Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:41:47.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The determination of the size distribution of soil clods and crumbs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. W. Russell  and
R. V. Tamhane
E. W. Russell
Affiliation:
Soil Physics Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
R. V. Tamhane
Affiliation:
Soil Physics Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. It is possible to determine the size distribution of clods in the field by simple sieving of the soil without any pre-treatment provided the soil is not too wet. There is a personal factor involved in the sieving, but with care and training this will not affect comparisons of results obtained by that person. If the soil is too wet the individual clods smaller than 3 mm. stick together on the 3 mm. sieve. This sticking together is first apparent on the 3 mm. sieve but may become appreciable on the ¼ in. (6 mm.) sieve. No certain way was found for overcoming this difficulty.

2. There appears to be no best method for determining the size distribution of the soil crumbs, i.e. of the water-stable aggregates in the soil. The method and the technique must be chosen so as to give the maximum amount of useful information. If an appreciable proportion of the crumbs are larger than ½ mm., a water-sieving method is practically essential.

3. The method of wetting to be used can only be chosen from a consideration of what information is wanted. If possible it would be desirable for general purposes to use a very slow or a vacuum wetting technique and a very rapid wetting technique such as wetting the soil by immersion in water.

4. The decision whether air-dry or field-moist soil should be used depends entirely on the information needed. For general purposes the use of air-dry soil is recommended.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , April 1940 , pp. 210 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bouyoucos, G. J. (1929). Soil Sci. 28, 27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, R. C. & Edlefsen, N. E. (1935). Soil Sci. 40, 473–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demolon, A. & Hénin, S. (1932). Soil Res. 3, 1–9.Google Scholar
Keen, B. A. (1933). Empire J. exp. Agric. 1, 97–102.Google Scholar
Keen, B. A. & Haines, W. B. (1923). J. agric. Sci. 13, 467–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangelsdorff, E. G. (1929). Landw. Jahrb. 69, 485–519.Google Scholar
Middleton, H. E. (1930). U.S. Dept. Agric. Tech. Bull. no. 178.Google Scholar
Pigulevsky, M. C. (1936). Principles and Methods of the Experimental Study of Soil Deformations. Selkhozgiz, Moscow, Leningrad.Google Scholar
Puchner, H. (1911). Mitt. d. deutsch. landw. Gesellsch. 26, 38–40.Google Scholar
Russell, E. W. (1938). Imp. Bur. Soil Sci., Harpenden. Tech. Comm. no. 37.Google Scholar
Savvinov, N. I. (1931). Quoted by Tsyganov (1935).Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K. (1933). J. agric. Sci. 23, 252–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjulin, A. F. (1928). Perm Agric. exp. Sta. Division agric. Chem. 2, 77–122.Google Scholar
Tsyganov, M. S. (1935). Pedology, 219–29.Google Scholar
Volkov, M. I. (1933). Pedology, 52–8.Google Scholar
Yoder, R. E. (1936). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 28, 337–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar