soils covered by local native vegetation, which are met in farmlands left uncultivated.
In the present study, the spatial and temporal variability of Ks of the upper soil layer of a loam soil covered by native vegetation without any cultivation treatment is investigated. The saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements on undisturbed soil samples taken twice a year, during the dry and rainy periods (summer and winter), were conducted in the laboratory using a constant head method.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Sampling

Experiments were conducted in the experimental field of the Laboratory of Agricultural Hydraulics of Agricultural University of Athens (Greece). The soil was flat and characterized as loam soil with soil texture: 38.8% sand, 39.5% silt, and 21.7% clay. The soil may be classified as a loam of the Typic xerofluvent [8].
During the experiments, the soil was covered by native vegetation. The species encountered were Malva Sylvestris, Tribulus Terrestris, Galium Aparine, Sinapis Arvensis, Convolvulus arvensis, Lolium spp. The soil had been left uncultivated without any treatment (irrigation, fertilization, plowing, cutting) for approximately 20 years, and native vegetation grew freely.
An experimental plot with sampling grid dimensions of 16 × 35 m, with 4 × 5 m, was established on the study field, and soil samples from the edges of sampling grids were taken.
Two samplings were performed, 1 during the dry season (summer) on 13 July 2015 and the other during the rainy season (winter) on 11 December 2015. Before sampling, plant residues on the soil surface were taken away. Soil cores of 5.6 cm diameter and 8 cm depth were received with a manual hammer-driven core sampler. Similar sample sizes are widely used for Ks measurement [33,34,35]. However, the small soil samples may not be representative of the soil examined. Jafari et al. [36] reported that larger sample diameters may provide more representative results by reducing edge effects, soil compaction, and deformation of soil structure. In total, 37 and 39 undisturbed soil samples were taken during the dry and rainy season, respectively.
The mean soil bulk density values during the dry and rainy period samplings were 1.11 g cm−3 and 1.16 g cm−3, respectively, and soil porosity was 0.53 cm3 cm−3.
In the following figure (Figure 1), the distribution of monthly precipitation during the sampling year is depicted. The data of precipitation height were recorded by a rain gauge established in the experimental field. As shown, the annual precipitation was 457.6 mm and approximately half of this (204.6 mm) was recorded between samplings (Figure 1).
The mean antecedent soil water content value during the sampling of the dry and rainy period was 0.02 cm3/cm3 and 0.137 cm3/cm3, respectively. The soil water content values were measured by a dielectric sensor ML2 [37].

2.2. Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Determination Method

Saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements on undisturbed soil samples were conducted using a constant head method [38]. Before Ks measurement, soil cores were prepared by saturating from the bottom with a degassed solution of 5 mM CaSO4 for 48 h [24].

2.3. Statistical Analysis

In order to determine significant differences of Ks between the 2 samplings (at summer and winter) a paired t-test was performed. The Shapiro–Wilk W test was applied to determine whether measured values were normally distributed. In addition, the Coefficient of Variation (CV) was calculated for assessing the spatial variability of Ks. For all tests, the significance level was set at 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using the statistical package Statgraphics Centourion (version 16.1).

3. Results and Discussion

The results of statistical analysis of experimental Ks values for the two sampling periods are presented in Table 1. The values of asymmetry, skewness, and kurtosis were used to determine whether the experimental values exhibited normal distributions. Specifically, if these statistical parameters were outside of the range −2 to +2, they indicate significant deviations from normality. As shown in Table 1, the skewness values for both dry and rainy period samplings were outside of the abovementioned normal range, while the kurtosis value was outside the normal range only in the case of the rainy period sampling.
In Figure 2, the density functions of dry and rainy period sampling are depicted, and it is clearly shown that they are not symmetrical because the data follow lognormal distributions. In addition, a normality distribution check was carried out using the Shapiro-Wilk W test (p < 0.001), which also confirmed that the spatial variability of Ks cannot be described by a normal distribution. Similar results have been observed by other researchers who studied the spatial variability of Ks in different cases of soils [39,40]. Then, the assessment of temporal variability was performed by applying the paired t-test using the log-transformed values of Ks. The results showed that the Ks values between the two sampling periods did not differ significantly (p = 0.67).
In Figure 3 and Figure 4, the Box and Whisker plots of measured Ks values (Figure 3) and log-transformed Ks values (Figure 4) are presented. The red crosses are the average values, and the vertical blue lines within the rectangular shapes are the medians values. As shown, there were no statistically significant differences between the dry and rainy periods (summer and winter, respectively).
Overall, it appears that experimental Ks values showed high spatial variability in both dry and rainy periods with CV values of 72.15% and 77.65%, respectively, following lognormal distributions, while there was no significant temporal variability of Ks (p > 0.05). These CV values indicate a high spatial variability since they are greater than 50% [41,42].
From experiments carried out in both field, e.g., [17,32] and laboratory [39] in soils covered by native vegetation without any cultivation treatment, significant spatial variability of Ks has been recorded, regardless of the device and measurement method, and no significant temporal variability has been recorded in some case studies [32]. It is worth noting that in the case of forest land use, where there is no human intervention, and the soil is covered by the same vegetation almost all throughout the year, no significant temporal variability of Ks has been observed as opposed to other land uses in which there is human intervention [17,32]. The case of forest land use may be considered similar to the case of farmlands left uncultivated, as in our case study.
Probably, in the aforementioned case, the non-significant temporal variability of Ks could be attributed to the existence of permanent natural vegetation, which on the one hand, prevents the destruction of soil aggregates by heavy rainfall, and, on the other hand, its root system maintains a relatively stable macropore system. The root system of permanent natural vegetation may create some relatively stable sequences of macro-pores with high hydraulic conductivity, significantly affecting the soil permeability and "hiding" any temporal variability of small and medium soil pores. The temporal variability of soil porosity in these cases can only be revealed when the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity is measured. We acknowledge that we conducted only two experimental tests, which may not completely represent the dynamic soil hydraulic properties in these two periods. For safer conclusions, the study should be extended over a longer time period and conducted several times within a year. It is also necessary to study cases with other types of natural vegetation, which creates another type of root system.

4. Conclusions

The spatial and temporal variability of saturated hydraulic conductivity of the upper soil layer of a loam soil of 560 m2, covered by native vegetation without any cultivation treatment, was investigated.
Statistical analysis of the experimental Ks values measured using a constant head method in undisturbed soil samples taken during the dry and rainy periods showed a high spatial variability of Ks in both sampling periods since the coefficient of variation (CV) was greater than 70%, while there was no significant temporal variability (p > 0.05).
Overall, it can be said that in the case of soils covered by natural vegetation without any cultivation treatment and human intervention, the role of both the shoots and the root system of vegetation is crucial in the variability of soil hydraulic conductivity. Thus, it is important to investigate further the interactions between natural soil vegetation and the soil hydraulic properties.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.K. and P.A.L.; methodology, G.K., P.A.L. and K.S.; formal analysis, G.K. and K.S.; supervision, G.K.; writing—original draft preparation, G.K. and P.A.L.; writing—review and editing, G.K., P.A.L. and K.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Vauclin, M.; Elrick, D.E.; Thony, J.L.; Vachaud, G.; Revol, P.; Ruelle, P. Hydraulic conductivity measurements of the spatial variability of a loamy soil. Soil Technol. 1994, 7, 181–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Or, D.; Leij, F.J.; Snyder, V.; Ghezzehei, T.A. Stochastic model for post tillage soil pore space evolution. Water Resour. Res. 2000, 36, 1641–1652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Chandrasekhar, P.; Kreiselmeier, J.; Schwen, A.; Weninger, T.; Julich, S.; Feger, K.H.; Schwärzel, K. Modeling the evolution of soil structural pore space in agricultural soils following tillage. Geoderma 2019, 353, 401–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lindstrom, M.; Onstad, C. Influence of tillage systems on soil physical parameters and infiltration after planting. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1984, 39, 149–152. [Google Scholar]
  5. Mapa, R.; Green, R.; Santo, L. Temporal variability of soil hydraulic properties with wetting and drying subsequent to tillage. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1986, 50, 1133–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Poulovassilis, A. The Effect of Cultivation Practices on the Physical Properties of the Upper Soil Laye; Project No. 5110, Final Report; Laboratory of Agricultural Hydraulics, Agricultural University of Athens: Athens, Greece, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  7. Kargas, G.; Kerkides, P.; Poulovassilis, A. Infiltration of rainwater in the semi-arid area under three land surface treatments. Soil Tillage Res. 2012, 120, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kargas, G.; Kerkides, P.; Sotirakoglou, K.; Poulovassilis, A. Temporal variability of surface soil hydraulic properties under varioustillage systems. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 158, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. McGarry, D.; Bridge, B.J.; Radford, B.J. Contrasting soil physical properties after zero and traditional tillage of an alluvial soil in the semi-arid subtropics. Soil Tillage Res. 2000, 53, 105–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kribaa, M.; Hallaire, V.; Curmi, P.; Lahmar, R. Effect of various cultivation methods on structure and hydraulic properties of a soil in a semi-arid climate. Soil Tillage Res. 2001, 60, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Moret, D.; Arrue, J.L. Dynamics of soil hydraulic properties during fallow by tillage. Soil Tillage Res. 2007, 96, 103–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Benjamin, J. Tillage effects on near surface soil hydraulic properties. Soil Tillage Res. 1993, 26, 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mahboubi, A.; Lal, A.; Faussey, N. 28 years of tillage effects on two soils in Ohio. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1993, 57, 506–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Azooz, R.H.; Arshad, M.A. Soil water drying and recharge rates as affected by tillage under continuous barley and barley-canola cropping systems in northwestern Canada. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2001, 81, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Shouse, P.J.; Mohanty, B.P. Scaling of near-saturated hydraulic conductivity measured using disc infiltrometers. Water Resour. Res. 1998, 34, 1195–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gupta, S.D.; Mohanty, B.P.; Köhne, J.M. Soil hydraulic conductivities and their spatial and temporal variations in a vertisol. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2006, 70, 1872–1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Bormann, H.; Klaassen, K. Seasonal and land use dependent variability of soil hydraulic and soil hydrological properties of two Northern German soils. Geoderma 2008, 145, 295–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Alletto, L.; Coquet, Y. Temporal and spatial variability of soil bulk density and near-saturated hydraulic conductivity under two contrasted tillage management systems. Geoderma 2009, 152, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chirico, G.B.; Medina, H.; Romano, N. Uncertainty in predicting soil hydraulic properties at the hillslope scale with indirect methods. J. Hydrol. 2007, 334, 405–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Angulo-Jaramillo, R.; Vandervaere, J.P.; Roulier, S.; Thony, J.L.; Gaudet, J.P.; Vauclin, M. Field measurement of soil surface hydraulic properties by disk and ring infiltrometers–A review and recent developments. Soil Tillage Res. 2000, 55, 1–29. [Google Scholar]
  21. Laloy, E.; Bielders, C.L. Plot scale continuous modelling of runoff in a maize cropping system with dynamic soil surface properties. J. Hydrol. 2008, 349, 455–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Olyphant, G.A. Temporal and spatial (down profile) variability of unsaturated soil hydraulic properties determined from a combination of repeated field experiments and inverse modelling. J. Hydrol. 2003, 281, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bagarello, V.; Sgroi, A. Using the simplified falling head technique to detect temporal changes in field-saturated hydraulic conductivity at the surface of a sandy loam soil. Soil Tillage Res. 2007, 94, 283–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Fuentes, J.P.; Flury, M.; Bezdicek, D.F. Hydraulic properties in a silt loam soil under natural prairie, conventional till, and no-till. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2004, 68, 1670–1688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Strudley, W.M.; Green, T.R.; Ascough, J.C. Tillage effects on soil hydraulic properties in space and time: State of the science. Soil Tillage Res. 2008, 99, 4–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chan, K.Y. An overview of some tillage impacts on earthworm population abundance and diversity-implications for functioning in soils. Soil Tillage Res. 2001, 57, 179–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wuest, S.B. Earthworm, infiltration, and tillage relationships in a dryland pea-wheat rotation. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2001, 18, 187–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Lichner, L.; Eldridge, D.J.; Schacht, K.; Zhukova, N.; Holko, L.; Šìr, M.; Pecho, J. Grass cover influences hydrophysical parameters and heterogeneity of water flow in a sandy soil. Pedosphere 2011, 21, 719–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Seki, K.; Miyazaki, T.; Nakano, M. Effects of microorganisms on hydraulic conductivity decrease in infiltration. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 1998, 49, 231–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rillig, M.C. A connection between fungal hydrophobins and soil water repellency? Pedobiologia 2005, 49, 395–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Buczko, U.; Bens, O.; Hüttl, R.F. Tillage effects on hydraulic properties and macroporosity in silty and sandy soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2006, 70, 1998–2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhou, X.; Lin, H.; White, E. Surface soil hydraulic properties in four soil series under different land uses and their temporal changes. Catena 2008, 73, 180–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Reynolds, W.D. Saturated hydraulic properties: Laboratory methods. In Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, 2nd ed.; Carter, M.R., Gregorich, E.G., Eds.; CRC Press Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2008; pp. 1013–1024. [Google Scholar]
  34. Keller, T.; Sutter, J.A.; Nissen, K.; Rydberg, T. Using field measurement of saturated soil hydraulic conductivity to detect low-yielding zones in three Swedish fields. Soil Tillage Res. 2012, 124, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Wang, Υ.; Shao, M.; Liu, Z.; Horton, R. Regional-scale variation and distribution patterns of soil saturated hydraulic conductivities in surface and subsurface layers in the loessial soils of China. J. Hydrol. 2013, 487, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jafari, R. Effect of soil sample size on saturated soil hydraulic conductivity. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2017, 48, 908–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Delta-T Devices. ThetaProbe Soil Moisture Sensor Type ML2x User Manual ML2x-UM-1.21; Delta-T Devices Ltd.: Burwell, NE, USA; Cambridge, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  38. Klute, A.; Dirksen, C. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1, 2nd ed.; Agron. Monogr. 9; ASA and SSSA: Madison, WI, USA, 1986; pp. 687–734. [Google Scholar]
  39. Stekauerova, V.; Mikulec, V. Variability of saturated hydraulic conductivities in the agriculturally cultivated soils. Soil Water Res. 2009, 4, S14–S21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Rienzner, M.; Gandolfi, C. Investigation of spatial and temporal variability of saturated soil hydraulic conductivity at the field-scale. Soil Tillage Res. 2014, 135, 28–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Warrick, A.W. Spatial Variability. In Environmental of Soil Physics; Hillel, D., Ed.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980; pp. 655–675. [Google Scholar]
  42. Mulla, D.J.; McBratney, A.B. Soil Spatial Variability. In Soil Physics Companion; Warrick, A.W., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2002; pp. 343–373. [Google Scholar]
Geosciences 11 00105 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of monthly precipitation during the sampling year 2015.
Figure 1. Distribution of monthly precipitation during the sampling year 2015.
Geosciences 11 00105 g001
Geosciences 11 00105 g002 550
Figure 2. Probability density function of the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements (Ks) during the dry and rainy period.
Figure 2. Probability density function of the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements (Ks) during the dry and rainy period.
Geosciences 11 00105 g002
Geosciences 11 00105 g003 550
Figure 3. Box and Whisker plot of measured saturated hydraulic conductivity values (Ks) during the dry and rainy period. Values presented by the square symbol are outliers.
Figure 3. Box and Whisker plot of measured saturated hydraulic conductivity values (Ks) during the dry and rainy period. Values presented by the square symbol are outliers.
Geosciences 11 00105 g003
Geosciences 11 00105 g004 550
Figure 4. Box and Whisker plot of log-transformed saturated hydraulic conductivity values (Ks) during the dry and rainy period. Ks was measured in cm min−1.
Figure 4. Box and Whisker plot of log-transformed saturated hydraulic conductivity values (Ks) during the dry and rainy period. Ks was measured in cm min−1.
Geosciences 11 00105 g004
Table
Table 1. Statistical parameters of experimental values of saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) during the two sampling periods (dry and rainy).
Table 1. Statistical parameters of experimental values of saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) during the two sampling periods (dry and rainy).
Statistical ParametersDry PeriodRainy Period
Number of samples3739
Average (cm min−1)1.701.68
Standard deviation(cm min−1)1.221.31
Coefficient of variation (%)72.1577.65
Minimum value (cm min−1)0.250.16
Maximum value (cm min−1)5.595.75
Range (cm min−1)5.345.59
Standardized skewness3.084.02
Standardized kurtosis1.783.22
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kargas, G.; Londra, P.A.; Sotirakoglou, K. Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements in a Loam Soil Covered by Native Vegetation: Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Upper Soil Layer. Geosciences 2021, 11, 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11020105

AMA Style

Kargas G, Londra PA, Sotirakoglou K. Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements in a Loam Soil Covered by Native Vegetation: Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Upper Soil Layer. Geosciences. 2021; 11(2):105. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11020105

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kargas, George, Paraskevi A. Londra, and Kyriaki Sotirakoglou. 2021. "Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements in a Loam Soil Covered by Native Vegetation: Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Upper Soil Layer" Geosciences 11, no. 2: 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11020105

APA Style

Kargas, G., Londra, P. A., & Sotirakoglou, K. (2021). Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurements in a Loam Soil Covered by Native Vegetation: Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Upper Soil Layer. Geosciences, 11(2), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11020105

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop