Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 3 — Observational / field trialPeer-reviewed

Reproducibility of the wet part of the soil water retention curve: a European interlaboratory comparison

Benjamin Guillaume, Hanane Aroui Boukbida, Gerben Bakker, Andrzej Bieganowski, Yves Brostaux, Wim Cornelis, Wolfgang Durner, Christian Hartmann, Bo Vangsø Iversen, Mathieu Javaux, Joachim Ingwersen, Krzysztof Lamorski, Axel Lamparter, András Makó, Ana María Mingot Soriano, Ingmar Messing, Attila Nemes, Alexandre Pomes-Bordedebat, Martine van der Ploeg, Tobias K. D. Weber, Lutz Weihermüller, Joost Wellens, Aurore Degré

SOIL · 2023

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

This European interlaboratory comparison study examined the reproducibility of soil water retention curve measurements across 14 laboratories using artificially constructed reference samples. The analysis revealed that interlaboratory variability was substantially greater than intralaboratory variability, with performance differing markedly between laboratories. The authors conclude that harmonisation and standardisation of measurement procedures are necessary to ensure the quality of soil water retention databases and derivative products such as pedotransfer functions and soil property maps.

UK applicability

UK laboratories contributing to or using soil water retention curve databases should be aware of this evidence for procedural variability and its downstream effects on soil hydrological property prediction. The findings underscore the need for adoption of standardised measurement protocols to improve the reliability of soil databases used in UK environmental and agricultural research.

Key measures

Soil water retention curve measurements at matric potentials between 10 and 300 hPa; interlaboratory variability; intralaboratory variability; sample-to-sample variability quantified via Bayesian linear mixed models

Outcomes reported

The study quantified inter- and intralaboratory variability in measurements of the wet portion of the soil water retention curve (10–300 hPa) across 14 European laboratories using standardised reference samples. It identified that interlaboratory variability was the dominant source of measurement differences, with considerable variation in intralaboratory reproducibility depending on the laboratory.

Theme
Measurement & metrics
Subject
Measurement methods & nutrient profiling
Study type
Research
Study design
Interlaboratory comparison study
Source type
Peer-reviewed study
Status
Published
Geography
Europe
System type
Laboratory / in vitro
DOI
10.5194/soil-9-365-2023
Catalogue ID
BFmovbmeb4-g3rc05

Topic tags

Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.