| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
a Dep. of Soil Sciences, SLU, Box 7014, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
b Agrosphere Institute, ICG–IV, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, D–52425 Jülich, Germany
c Currently, Soil Protection Group, Insitute of Terresterial Ecology, ETH Zurich, Grabenstrasse 11a, 8952 Schlieren, Switzerland
* Corresponding author (Mats.Larsbo{at}mv.slu.se)
Received 23 September 2004.
We introduce an improved, one-dimensional, non-steady-state dual-permeability model (MACRO 5.1). The model simulates water flow and solute transport in the vadose zone of structured soils by coupling a high-conductivity–low porosity macropore domain to a low-conductivity–high porosity domain representing the soil matrix. Mass exchange between the domains is approximated by first-order expressions. The numerical solutions are briefly described, focusing on the dual-permeability formulation. The solution method for water flow in macropores was verified by comparing simulation results with analytical solutions for a "kinematic wave". The model was tested against high time-resolution measurements of water flow and nonreactive (Cl–) solute transport in transient microlysimeter experiments. The objective was to test the identifiability of four key model parameters determining the degree of preferential flow using the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) procedure. The parameters were chosen either because they are difficult or impossible to measure directly or because they were considered sensitive on the basis of earlier experience with the model. The measurements, indicating strong preferential flow, were adequately reproduced by the model simulations (overall model efficiency = 0.62). The GLUE procedure conditioned the saturated matrix hydraulic conductivity, the macroporosity, and the mass exchange coefficient (diffusion pathlength), indicating that these parameters would be identifiable in inverse modeling approaches based on microlysimeter experiments. The conditioning of the kinematic exponent was poor, which was attributed primarily to correlation with the macroporosity.
Abbreviations: GLUE, generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Panday and P. S. Huyakorn MODFLOW SURFACT: A State-of-the-Art Use of Vadose Zone Flow and Transport Equations and Numerical Techniques for Environmental Evaluations Vadose Zone J., May 27, 2008; 7(2): 610 - 631. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Larsbo, K. Fenner, K. Stoob, M. Burkhardt, K. Abbaspour, and C. Stamm Simulating Sulfadimidine Transport in Surface Runoff and Soil at the Microplot and Field Scale J. Environ. Qual., May 1, 2008; 37(3): 788 - 797. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. H. Skaggs, N. J. Jarvis, E. M. Pontedeiro, M. Th. van Genuchten, and R. M. Cotta Analytical Advection Dispersion Model for Transport and Plant Uptake of Contaminants in the Root Zone Vadose Zone J., November 20, 2007; 6(4): 890 - 898. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. H. Gerke, J. Dusek, T. Vogel, and J. M. Kohne Two-Dimensional Dual-Permeability Analyses of a Bromide Tracer Experiment on a Tile-Drained Field Vadose Zone J., August 23, 2007; 6(3): 651 - 667. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Boivin, J. Simunek, M. Schiavon, and M. Th. van Genuchten Comparison of Pesticide Transport Processes in Three Tile-Drained Field Soils Using HYDRUS-2D Vadose Zone J., June 21, 2006; 5(3): 838 - 849. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| The SCI Journals | Agronomy Journal | Crop Science | |||
| Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education |
Soil Science Society of America Journal | ||||
| Journal of Plant Registrations | Journal of Environmental Quality |
The Plant Genome | |||
