Thickness of soil solum as a parameter of plant-available water storage capacity in soils underlain by carbonate rocks
No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Meeting name
Sponsors
Date
Journal Title
Format
Technical Report
Abstract
Available water storage capacities were determined by field measurement in limestone-derived soils with a range in depths to carbonate rock of 15 cm to more than 300 cm. Neutron probe access wells were installed and amounts of water were determined throughout two growing seasons. Each soil layer had a characteristic volume of water (called observed field capacity) after recharge by rain periods. At maximum depletions, water approached 15 bar contents. Equations were developed for the prediction of available water (the volume difference between observed field capacity and 15 bar water) from three soil variables; clay content, chert-stone content and depth to carbonate rock. When effects of chert and clay were accounted for the prediction equation was: Total A.W.C. = 0.11 (cm depth) for depths of 0 to 102 cm. For greater depths: Total A.W.C. = 11.2 cm + 0.04 (cm depth - 102). Depths to limestone of less than 61 cm (67 cm A.W.C.) were too shallow to support forest canopies and the natural vegetation was prairie. Forest species survived where depths were greater than 61 cm and some depletion was observed at greater than 250 cm depth.
This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Missouri Water Center under the Grant/Cooperative Agreement.
The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Geological Survey or Missouri Water Center. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey or Missouri Water Center.
This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Missouri Water Center under the Grant/Cooperative Agreement.
The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Geological Survey or Missouri Water Center. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey or Missouri Water Center.