368 HYDRAULIC GRADIENT

Bibliography studying or predicting site-specific water flow and solute Introduction to Environmental Soil Physics (First Edition) 2003 transport processes in the subsurface. This includes using Elsevier Inc. Daniel Hillel (ed.) http://www.sciencedirect.com/ models as tools for designing, testing, or implementing science/book/9780123486554 soil, water, and crop management practices that optimize water use efficiency and minimize soil and water pollution by agricultural and other contaminants. Models are equally needed for designing or remediating industrial HYDRAULIC GRADIENT waste disposal sites and landfills, or assessing the for long-term stewardship of nuclear waste repositories. The slope of the hydraulic grade line which indicates the Predictive models for flow in variably saturated soils are change in pressure head per unit of distance. generally based on the Richards equation, which combines the Darcy–Buckingham equation for the fluid flux with a mass conservation equation to give (Richards, 1931): HYDRAULIC HEAD @yðhÞ @ @h ¼ KðhÞ KðhÞ (1) @t @z @z The sum of the pressure head (hydrostatic pressure rela- tive to atmospheric pressure) and the gravitational head in which y is the volumetric water content (L3 L3), h is (elevation relative to a reference level). The gradient of the pressure head (L), t is time (T), z is soil depth (positive the hydraulic head is the driving force for water flow in down), and K is the hydraulic conductivity (L T1). porous media. Equation 1 holds for one-dimensional vertical flow; similar equations can be formulated for multidimensional flow Bibliography problems. The Richards equation contains two constitutive Introduction to Environmental Soil Physics (First Edition) 2003 relationships, the soil water retention curve, y(h), and the Elsevier Inc. Daniel Hillel (ed.) http://www.sciencedirect.com/ unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity function, K(h). science/book/9780123486554 These hydraulic functions are both strongly nonlinear func- tions of h. They are discussed in detail below.

HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS Water retention function The soil water retention curve, y(h), describes the relation- Martinus Th. van Genuchten1, Yakov A. Pachepsky2 ship between the water content, y, and the energy status of 1Department of Mechanical Engineering, COPPE/LTTC, water at a given location in the soil. Many other names may be found in the literature, including soil moisture Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, UFRJ, Rio de – Janeiro, Brazil characteristic curve, the capillary pressure saturation 2Environmental Microbial and Food Safety Laboratory, relationship, and the pF curve. The retention curve histor- Animal and Natural Resource Institute, Beltsville ically was often given in terms of pF, which is defined as Agricultural Research Center, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, the negative logarithm (base 10) of the absolute value of MD, USA the pressure head measured in centimeters. In the unsatu- rated zone, water is subject to both capillary forces in soil pores and adsorption onto solid phase surfaces. This leads Definition to negative values of the pressure head (or matric head) Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils. Properties relative to free water, or a positive suction or tension. reflecting the ability of a soil to retain or transmit water As opposed to unsaturated soils, the pressure head h is and its dissolved constituents. positive in a saturated system. More formally, the pressure head is defined as the difference between the pressures of Introduction the air phase and the liquid phase. Capillary forces are the Many agrophysical applications require knowledge of the result of a complex set of interactions between the solid hydraulic properties of unsaturated soils. These properties and liquid phases involving the surface tension of the liq- reflect the ability of a soil to retain or transmit water and uid phase, the contact angle between the solid and liquid its dissolved constituents. For example, they affect the phases, and the diameter of pores. partitioning of rainfall and irrigation water into infiltration Knowledge of y(h) is essential for the hydraulic charac- and runoff at the soil surface, the rate and amount of redis- terization of a soil, since it relates an energy density tribution of water in a soil profile, available water in the (potential) to a capacity (water content). Rather than using soil root zone, and recharge to or capillary rise from the pressure head (energy per unit weight of water), many the groundwater table, among many other processes in agrophysical applications use the pressure or matric the unsaturated or vadose zone between the soil surface potential (energy per unit volume of water, usually mea- and the groundwater table. The hydraulic properties are sured in Pascal, Pa), cm = rwgh, where rw is the density also critical components of mathematical models for of water (ML3) and g the acceleration of gravity (L T2). HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS 369

Figure 1 shows typical soil water retention curves for initially very dry sample to produce the main wetting relatively coarse-textured (e.g., sand and loamy sand), curve, which is generally displaced by a factor of medium-textured (e.g., loam and sandy loam), and fine- 1.5–2.0 toward higher pressure heads closer to saturation. textured (e.g., clay loam, silty loam, and clay) soils. The This phenomenon of having different wetting and drying curves in Figure 1 may be interpreted as showing the equi- curves, including primary and secondary scanning curves librium water content distribution above a relatively deep is referred to hysteresis. Hysteresis is caused by the fact water table where the pressure head is zero and the soil that drainage is determined mostly by the smaller pore in fully saturated. The plots in Figure 1 show that coarse- a certain pore sequence, and wetting by the larger pores textured soils lose their water relatively quickly (at small (this effect is often referred to as the ink bottle effect). negative pressure heads) and abruptly above the water Other factors contributing to hysteresis are the presence table, while fine-textured soils lose their water much more of different liquid–solid contact angles for advancing gradually. This reflects the particle or pore-size distribu- and receding water menisci, air entrapment during wet- tion of the medium involved. While the majority of pores ting, and possible shrink–swell phenomena of some soils. in coarse-textured soils have larger diameters and thus drain at relatively small negative pressures, the majority Hydraulic conductivity function of pores in fine-textured soils do not drain until very large tensions (negative pressures) are applied. The hydraulic conductivity characterizes the ability of As indicated by the plots in Figure 1, the water content a soil to transmit water. Its value depends on many factors varies between some maximum value, the saturated water such as the pore-size distribution of the medium, and the content, y , and some small value, often referred to as tortuosity, shape, roughness, and degree of interconnec- s tedness of the pores. The hydraulic conductivity decreases the residual (or irreducible) water content, yr. As a first approximation and on intuitive ground, the saturated considerably as soil becomes unsaturated since less pore water content is equal to the porosity, and y equal to zero. space is filled with water, the flow paths become increas- r ingly tortuous, and drag forces between the fluid and the In reality, however, the saturated water content, ys, of soils is generally smaller than the porosity because of entrapped solid phases increase. The unsaturated hydraulic conductivity function gives and dissolved air. The residual water content yr is likely to be larger than zero, especially for fine-textured soils with the dependency of the hydraulic conductivity on the water their large surface areas, because of the presence of content, K(y), or pressure head, K(h). Figure 2 presents examples of typical K(y) and K(h) functions for relatively adsorbed water. Most often ys and especially yr are treated as fitting parameters without much physical significance. coarse-, medium-, and fine-textured soils. Notice that the Soil water retention curves such as shown in Figure 1 hydraulic conductivity at saturation is significantly larger are not unique but depend on the history of wetting and for coarse-textured soils than fine-textured soils. This differ- drying. Most often, the soil water retention curve is deter- ence is often several orders of magnitude. Also notice mined by gradually desaturating an initially saturated soil that the hydraulic conductivity decreases very significantly by applying increasingly higher suctions, thus producing as the soil becomes unsaturated. This decrease, when a main drying curve. One could similarly slowly wet an expressed as a function of the pressure head (Figure 2; right), is much more dramatic for the coarse-textured soils. The decrease for coarse-textured soils is so large that at 100,000 a certain pressure head the hydraulic conductivity becomes smaller than the conductivity of the fine-textured soil. The 10,000 water content where the conductivity asymptotically becomes zero (Figure 2; left) is often used as an alternative working definition for the residual water content, y . 1,000 r Soil water diffusivity 100 Another hydraulic function often used in theoretical and management application of unsaturated flow theories is Pressure head, |h| (cm) 10 the soil water diffusivity, D(y), (L2 T 1), which is defined as dh 1 DðyÞ¼KðyÞ : (2) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 dy Volumetric water content [–] This function appears when Equation 1 is transformed into a water-content-based equation in which y is now Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils, Figure 1 Typical the dependent variable: soil water retention curves for relatively coarse- (solid line), medium- (dashed line), and fine-textured (dotted line) soils. The @ @ @ y ¼ ð Þ h ð Þ : curves were obtained using Equation 6a assuming hydraulic @ @ D y @ K y (3) parameter values as listed in Table 1. t z z 370 HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS

4 4

2 2

0 0

−2 −2 log (K), [cm/day] −4 log (K), [cm/day] −4

−6 −6 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Volumetric water content, [–] log(|h|, [cm])

Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils, Figure 2 Typical curves of the hydraulic conductivity K, as a function of the pressure head (left) and water content (right) for coarse- (solid line), medium- (dashed line), and fine-textured (dotted line) soils. The curves were obtained using Equation 6b assuming hydraulic parameter values as listed in Table 1.

Equation 3 is very attractive for approximate analytical (using a cut-and-paste concept of a cross-section of the modeling of unsaturated flow processes, especially for medium containing different-sized pores), and then inte- modeling horizontal (without the K(y) gravity term) and grating over all water-filled capillaries leads to the hydrau- vertical infiltration (e.g., Philip, 1969; Parlange, 1980). lic conductivity of the complete set of capillaries, and However, the water-content-based equation is less attractive consequently of the soil itself. The approach allows infor- for more comprehensive numerical modeling of flow in mation of the soil water retention curve to be translated in layered media, flow in media that are partially saturated predictive equations for the unsaturated hydraulic conduc- and partially unsaturated, and for highly transient flow tivity. Many theories of this type, often referred to also as problems. statistical pore-size distribution models, have been pro- posed in the past, including Childs and Collis-George (1950), Burdine (1953), Millington and Quirk (1961), Analytical representations and Mualem (1976). A review of the different approaches To enable their use in analytical or numerical models for is given by Mualem (1992). Examples of analytical y(h) unsaturated flow, the soil hydraulic properties are often and K(h) equations resulting from this approach are the expressed in terms of simplified analytical expressions. hydraulic functions of Brooks and Corey (1964), based A large number of functions have been proposed over on the approach by Burdine (1953), and equations by the years to describe the soil water retention curve, y(h), van Genuchten (1980) and Kosugi (1996), based on the and the hydraulic conductivity function, K(h)orK(y). theory of Mualem (1976). A comprehensive review of the performance of some of The classical equations of Brooks and Corey (1964) for many these models is given by Leij et al. (1997). The func- y(h), K(h), and D(y) are given by tions range from completely empirical equations to models based on the simplified conceptual picture that h l y þ ðÞy y e < soils are made up of a bundle of equivalent capillary tubes y ¼ r s r h h he (4a) that contain and transmit water. ys h he While extremely simplistic as indicated by Tuller and 2=lþlþ1 Or (2001) among others, conceptual models that view KðhÞ¼KsS (4b) a soil as a bundle of capillaries of different radii are still e useful for explaining the shape of the water retention curve K for different textures, as well as to provide a means for ð Þ¼ s 1=lþl D y ð Þ Se (4c) predicting the hydraulic conductivity function from soil a ys yr water retention information. These models typically 3 3 assume that pores at a given pressure head are either where, as before, yr is the residual water content (L L ), 3 3 completely filled with water, or empty, depending upon ys is the saturated water content (L L ), he is often the applied suction. Flow in each water-filled capillary referred to as the air-entry value (L), l is a pore-size distri- tube is subsequently calculated using Poiseuille’s law for bution index characterizing the width of the soil pore-size flow in cylindrical pores. By adding the contribution of distribution, Ks is the saturated hydraulic conductivity all capillaries that are still filled with water at a particular (LT1), l a pore-connectivity parameter assumed to be pressure head, making some assumption about how small 2.0 in the original study of Brooks and Corey (1964), and large capillaries connect to each other in sequence and Se = Se(h) is effective saturation given by HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS 371

ð Þ for l have been suggested in various studies. Based on an ð Þ¼y h yr Se h (5) analysis of a large data set from the UNSODA database, ys yr Schaap and Leij (2000) recommended using l equal to 1 as a more appropriate value for most soil textures. For completeness we have given here also the expres- Equations 6a, 6b, and 6c assume the restrictive relation- sion for the soil water diffusivity, D(y). Note that Equa- ship m =1 1/n, which simplifies the predictive K(h) tions 4b and 4c contain parameters that are also present expression compared to leaving m and n as independent in Equation 4a, in particular yr and ys through Equation 5, parameters in Equation 6b. In particular, the convex and as well as he and l. The value of l in Equation 4a reflects concave curvatures at the high and low pressure heads in the steepness of the retention function and is relatively large Figure 1 have then a particular relationship with each for soils with a relatively uniform pore-size distribution (gen- other. Other restrictions on Equation 6a have been used erally coarse-textured soils such as those shown in Figures 1 also. For example, Haverkamp et al. (2005) used the and 2), but small for soils having a wide range of pore sizes. restriction m =1 2/n in connection with Equation 6a One property of Equation 4a is the presence of a sharp and Burdine’s (1953) model to produce a different expres- break in the retention curve at the air-entry value, he. This sion for K(h). The restrictions are not formally needed, break (or discontinuity in the slope of the function) is since they limit the flexibility of Equation 6a in describing often visible in retention data for coarse-textured soils, experimental data. However, the predicted K(h) function but may not be realistic for fine-textured soils and soils obtained with the theories of Burdine or Mualem becomes having a relatively broad pore- or particle-size distribu- then extremely complicated by containing incomplete tion. A sharp break is similarly present in the hydraulic beta or hypergeometric functions, thus limiting the practi- conductivity function when plotted as a function of the cality of the analytical functions. pressure head, but not versus the water content. As an Rawls et al. (1982) provided average values of the alternative, van Genuchten (1980) proposed a set of equa- parameters in the Brooks and Corey (1964) soil hydraulic tions that exhibit a more smooth sigmoidal shape. The van parameters for 11 soil textural classes of the U.S. Depart- Genuchten equations for y(h), K(h), and D(y) are given by: ment of Agriculture (USDA) textural triangle. Carsel and y y Parrish (1988) gave similar values for the van Genuchten yð Þ¼y þ s r ðÞ¼ = ; > (1980) parameters for 12 USDA soil textural classes. In h r ðÞþ jjn m m 1 1 n n 1 1 ah Table 1, we list typical van Genuchten hydraulic parameter (6a) values for relative coarse-, medium-, and fine-textured soils. hi The data in this table were actually used to calculate the m 2 KðhÞ¼K Sl 1 1 S1=m (6b) water retention and hydraulic conductivity functions, s e e shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively, with Equations 6a, h b. Average values such as those given in Table 1, or pro- ð1 mÞK m DðyÞ¼ s Sl1=m 1 S1=m vided in more detail by Rawls et al. (1982) and Carsel and amðÞy y e e s r i (6c) Parrish (1988), are often referred to as textural class aver- m þ 1=m aged pedotransfer functions. Pedotransfer functions are 1 Se 2 relationships that use more easily measured of readily avail- able soil data to estimate the unsaturated soil hydraulic respectively, where a (L1), n (), and m (= 1–1/n)() parameters or properties (Bouma and van Lanen, 1987; are shape parameters, and l is the pore-connectivity Leij et al., 2002; Pachepsky and Rawls, 2004). parameter (). The parameter n in Equation 6 tends to We note that Equations 4 and 6 provide only two exam- be large for soils with a relatively uniform pore-size distri- ples in which the hydraulic properties are described bution and small for soils having a wide range of pore analytically. Many other combinations (Leij et al., 1997; sizes. The pore-connectivity parameter l in Equation 6b Kosugi et al., 2002) are possible and have been used. was estimated by Mualem (1976) to be about 0.5 as an For example, the combination of Equation 6a for y(h) with average for many soils. However, many other values a simple expression like

Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils, Table 1 Typical values of the soil hydraulic parameters in the analytical functions of van Genuchten (1980) for relatively coarse-, medium-, and fine-textured soils. The parameters were used to calculate the hydraulic properties plotted in Figures 1 and 2 using Equations 6a and 6b, respectively

yr ys a nKs Soil texture (cm day1) (cm3 cm3) (cm3 cm3) (cm1)()

Coarse 0.045 0.430 0.145 2.68 712.8 Medium 0.057 0.410 0.124 2.28 350.2 Fine 0.020 0.540 0.0010 1.2 45.0 372 HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS

KðhÞ¼K Sb (7) capacity or flow attributes (e.g., water contents, pressure s e heads, boundary fluxes), which are then used in combina- which is essentially identical to Equation 4b, for K(h)is tion with a mathematical solution (generally numerical) to also very realistic. Another attractive alternative equation obtain estimates of the hydraulic parameters such as for K(h) is of the form (e.g., Vereecken et al., 1989) those that appear in Equations 4 and 6, or other functions. Popular methods include one-step and multi-step outflow K KðhÞ¼ s (8) methods (Kool et al., 1987; van Dam et al., 1994), tension 1 þjahjb infiltrometers methods (Šimůnek et al., 1998a), and evap- oration methods (Šimůnek et al., 1998b), although many Many alternative expressions have been used also for other laboratory and field methods also exist or can be the soil water diffusivity function, D(y), mostly to facili- similarly employed (Hopmans et al., 2002). This also per- tate simplified analytical analyses of unsaturated flow tains to different approaches for minimizing the objective problems (e.g., Parlange, 1980). function, including quantification of parameter uncer- tainty (Abbaspour et al., 2001; Vrugt and Robinson, Experimental procedures 2007). Very attractive now also is the use of combined A large number of experimental techniques can be used to hard (e.g., directly measured) and soft (e.g., indirectly esti- estimate the hydraulic properties of unsaturated soils. mated) data, including hydrogeophysical measurements A direct approach for the water retention function would and information derived from pedotransfer functions, to be to measure a number of water content (y) and pressure extract the most out of available information (e.g., head (h) pairs, and then to fit a particular retention func- Kowalski et al., 2004; Segal et al., 2008). tion to the data. Direct measurement techniques include methods using a hanging water column, pressure cells, pressure plate extractors, suction tables, soil freezing, Hydraulic properties of structured soils and many other approaches. Comprehensive reviews of The Richards equation 1 typically predicts a uniform flow various methods are given by Gee and Ward (1999) and process in the vadose zone. Unfortunately, the vadose Dane and Hopmans (2002). Once the pairs of y and h zone can be extremely heterogeneous at a range of scales, data are obtained, the data may be analyzed in terms of from the microscopic (e.g., pore scale) to the macroscopic specific analytical water retention and conductivity func- (e.g., field or larger scale). Some of these heterogeneities tions such as those discussed earlier. Several convenient can lead to a preferential (or bypass) flow process that software packages are available for this purpose (van macroscopically is very difficult to capture with the stan- Genuchten et al., 1991; Wraith and Or, 1998). Alterna- dard Richards equation. One obvious example of prefer- tively, the data can be analyzed without assuming specific ential flow is the rapid movement of water and dissolved analytical functions for y(h) and K(h)orK(y). This could solutes through soil macropores (e.g., between soil aggre- be done using linear, cubic spline, or other interpolation gates, or created by earthworms or decayed root channels techniques (Kastanek and Nielsen, 2001; Bitterlich et al., or rock fractures), with much of the water bypassing 2004). (short-circuiting) the soil or rock matrix. However, many Similar direct measurement approaches involving pairs other causes of preferential flow exist, such as flow of conductivity (or diffusivity) and pressure head (or water instabilities caused by soil textural changes or water repel- content) data are also possible for the K(h) and D(y) lency (Hendrickx and Flury, 2001; Šimůnek et al., 2003; functions, at least in principle (Dane and Topp, 2002), Ritsema and Dekker, 2005), and lateral funneling of water including for the saturated hydraulic conductivity, Ks. along sloping soil layers (e.g., Kung, 1990). The saturated hydraulic conductivity can be measured in While uniform flow in granular soils is traditionally the laboratory using a variety of constant or falling head described with a single-porosity model such as the methods, and in the field using single or double ring Richards equation given by Equation 1, flow in structured infiltrometers, constant head permeameters, and various media can be described using a variety of dual- auger-hole and piezometer methods (Dane and Topp, porosity, dual-permeability, multi-porosity, and/or multi- 2002). Unfortunately, because of the strongly nonlinear permeability models (Šimůnek and van Genuchten, nature of the soil hydraulic properties, pairs for the K(h) 2008; Köhne et al., 2009). While single-porosity models and D(y) data are not easily measured directly, especially assume that a single pore system exists that is fully acces- at relatively low (negative) pressure heads, unless more sible to both water and solute, dual-porosity and dual- specialized techniques are used such as centrifuge permeability models both assume that the porous medium methods (Nimmo et al., 2002). Even then, the data are consists of two interacting pore regions, one associated generally not distributed evenly over the entire water con- with the inter-aggregate, macropore, or fracture system, tent range of interest. Consequently, unsaturated hydraulic and one comprising the micropores (or intra-aggregate conductivity properties are most often estimated using pores) inside soil aggregates or the rock matrix. Whereas inverse or parameter estimation procedures. dual-porosity models assume that water in the matrix is Parameter estimation methods generally involve the stagnant, dual-permeability models allow also for water measurement during some experiment of one or several flow within the soil or rock matrix. HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS 373

To avoid over-parameterization of the governing equa- provide more realistic simulations of field data than the tions, one useful simplifying approach is to assume instan- standard approach using unimodal hydraulic properties taneous hydraulic equilibration between the fracture and of the type shown in Figures 1 and 2. In soils, the two parts matrix regions. In that case, the Richards equation can still of the conductivity curves may be associated with soil be used, but now with composite hydraulic properties of structure (near saturation) and soil texture (at lower nega- the form (e.g., Peters and Klavetter, 1988) tive pressure heads). ð Þ¼ ð Þþ ð Þ The use of composite hydraulic functions such as those y h wf yf h wmym h (9a) shown in Figure 2 is consistent with field measurements ð Þ¼ ð Þþ ð Þ suggesting that the macropore conductivity of soils at K h wf Kf h wmKm h (9b) saturation is generally about one to two orders of magni- where the subscripts f and m refer to the fracture tude larger than the matrix conductivity at saturation, (macropore) and matrix (micropore) regions, respectively, depending upon texture. These findings were confirmed and where w are volumetric weighting factors for the two by Schaap and van Genuchten (2006) using a detailed i neural network analysis of the UNSODA unsaturated soil overlapping regions such that wf + wm = 1. Rather than using Equations 6a,b directly in Equations 9a and 9b, hydraulic database (Leij et al., 1996). The analysis Durner (1994) proposed a slightly different set of equa- revealed a relatively sharp decrease in the conductivity tions for the composite functions as follows away from saturation and a slower decrease afterward. Schaap and van Genuchten (2006) suggested an improved ð Þ w w ð Þ¼y h yr ¼ f þ m composite function for K(h) to account for the effects of Se h nf mf nm mm ys yr ½1 þjaf hj ½1 þjamhj macropores near saturation as follows: (10a) RðhÞ ð Þ¼ Ks ð Þ K h ð Þ Km h (11a) KðSeÞ¼ Km h no = mf 2 l 1 mf 1=m mm w S þ w S w a ½1 ð1 e Þ þw a ½1 ð1 m Þ f ef m em f f S f m m Sem where Ks 2 8 w a þ w a f f m m < 0 h < 40 cm: (10b) ð Þ¼ : þ : < R h : 0 2778 0 00694h 40 h 4cm þ : where ai, ni, and mi (=1 1/ni) are empirical parameters of 1 0 1875h 4 h 0cm the separate hydraulic functions (i = f,m). An example of (11b) composite retention and hydraulic conductivity functions based on Equations 10a and 10b is shown in Figure 2 for and where Km(h) is the traditional hydraulic conductiv- the following set of parameters: yr = 0.00, ys = 0.50, ity function for the matrix as given by Equation 6b. 1 1 l = 0.5, Ks = 1 cm d , am = 0.01 cm , nm = 1.50, wm = Equations 11a and 11b were found to produce very small 1 0.975, wf = 0.025, af = 1.00 cm , and nf = 5.00. The systematic errors between the observed (UNSODA) and fracture domain in this case represents only 2.5% of the calculated hydraulic conductivities across a wide range entire pore space, but accounts for almost 90% of the of pressure heads between saturation and 150 m. hydraulic conductivity close to saturation (Figure 3). While the macropore contribution was most significant While still leading to uniform flow, models using such between pressure heads 0 and 4 cm, its influence on composite media properties do allow for faster flow and the conductivity function extended to pressure heads as transport during conditions near saturation, and as such low as 40 cm (Equation 11b).

0.5 0 0.4 −2 0.3 −4

0.2 −6

0.1 log(K), [cm/day]) −8 Volumetric water content, [–] water Volumetric 0.0 −10 −1 0 1 2 3 4 −1 01234 log(|h|, [cm]) log(|h|, [cm])

Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils, Figure 3 Bimodal water retention (left) and hydraulic conductivity (right) functions as described with the composite soil hydraulic model of Durner (1994). 374 HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS

Multiphase constitutive relationships media (macroporous soils and fractured rock). The The use of Equation 1 implies that the air phase has no hydraulic properties of such media may require special effect of water flow. This is a realistic assumption for most provisions to account for the effects of soil texture and soil flow simulations, except near saturation in relatively structure on the shape of the hydraulic functions near sat- closed systems where air may not move freely. The uration, thus leading to dual- or multi-porosity formula- resulting situation may need to be described using two tions as indicated by Schaap and van Genuchten (2006) flow equations, one for the air phase and one for the liquid and Jarvis (2008), among others. Estimation of the effective phase. The same is true for multiphase air, oil, and water properties of heterogeneous (including layered) field soil systems in which the fluids are not fully miscible. Flow profiles also remains an important challenge. Very promis- in such multiphase systems generally require flow equa- ing here is the increased integration of hard (directly tions for each fluid phase involved. Two-phase air-water measured) data and soft (indirectly estimated) information systems hence could be modeled also using separate equa- for improved estimation of field- or larger-scale hydraulic tions for air and water. This shows that the standard properties, including the use of noninvasive geophysical Richards equation is a simplification of a more complete information. New noninvasive technologies with enormous multiphase (air-water) approach in that the air phase is potential range from neutron and X-ray radiography and assumed to have a negligible effect on variably saturated magnetic resonance imaging at relatively small (laboratory) flow, and that the air pressure varies only little in space scales, to electrical resistivity tomography and ground and time. This assumption appears adequate for most var- penetrating radar at intermediate (field) scales, to passive iably saturated flow problems. Similar assumptions, how- microwave remote sensing at regional or larger scales. ever, are generally not possible when nonaqueous phase Challenges remain on how to optimally integrate, liquids (NAPLs) are present. Mathematical descriptions assimilate, or otherwise fuse such information with direct of multiphase flow and transport hence in general require laboratory and field hydraulic measurements (Yeh and flow equations for each of the fluid phases involved. Šimůnek, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2004, Looms et al., Assuming applicability of the van Genuchten hydraulic 2008; Ines and Mohanty, 2008), including the optimal functions and ignoring the presence of residual air and and cost-effective use of pedotransfer function and soil water, the hydraulic conductivity functions for the liquid texture information, and resultant quantification of uncer- (wetting) and air phase (non-wetting) phases are given tainty (Minasny and McBratney, 2002; Wang et al., 2003). by (e.g., Luckner et al., 1989; Lenhard et al., 2002): These various integrated technologies undoubtedly will hi further advance in the near future, as well as the use of m 2 K ðÞ¼S K Sl 1 1 S1=m (12a) increasingly refined pore-scale modeling approaches w e w e e (e.g., Tuller and Or, 2001) at the smaller scales for more hi precise simulation of the basic physical processes 2m l 1=m KaðÞ¼Se KaðÞ1 Se 1 S (12b) governing the retention and movement of water in unsatu- e rated media. where the subscripts w and a refer to the water and air phases, respectively, and Kw and Ka are the hydraulic con- ductivities of the medium to water and air when filled Bibliography completely with those fluids. A detailed overview of var- Abbaspour, K. C., Schulin, R., and Th. van Genuchten, M., 2001. ious approaches for measuring and describing the hydrau- Estimating unsaturated soil hydraulic parameters using ant col- ony optimization. Advances in Water Resources, 24, 827–841. lic properties of multi-fluid systems is given by Lenhard Bitterlich, S., Durner, W., Iden, S. C., and Knabner, P., 2004. Inverse et al. (2002). estimation of the unsaturated soil hydraulic properties from col- umn outflow experiments using free-form parameterizations. Vadose Zone Journal, 3, 971–981. A look ahead Bouma, J., and van Lanen, J. A. J., 1987. Transfer functions and The unsaturated soil hydraulic properties are key factors threshold values: from soil characteristics to land qualities. In determining the dynamics and movement of water and Beek, K. J., et al. (eds.), Quantified Land Evaluation. Enschede: its dissolved constituents in the subsurface. Reliable esti- Int. Inst. Aerospace Surv. Earth Sci. ITC Publ. No. 6, – mates are needed for a broad range of agrophysical appli- pp. 106 110. Brooks, R. H., and Corey, A. T., 1964. Hydraulic properties of cations, including for subsurface contaminant transport porous media, Hydrol. Paper No. 3, Colorado State Univ., Fort studies. A large number of approaches are now available Collins, CO. for describing and measuring the hydraulic properties, Burdine, N. T., 1953. Relative permeability calculations from pore- especially for relatively homogeneous single-porosity size distribution data. Petr. Trans. Am. Inst. Mining Metall. Eng., soils. This includes direct measurement of discrete y(h), 198,71–77. and K(h)orK(y) data points and fitting appropriate analyt- Carsel, R. F., and Parrish, R. S., 1988. Developing joint probability distributions of soil water retention characteristics. Water ical models to the data, and the use of increasingly sophis- Resources Research, 24, 755–769. ticated inverse methods. Childs, E. C., and Collis-George, N., 1950. The permeability of Considerable challenges remain in the description and porous materials. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, measurement of the hydraulic properties of structured Series A, 201, 392–405. HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF UNSATURATED SOILS 375

Dane, J. H., and Hopmans, J. W., 2002. Water retention and storage. Part 1, Physical Methods, 3rd edn. Madison: Soil Science Soci- In Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, ety of America, pp. 1009–1045. Part 1, Physical Methods. Chapter 3.3, 3rd edn. Madison, WI: Lenhard, R. J., Oostrom, M., and Dane, J. H., 2002. Multi-fluid Soil Science Society of America, pp. 671–720. flow. In Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), 2002. Methods of Soil Analysis, Analysis, Part 4, Physical Methods, SSSA Book Series 5, Part 1, Physical Methods, 3rd edn. Madison: Soil Science Soci- Chapter 7. Madison: Soil Science Society of America, ety of America. pp. 1537–1619. Durner, W., 1994. Hydraulic conductivity estimation for soils with Looms, M. C., Binley, A., Jensen, K. H., Nielsen, L., and Hansen, heterogeneous pore structure. Water Resources Research, T. M., 2008. Identifying unsaturated hydraulic properties using 32(9), 211–223. an integrated data fusion approach on cross-borehole geophysi- Gee, G. W., and Ward, A. L., 1999. Innovations in two-phase mea- cal data. Vadose Zone Journal, 7, 238–248. surements of hydraulic properties. In Th. van Genuchten, M., Luckner, L., van Genuchten, M Th., and Nielsen, D. R., 1989. Leij, F. J., and Wu, L. (eds.), Proceedings of the International A consistent set of parametric models for the two-phase flow Workshop, Characterization and Measurement of the Hydraulic of immiscible fluids in the subsurface. Water Resources Properties of Unsaturated Porous Media. Parts 1 and 2. River- Research, 25(10), 2187–2193. side: University of California, pp. 241–270. Minasny, B., and McBratney, A. B., 2002. The efficiency of various Haverkamp, R. F. J., Leij, C. F., Sciortino, A., and Ross, P. J., 2005. approaches to obtaining estimates of soil hydraulic properties. Soil water retention: I Introduction of a shape index. Soil Science Geoderma, 107(1–2), 55–70. Society of America Journal, 69, 1881–1890. Millington, R. J., and Quirk, J. P., 1961. Permeability of porous Hopmans, J. W., Šimůnek, J., Romano, N., and Durner, W., 2002. materials. Transactions of the Faraday Society, 57, 1200–1206. Inverse modeling of transient water flow. In Dane, J. H., and Mualem, Y., 1976. A new model for predicting the hydraulic con- Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, Physical ductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resources Methods, 3rd edn. Madison: SSSA, pp. 963–1008. Research, 12, 513–522. Hendrickx, J. M. H., and Flury, M., 2001. Uniform and preferential Mualem, Y., 1992. Modeling the hydraulic conductivity of unsatu- flow, mechanisms in the vadose zone. In Conceptual models of rated porous media. In Th. van Genuchten, M., Leij, F. J., and flow and transport in the fractured vadose zone. Washington, Lund, L. J. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Workshop, DC: National Research Council, National Academy, Indirect Methods for Estimating the Hydraulic Properties of pp. 149–187. Unsaturated Soils. Riverside: University of California, pp. 45–52. Ines, A. V. M., and Mohanty, B., 2008. Near-Surface soil moisture Nimmo, J. R., Perkins, K. S., and Lewis, A. M., 2002. Steady-state assimilation for quantifying effective soil hydraulic properties centrifuge. In Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil under different hydroclimatic conditions. Vadose Zone Journal, Analysis, Part 4, Physical Methods, SSSA Book Series 5, 7,39–52. Chapter 7. Madison: Soil Science Society of America, Jarvis, N., 2008. Near-saturated hydraulic properties of pp. 903–916. macroporous soils. Vadose Zone Journal, 7, 1256–1264. Pachepsky, Y. A., and Rawls, W. J., 2004. Status of pedotransfer Kastanek, F. J., and Nielsen, D. R., 2001. Description of soil water functions. In Pachepsky, Y. A., and Rawls, W. J. (eds.), Develop- characteristics using cubic spline interpolation. Soil Science ment of Pedotransfer Functions in Soil Hydrology. Amsterdam: Society of America Journal, 65, 279–283. Elsevier, pp. vii–xviii. Köhne, J. M., Köhne, S., and Šimůnek, J., 2009. A review of model Parlange, J.-Y., 1980. Water transport in soils. Annual Review of applications for structured soils: a) Water flow and tracer trans- Fluid Mechanics, 12,77–102. port. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 104,4–35. Peters, R. R., and Klavetter, E. A., 1988. A continuum model for Kool, J. B., Parker, J. C., and van Genuchten, M Th, 1987. Param- water movement in an unsaturated fractured rock mass. Water eter estimation for unsaturated flow and transport models – a Resources Research, 24, 416–430. review. Journal of Hydrology, 91, 255–293. Philip, J. R., 1969. Theory of infiltration. In Chow, V. T. (ed.), Kosugi, K., 1996. Lognormal distribution model for unsaturated Advances in Hydroscience, 5, 215–296; New York: Academic, soil hydraulic properties. Water Resources Research, 32(9), pp. 215–296. 2697–2703. Rawls, W. J., Brakensiek, D. L., and Saxton, K. E., 1982. Estimation Kosugi, K., Hopmans, J. W., and Dane, J. H., 2002. Parametric of soil water properties. Transactions on ASAE, 25(5), 1316– models. In Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil 1320 and 1328. Analysis, Part 1, Physical Methods, 3rd edn. Madison: SSSA, Richards, L. A., 1931. Capillary conduction of fluid through porous pp. 739–757. mediums. Physics, 1, 318–333. Kowalski, M. B., Finsterle, S., and Rubin, Y.,2004. Estimating slow Ritsema, C. J., and Dekker, L. W. (eds.), 2005. Behaviour and man- parameter distributions using ground-penetrating radar and agement of water-repellent soils. Australian Journal of Soil hydrological measurements during transient flow in the vadose Research, 43(3), i–ii, 1–441. zone. Advances in Water Resources, 27, 583–599. Schaap, M. G., and Leij, F. J., 2000. Improved prediction of unsat- Kung, K.-J. S., 1990. Preferential flow in a sandy vadose zone. 2. urated hydraulic conductivity with the Mualem-van Genuchten Mechanism and implications. Geoderma, 46,59–71. Model. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64, 843–851. Leij, F. J., Alves, W. J., van Genuchten, M. Th., and Williams, J. R., Schaap, M. G., and van Genuchten, M Th., 2006. A modified 1996. The UNSODA-Unsaturated Soil Hydraulic Database. Mualem-van Genuchten formulation for improved description User’s manual Version 1.0. Report EPA/600/R-96/095. National of the hydraulic conductivity near saturation. Vadose Zone Jour- Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and nal, 5,27–34. Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Segal, E., Bradford, S. A., Shouse, P., Lazarovitch, N., and Corwin, Cincinnati, OH. D., 2008. Integration of hard and soft data to characterize field- Leij, F. J., Russell, W. B., and Lesch, S. M., 1997. Closed-form scale hydraulic properties for flow and transport studies. Vadose expressions for water retention and conductivity data. Ground Zone Journal, 7, 878–889. Water, 35, 848–858. Šimůnek, J., and van Genuchten, M Th., 2008. Modeling Leij, F. J., Schaap, M. G., and Arya, L. R., 2002. Indirect methods. nonequilibrium flow and transport processes using HYDRUS. In Dane, J. H., and Topp, G. C. (eds.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Vadose Zone Journal, 7, 782–797. 376 HYDRODYNAMIC DISPERSION

Šimůnek, J., Wang, D., Shouse, P. J., and van Genuchten, M Th., 1998a. Analysis of field tension disc infiltrometer data by param- HYDRODYNAMIC DISPERSION eter estimation. International Agrophysics, 12, 167–180. Šimůnek, J., Wendroth, O., and van Genuchten, M Th., 1998b. The tendency of a flowing solution in a porous medium A parameter estimation analysis of the evaporation method for that is permeated with a solution of different composition determining soil hydraulic properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 62(4), 894–905. to disperse, due to the non-uniformity of the flow velocity Šimůnek, J., Jarvis, N. J., Th. van Genuchten, M., and Gärdenäs, A., in the conducting pores. The process is somewhat analo- 2003. Nonequilibrium and preferential flow and transport in the gous to diffusion, though it is a consequence of vadose zone: review and case study. Journal of Hydrology, 272, convection. 14–35. Tuller, M., and Or, D., 2001. Hydraulic conductivity of variably sat- urated porous media – film and corner flow in angular pore Bibliography space. Water Resources Research, 37, 1257–1276. Introduction to Environmental Soil Physics (First Edition) 2003 van Dam, J. C., Stricker, J. N. M., and Droogers, P., 1994. Inverse Elsevier Inc. Daniel Hillel (ed.) http://www.sciencedirect.com/ method for determining soil hydraulic functions from multi-step science/book/9780123486554 outflow experiments. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 58, 647–652. van Genuchten, M.Th., 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 44, 892–898. van Genuchten M.Th., Leij, F. J., and Yates, S. R., 1991. The RETC HYDROPEDOLOGICAL PROCESSES IN SOILS code for quantifying the hydraulic functions of unsaturated soils. Report EPA/600/2–91/065. U.S. Environmental Protection Svatopluk Matula Agency, Ada, OK. Department of Water Resources, Food and Natural Vereecken, H., Maes, J., Feyen, J., and Darius, P., 1989. Estimating the soil moisture retention characteristic from texture, bulk- Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague, density, and carbon content. Soil Science, 148, 389–403. Czech Republic Vrugt, J. A., and Robinson, B. A., 2007. Improved evolutionary optimization from genetically adaptive multimethod search. Synonyms Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 708–711. Soil hydrophysical processes; Soil physical processes; Wraith, J. M., and Or, D., 1998. Nonlinear parameter estimation Soil water processes; Soil water–soil morphology using spreadsheet software. Journal of Natural Resources and interactions Life Sciences Education, 27,13–19. Wang, W., Neuman, S. P., Yao, T., and Wierenga, P. J., 2003. Simu- Definition lation of large-scale field infiltration experiments using a hierar- chy of models based on public, generic, and site data. Vadose The hydropedological processes in the broader sense are all Zone Journal, 2, 297–312. soil processes in which flowing or stagnant water acts as the Yeh, T.-C. J., and Šimůnek, J., 2002. Stochastic fusion of informa- environment or agent or the vehicle of transport. These pro- tion for characterizing and monitoring the vadose zone. Vadose cesses affect the visible or otherwise discernible morpholog- Zone Journal, 1, 227–241. ical features of the soil profile and analogous features on the pedon, polypedon, catena, and soil landscape or soil series Cross-references scales. These features can be distinguished and categorized according to various pedological classification systems Bypass Flow in Soil (Lal, 2005) and, vice versa, used to identify and semi- Databases of Soil Physical and Hydraulic Properties Ecohydrology quantify the soil water processes (e.g., Stewart and Howell, Evapotranspiration 2003) that have produced or affected them. In the narrower Field Water Capacity sense, only those processes in which water itself (its content, Hydropedological Processes in Soils energy status, movement, and balance) is in the focus are Hysteresis in Soil regarded as hydropedological processes. Infiltration in Soils Layered Soils, Water and Solute Transport Introduction Pedotransfer Functions Physics of Near Ground Atmosphere Pedology is the branch of soil science dealing with soil Pore Size Distribution genesis, morphology, and classification. In some parts of Soil Hydrophobicity and Hydraulic Fluxes the world, however, the world pedology has been or still Soil Water Flow is used to denote the whole of soil science. Under these Soil Water Management conditions, it was quite natural to name that branch of soil Sorptivity of Soils science that deals with soil water (e.g., Stewart and Surface and Subsurface Waters Tensiometry Howell, 2003) and is otherwise referred to, for example, Water Balance in Terrestrial Ecosystems as soil physics, soil water physics, physics of soil water, Water Budget in Soil or soil hydrology as hydropedology, notwithstanding its Wetting and Drying, Effect on Soil Physical Properties relations (or rather the absence of such relations) to soil HYDROPEDOLOGICAL PROCESSES IN SOILS 377 genesis, morphology, and classification. This happened in The infiltration capacity of the soil is affected, among the fifties of the last century in Czechoslovakia, where the other factors, by the aptitude of the surface soil to crusting, word “hydropedology” was used to denote the discipline the roughness of the soil surface and the presence and of applied soil survey for designing irrigation and drainage openness of macropores (Stewart and Howell, 2003) systems on agricultural lands (ON 73 6950, 1974; Kutílek (biopores, cracks, and tillage-induced pores). et al., 2000). Similar usage may have developed in other The key role in the pedological control of landscape countries, too. Recently, the term “hydropedology” was hydrology is played by the retention capacity of the soil redefined with due regard to both parts of the word, i.e., profile (e.g., Dingman, 2002). Although it is not exactly to the water in the soil and the pedology as defined in true that the soil is capable of retaining all water until its the first sentence of this paragraph (Lin, 2003; Lin et al., field capacity is exceeded, this rule is nevertheless approx- 2005, 2006a). Hydropedology is thus emerging as a new imately valid. A nonlinear process, referred to as the “soil field, formed from the intertwining branches of soil science, moisture accounting,” has to be included in hydrological hydrology, and some other closely related disciplines (Lin models in order to turn the infiltration input into the et al., 2006b, 2008a, b; Lin, 2009). As in hydrogeology, shallow subsurface and deep groundwater runoff output hydroclimatology, and ecohydrology, the emphasis is on (e.g., Kachroo, 1992). The available water capacity of connections between hydrology and other spheres of the the soil (the field capacity minus the wilting point) plays earth (Wikipedia, 2009), in particular on the pedologic con- also a crucial role in supporting vegetation growth and trols on hydrologic processes and properties and hydrologic evapotranspiration. impacts on soil formation, variability, and functions. The field-capacity rule is sometimes vitiated by various Hydropedology emphasizes the in situ soils in the context types of preferential flow, i.e., a fast gravitationally driven of the landscape (Hydropedology, 2009). downward movement of water through the spots that are either more permeable or more wettable than the rest of the soils or appear as random manifestations of the Hydropedological processes in the soil hydraulic instability at the wetting front (fingering). This The soil and the living or dead vegetation on it transforms phenomenon is a zone of active research (e.g., Roulier the precipitation and snowmelt water into overland flow, and Schulin, 2008). However, the question of where, infiltration, and evaporation (e.g., Lal, 2005). All these when, and to which extent these phenomena occur in dif- three processes depend not only on the state and properties ferent soils and rocks (so that we can predict them) of the soil on the spot but also on the surface run on and remains largely unanswered. subsurface inflow of water from the upslope parts of the The hydraulic properties of the soil (Stewart and landscape, on the arrangement and properties of soil hori- Howell, 2003), such as the soil moisture retention curve, zons (e.g., Lal, 2005) (lithologically or pedogenetically the saturated hydraulic conductivity, the unsaturated hydrau- generated), and on the boundary conditions at the bottom lic conductivity function, the shrinkage curve, the wettability of the soil (bearing in mind how difficult it is to define parameters, and many other properties, sometimes easy to any “bottom” of the soil). quantify but sometimes still resisting to quantification, are The overland flow is generated (in most cases) only mutually correlated and, which is advantageous, are also locally, due either to the insufficiency of the soil infiltra- correlated to other, more easily determinable soil properties tion capacity, the lack of soil permeability when the soil such as the particle size distribution, bulk density, and is frozen or covered with ice crust, or to shallow ground- organic matter content (Pachepsky and Rawls, 2004; Pachepsky et al., 2006). It is not incidental that the tradi- water exfiltrating from the soil in the downslope parts of “ ” the landscape, where the soils are often stigmatized by tional Czechoslovak hydropedology (see above) turned hydromorphism (gleyization, peat horizons, salinization). in practice mainly into the particle size distribution analy- The overland flow is a vehicle of soil erosion and a carrier sis of command areas. One task of modern hydropedology of eroded soil particles. The eroded particles are deposited would be, in this respect, to reinvestigate the spatial distri- in the places where the overland flow loses its carrying bution of soil texture classes in conjunction with other soil capacity. In this way, the overland flow contributes sub- features, such as the soil depth, soil horizons, the position stantially to the thinning of the upland soils and thickening in the landscape, the degree of hydromorphism, etc. of the lowland soils and the submerged soils in streams, reservoirs, lakes, and seas. Conclusions The shallow subsurface downslope flow often occurs as The hydropedological processes as a part of soil-water rela- perched groundwater accumulated on the top of less per- tion processes belong to a new discipline, hydropedology meable soil horizons, produced by technogenic compac- (Lin et al., 2008c). Hydropedology undergoes burgeoning tion or translocation of clay particles (illuviation) or iron development. Its new topics and subtopics crop up all and aluminum (lateritization) or iron and organic matter the time and many existing hot topics can easily accommo- (podsolization) or simply because of the lack of organic date under its wings. In most cases, the acceptance of matter or the absence of tillage that would render the top- hydropedological viewpoints is useful and makes the soil more permeable than the subsoil. researcher more interdisciplinary and open to new ideas. 378 HYDROPHOBICITY

Bibliography Overland Flow Pedotransfer Functions Dingman, S. L., 2002. Physical Hydrology. Long Grove: Waveland Soil Water Flow Press. Water Budget in Soil Hydropedology, 2009. Available from World Wide Web: http:// hydropedology.psu.edu/hydropedology.html. Accessed Septem- ber 30, 2009. Kachroo, R. K., 1992. River flow forecasting. Part 5. Applications of a conceptual model. Journal of Hydrology, 133, 141–178. HYDROPHOBICITY Kutílek, M., Kuráž, V., and Císlerová, M., 2000. Hydropedologie 10. Textbook, 2nd edn. Prague: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Czech Technical University (in Czech). See Soil Hydrophobicity and Hydraulic Fluxes Lal, R. (ed.), 2005. Encyclopedia of Soil Science, 2nd edn. New York: Taylor & Francis. Cross-references Lin, H. S., 2003. Hydropedology: bridging disciplines, scales, and Conditioners, Effect on Soil Physical Properties data. Vadose Zone Journal, 2,1–11. Lin, H. S., 2009. Earth’s critical zone and hydropedology: concepts, characteristics, and advances. Hydrology and Earth System Sci- ence Discussion, 6, 3417–3481. Lin, H. S., Bouma, J., Wilding, L., Richardson, J., Kutílek, M., and HYDROPHOBICITY OF SOIL Nielsen, D., 2005. Advances in hydropedology. Advances in Agronomy, 85,1–89. Paul D. Hallett1, Jörg Bachmann2, Henryk Czachor3, Lin, H. S., Bouma, J., Pachepsky, Y., Western, A., van Genuchten, 4 5 M. Th., Thompson, J., Vogel, H., and Lilly, A., 2006a. Emilia Urbanek , Bin Zhang 1Scottish Crop Research Institute, Dundee, UK Hydropedology: synergistic integration of pedology and hydrol- 2 ogy. Water Resource Research, 42, W05301, doi:10.1029/ Institute of Soil Science, Leibniz University of Hannover, 2005WR004085. Hannover, Germany Lin, H. S., Bouma, J., and Pachepsky, Y. (eds.), 2006b. 3Institute of Agrophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Hydropedology: bridging disciplines, scales, and data. 131 – Lublin, Poland Geoderma, , 255 406. 4Department of Geography, Swansea University, Lin, H. S., Bouma, J., Owens, P., and Vepraskas, M., 2008a. Swansea, UK Hydropedology: fundamental issues and practical applications. 5 Catena, 73, 151–152. Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Lin, H. S., Brooks, E., McDaniel, P., and Boll. J., 2008b. Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hydropedology and surface/subsurface runoff processes. In Beijing, PR China Anderson M. G. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences. Chichester, UK: Wiley. doi:10.1002/0470848944.hsa306. Lin, H. S., Chittleborough, D., Singha, K., Vogel, H.-J., and Synonyms Mooney, S., 2008c. The outcomes of the first international con- Localized dry spot; Soil water repellency ference on hydropedology. In PES-02, 2008. The Earth’s Critical Zone and Hydropedology. Symposium PES-02, International Geological Congress, Oslo, August 6–14, 2008. http://www. Definition cprm.gov.br/33IGC/Sess_430.html. Accessed October 30, 2009. Hydrophobic – meaning “water fearing” in Greek. ON 73 6950, 1974. Hydropedological survey for land improvement Hydrophobic soils – repel water, generally resulting in purposes. Technical Standard. Prague: Hydroprojekt (in Czech). water beaded on the surface. Pachepsky, Y., and Rawls, W. J., 2004. Development of Hydrophobicity – sometimes refers to a soil–water contact Pedotransfer Functions in Soil Hydrology. Developments in Soil > Science. Amsterdam: Elsevier, Vol. 30. angle 0 . These soils absorb less water and more slowly Pachepsky, Y. A., Rawls, W. J., and Lin, H. S., 2006. than hydrophilic soils. Hydropedology and pedotransfer functions. Geoderma, 131, 308–316. Introduction Roulier, S., and Schulin, R. (eds.), 2008. A monothematic issue on preferential flow and transport in soil. European Journal of Soil Hydrophobicity impedes the rate and extent of wetting in Science, 59,1–130. many soils. It is caused primarily by organic compounds Stewart, B. A., and Howell, T. A. (eds.), 2003. Encyclopedia of that either coat soil particles or accumulate as particulate Water Science. New York: M. Dekker. organic matter not associated with soil minerals. Sandy Wikipedia, 2009. Available from World Wide Web: http://en. textured soils are more prone to hydrophobicity because wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydropedology. Accessed October 30, 2009. their smaller surface area is coated more extensively than soils containing appreciable amounts of clay and silt. Cross-references The most important effect of hydrophobicity is changes Bypass Flow in Soil to soil water dynamics. Hydrophobicity causes negative Ecohydrology effects through reduced infiltration and water retention, Field Water Capacity Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils leading to enhanced run-off across the soil surface, prefer- Hysteresis in Soil ential flow pathways in the unsaturated zone of the soil, Infiltration in Soils and less plant available water. Many soils that appear to Laminar and Turbulent Flow in Soils readily take in water have small levels of hydrophobicity.