lysimeter stations and soil hydrology measuring sites in europe—

Christine Lanthaler

Lysimeter Stations and Soil Hydrology Measuring Sites in Europe— Purpose, Equipment, Research Results, Future Developments

A diploma thesis for the degree of

Magistra der Naturwissenschaften (Mag. rer. nat.)

submitted to the School of Natural Sciences at the Karl-Franzens-University Graz

Advisor: Univ.-Doz. Dr. Johann Fank JOANNEUM RESEARCH, Graz

Department for WaterResourcesManagement Hydrogeology and Geophysics

Graz, December 2004

2

Declaration

I hereby declare that this diploma thesis is my own work which I wrote without

anybody’s help—except persons mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.

I only used sources listed in chapter 9, References.

3

Preface and Acknowledgements I have always had a special interest in geography and water-related matters and decided to take hydrology as my main subject. To write a diploma thesis that combines physical geography, hydrology and cartography—that’s what I desired to do and therefore I would like to thank • My advisor Univ.-Doz. Dr. Johann Fank, JOANNEUM RESEARCH, first for giving

me the chance to treat this lysimeter topic in such an extensive way. His courses with useful practical explanations and a hydrological excursion contributed to a com-prehensive education. He supported me in various ways for this work and took the time to visit Austrian and German lysimeter stations with me, made it possible for me to take part in the reconstruction of the lysimeter facility Wagna, provided several conference proceedings, and he was very interested in the progress I was making on the thesis.

• All operators of lysimeter/soil hydrology measuring sites and other persons I contacted

for taking part in my survey by completing the questionnaire, sending me information by e-mail, attaching descriptions and reports or providing journals and research results by post—without their help, this thesis would not have been possible in this extent. Unfortunately, not all stations/facilities can be presented equally in this thesis.

• The following persons for the possibility to visit their lysimeter facilities and for

providing additional information: Dr. Thomas Pütz (Jülich) and Dipl.-Phys. Dietmar Klotz (Neuherberg) in Germany; Ass.-Prof. Dr. Peter Cepuder (Groß-Enzersdorf/ Vienna), DI Johannes Hösch (Hirschstetten, Vienna), Dr. Bernhard Wimmer (Seibers- dorf), HR Dr. Gerfried Eder and Dr. Andreas Bohner (BAL Gumpenstein, Irdning)—all Austria; excursion guides in Slovenia and Croatia who showed lysimetric devices during an excursion of the Austrian Lysimeter Research Group/Österreichische AG Lysimeter.

• DI (FH) Georg v. Unold and Udo Weiß of UMS Umweltanalytische Mess-Systeme

GmbH, Munich (Germany) for sending me information on measuring methods of the unsaturated zone and on seepage water samplers and for providing background information on lysimeters during the installation of new vessels in Wagna.

• Ernst Stelzl (JOANNEUM RESEARCH) for providing working steps of the recon-

struction of the lysimeter facility Wagna and for great cooperation during the process. • For additional English phrases or soil type information many thanks to Dr. A. Behrendt,

M. Javaux, Dipl.-Geol. J. Stude and Dipl.-Geol. B. Susset; for answering additional inquiries Dr. O. Bragg, Ing. J. Fiala, Csc., DI G. Fuchs, Dr. R. Helliwell, Dr. H. Rupp.

• Univ.-Prof. Dr. Harald Eicher, second reader, and Univ.-Prof. Dr. Herwig Wakonigg, of

the Department for Geography and Regional Sciences, for their interesting courses and lively lectures. To professor Wakonigg I owe a tutorium and my personal logo!

• My sister Mag. Maria T. Lanthaler, M.T.S.C., who helped me with some formatting

problems, several English expressions (at any hour!), and who proofread this thesis. • My parents Gertrud and Josef who always supported me in every way and encouraged

me to study geography. Thank you also for plant and technical details.

Lysimeter Stations and Soil Hydrology Measuring Sites in Europe— Christine Lanthaler Purpose, Equipment, Research Results, Future Developments

4

Summary

The main goal of this thesis is to provide an overview of lysimeter types used in Europe and

to show their employment in research centres. Purpose, details on equipment, research

results and future perspectives of lysimeter facilities are described and presented clearly.

All stations are additionally shown in two maps. Basics of soil hydrology and measuring

techniques of the unsaturated zone are offered first to explain fundamental facts.

Lysimeters are defined as containers with a soil volume and depth given, are either filled

undisturbed or disturbed, installed plane to the surface and are used to collect seepage water

(drainage/leachate) which is gained by means of different methods at the lysimeter bottom.

Furthermore, parameters of the water balance or dissolved substances may be determined.

In contrast, seepage water samplers/SWS do not reach soil surface and are usually smaller.

As lysimeters can have various sizes and may be planted with several crops/kinds of grass or

trees, many research fields such as (soil) hydrology, agricultural and forest economy or

ecology use these devices for their research matters. Gathered data are valid for a conclusion

on water and nutrient transport in the unsaturated zone but so-called lysimeter errors

must be taken into consideration when interpreting and analyzing results.

According to my survey around Europe, 117 institutions operate ca. 2930 lysimeters/SWS in

18 countries. 2440 of the total number are lysimeter vessels; 84 % of them are non

weighable and to 30 % they are monolithically filled. 269 containers are weighable,

whereby 46 % are monolithic lysimeters. Two thirds of all lysimeters are used for research

on arable land, almost one fourth is used under grassland and only 1 % is implemented in

forests. SWS are used to a higher extent in grassland (41 %); 15 % are installed under arable

land, and 8 % in forests. The percentage of all vessels used for studies of arable land

amounts to 54 % (1590 vessels).

In order to assure sustainable soil and groundwater protective ground cultivation, it is

important to control soil water budget and seepage water processes using lysimeter studies.

With data measured at one position, numerical soil water movement and nutrient

transport models may be calibrated and results are then transferred to larger geographical

units (catchment areas, for example); this will also be a main challenge for research in the

future as well as improving precise measuring methods.

Lysimeter Stations and Soil Hydrology Measuring Sites in Europe— Christine Lanthaler Purpose, Equipment, Research Results, Future Developments

5

Zusammenfassung

Lysimeter- und bodenhydrologische Forschungsstationen in Europa – Ziele, Ausstattung, Ergebnisse, Perspektiven

Das Ziel dieser Diplomarbeit ist nach einer Aufarbeitung der bodenhydrologischen Grund-

lagen und Messmethoden der ungesättigten Zone einen Überblick über in Europa ver-

wendete Lysimetertypen und ihren Einsatz in Forschungsstationen zu geben. Dabei werden

deren Zielsetzungen, Ausstattungsmerkmale, Forschungsergebnisse sowie Zukunftsentwick-

lungen übersichtlich dargestellt; alle erhobenen Stationen sind in zwei Karten eingezeichnet.

Lysimeter sind Gefäße mit definiertem Bodenvolumen und Tiefe, die entweder ungestört

oder gestört befüllt oberflächengleich in den Boden eingebaut sind und dienen der Sammlung

von Sickerwasser, das durch verschiedene Verfahren an der Gefäßunterseite gewonnen wird.

Im Weiteren können Wasserhaushaltsparameter oder gelöste Stoffe bestimmt werden. Im

Unterschied dazu ragen Sickerwassersammler/SWS mit ihrer seitlichen Berandung nicht an

die Erdoberfläche und sind meist kleiner. Aufgrund ihrer unterschiedlichen Größe und

Bepflanzung werden Lysimeter/SWS für viele Fragestellungen der (Boden-)Hydrologie,

Land- und Forstwirtschaft oder Ökologie eingesetzt. Die ermittelten Daten lassen sehr gute

Schlüsse auf den Stoff- und Wassertransport in der ungesättigten Zone zu, jedoch müssen

Lysimeterfehler immer in die Interpretation der Ergebnisse miteinbezogen werden.

Nach Auswertung einer eigenen europaweiten Umfrage betreiben in 18 Ländern ca. 117

Institutionen etwa 2930 Lysimeter/SWS, davon sind 2440 Lysimetergefäße, die zu ca. 84 %

nicht wägbar und zu etwa 30 % monolithisch befüllt sind. 269 Lysimeter sind wägbar,

wobei hier der Anteil an Monolithen bei 46 % liegt. Lysimeter werden zu fast zwei Drittel

für ackerbaulich relevante Untersuchungen, zu einem knappen Viertel für den Einsatz in

Grünland und nur zu 1 % in Waldgebieten herangezogen. SWS werden vermehrt im Grün-

land (41 %), in Feldern (16 %), aber auch in Waldbeständen (8 %) eingebaut. Damit ergibt

sich ein Gesamtanteil aller Gefäße im Ackerland von etwa 54 % (1590 Lysimeter/SWS).

Im Sinne von nachhaltigen Boden und Grundwasser schonenden Bewirtschaftungsmaß-

nahmen ist es wichtig, den Bodenwasserhaushalt und die Sickerwasserprozesse mittels Lysi-

meterstudien zu beobachten. Anhand der gemessenen punktbezogenen Daten können

numerische Bodenwasserhaushalts- und Stofftransportmodelle kalibriert und die Ergeb-

nisse somit auf größere Flächen übertragen werden. Darin liegen neben der Verbesserung

der präzisen Messtechnik vor allem Herausforderungen für zukünftige Forschungen.

6

Table of Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... 8 List of Tables............................................................................................................................. 9 List of Appendixes.................................................................................................................. 10 List of Enclosures ................................................................................................................... 10 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 11

1.1 Goals and Purpose of the Thesis .................................................................................. 11 1.2 Theoretical Approaches and Methodology.................................................................. 12

2 Fundamentals of Soil Hydrology...................................................................................... 13 2.1 Definitions: Soil and the Unsaturated Zone................................................................. 13 2.2 Composition of Soil ..................................................................................................... 15

2.2.1 Soil Fractions, Texture, and Structure ................................................................................ 15 2.2.2 Soil Porosity........................................................................................................................ 17

2.3 Basics of Soil Water and Measuring Methods of the Unsaturated Zone ..................... 19 2.3.1 Soil Water and Soil Water Content..................................................................................... 19 2.3.2 Concept of Soil Water Potential ......................................................................................... 21 2.3.3 Soil Water Retention Curve (SWRC), pF Curve ................................................................ 22 2.3.4 Measuring Techniques of Soil Water Content and Matric Potential/Suction ..................... 24 2.3.5 Hydrodynamics of Soil Water ............................................................................................ 29

2.3.5.1 Basic Concept: DARCY’s Law.................................................................................... 29 2.3.5.2 Infiltration, Percolation, Drainage, and Capillary Rise .............................................. 31 2.3.5.3 Transport of Solutes in Soils....................................................................................... 32 2.3.5.4 Soil Water Quality and Measurement of Soil Solution .............................................. 34

2.3.6 Soil Water Balance ............................................................................................................. 34 3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types .......................................................... 37

3.1 What Is a Lysimeter? ................................................................................................... 37 3.2 Lysimeters and Their Research Objectives.................................................................. 38 3.3 Requirements for a Location for Lysimeter Stations ................................................... 39 3.4 Lysimeter Types: Construction and Function.............................................................. 40

3.4.1 Seepage Water Sampler (SWS) .......................................................................................... 40 3.4.2 Gravitation Lysimeter (Monolithic or Backfilled).............................................................. 44 3.4.3 Monolithic Lysimeter ......................................................................................................... 45

3.4.3.1 Weighable Monolithic (or Backfilled) Lysimeter ...................................................... 45 3.4.3.2 Non-Weighable Monolithic Field Lysimeter (Petzenkirchen System)....................... 48

3.4.4 Suction Lysimeter ............................................................................................................... 50 3.4.5 Groundwater Lysimeter ...................................................................................................... 50 3.4.6 Other Lysimeter Types ....................................................................................................... 52 3.4.7 Soil Hydrology Measuring Site (SHMS)............................................................................ 53

3.5 Lysimeter Errors and Comparison of Lysimeter Types............................................... 54 3.5.1 Lysimeter Errors ................................................................................................................. 54 3.5.2 Comparisons of Lysimeter Types: Advantages and Limitations ........................................ 56

7

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe ................................................................... 58 4.1 Developing a Questionnaire for Operators of Lysimeter Sites in Europe ................... 58 4.2 Search for Operators and Lysimetric Sites; Lysimeter Database ................................ 59 4.3 Results of the Survey and General Information about Lysimeter Sites....................... 60 4.4 Lysimeter Sites in Europe According to Their Vegetation Type................................. 64

4.4.1 More Than Two Different Vegetation Types and Peatland Vegetation ............................. 65 4.4.1.1 Germany ..................................................................................................................... 65 4.4.1.2 United Kingdom (Scotland)........................................................................................ 69

4.4.2 Arable Land/Fields ............................................................................................................. 70 4.4.2.1 United Kingdom ......................................................................................................... 70 4.4.2.2 France ......................................................................................................................... 70 4.4.2.3 Germany ..................................................................................................................... 71 4.4.2.4 Switzerland ................................................................................................................. 76 4.4.2.5 Austria ........................................................................................................................ 77 4.4.2.6 Hungary ...................................................................................................................... 84 4.4.2.7 Spain ........................................................................................................................... 86 4.4.2.8 Italy............................................................................................................................. 87

4.4.3 Grassland (Lowland)........................................................................................................... 87 4.4.3.1 Finland........................................................................................................................ 87 4.4.3.2 Ireland......................................................................................................................... 88 4.4.3.3 United Kingdom ......................................................................................................... 90 4.4.3.4 Belgium ...................................................................................................................... 91 4.4.3.5 Germany ..................................................................................................................... 92

4.4.4 Grassland (Mountain Areas in Austria) .............................................................................. 93 4.4.5 Forests (Lowland and Mountain Areas) ............................................................................. 96

4.4.5.1 Germany ..................................................................................................................... 96 4.4.5.2 Austria ........................................................................................................................ 98

4.4.6 Dumps/Landfills, Polluted or Post-Mining Areas in Germany........................................... 98 5 Results of Lysimeter Studies........................................................................................... 101

5.1 Results for Peatland/Moorland .................................................................................. 101 5.2 Results for Arable Land ............................................................................................. 102 5.3 Results for Grassland (Lowland) ............................................................................... 106 5.4 Results for Grassland (Mountain Areas in Austria)................................................... 106 5.5 Results for a Spruce Forest (Austria)......................................................................... 107 5.6 Results for a Sanitary Landfill ................................................................................... 108 5.7 General Statements on Lysimeter Studies ................................................................. 108

6 Future Developments ...................................................................................................... 109 7 Concept for the European Lysimeter Platform (EuLP) on the Internet.................... 113 8 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 116 9 References ........................................................................................................................ 118 Appendixes............................................................................................................................ 126

8

List of Figures Fig. 1: The pedosphere: abiotic and biotic entities interacting in the soil matrix ................................. 13 Fig. 2: Division of soil fraction sizes, German (left) and American (right) nomenclature ................... 15 Fig. 3: Texture triangles according to DIN 4220 (a) and according to the U. S. Soil Taxonomy (b)... 16 Fig. 4: Relation of volume of pores, effective porosity and adherent water depending on fractions ... 18 Fig. 5: Kinds of water retention: Capillary water, menisci and adsorbed water in equilibrium (a),

retention of free-standing water on concave surfaces of coarse material (b).......................... 20 Fig. 6: Combined soil water retention and pF curve showing relation between matric suction/ pressure

head and water content; FK = field capacity, PWP = permanent wilting point (see text) ...... 23 Fig. 7: TDR probes (a) and pre-boring with extension tubes for installing probes in soil to avoid

damaging the probe’s rods or rod tips (b) ............................................................................... 25 Fig. 8: Principle of a tensiometer located above water table and a piezometer below water table in a

column of static equilibrium (a), example of a tensiometer (b) .............................................. 27 Fig. 9: Steady flow experiment on a saturated soil column; abbreviations are explained in the text ... 30 Fig. 10: Reactions in soils at dynamic equilibria; processes (see numbers) explained in the text........ 33 Fig. 11: System of vacuum applied to suction cups, sampling bottles ................................................. 34 Fig. 12: Requirements for planning a lysimeter station ........................................................................ 39 Fig. 13: Seepage water sampler (SWS) according to E. STENITZER .................................................... 41 Fig. 14: Capillary wick sampler in Villié-Morgon, France (a, FR 19 )............................................. 41 Fig. 15: Monolithic seepage water samplers and measuring site south of Graz (AT 25 )................. 42 Fig. 16: SWS (filled tray, a) installed in a forest near Jastrebarsko; tray and collection vessel (b)...... 43 Fig. 17: Seepage water sampler side view (Czech Republic) ............................................................... 43 Fig. 18: Sinji Vrh: weather station (a); collecting segments and water samplers in a tunnel (b).......... 44 Fig. 19: System of a gravitation lysimeter (a); weighable lysimeter with built-in probes (b) .............. 44 Fig. 20: Vessel is pressed into the soil .................................................................................................. 46 Fig. 21: Installing shear plate................................................................................................................ 46 Fig. 22: Cylinder is put on the ground .................................................................................................. 46 Fig. 23: Container is put on concrete foundation.................................................................................. 47 Fig. 24: Mobile ring is removed ........................................................................................................... 47 Fig. 25: Field after being ploughed....................................................................................................... 47 Fig. 26: Fine tuning of lysimeter........................................................................................................... 48 Fig. 27: Lysimeter has been installed ................................................................................................... 48 Fig. 28: Lysimeter site on August 22, 2004.......................................................................................... 48 Fig. 29: Modified monolithic field lysimeter, Petzenkirchen system ................................................... 49 Fig. 30: Equipment of a measuring site including a non-weighable monolithic field lysimeter and soil

hydrology probes; for example in Lobau, Vienna, Austria..................................................... 49 Fig. 31: Principle system of a groundwater lysimeter equipped with a device to control the constant

groundwater level continuously, according to SCHENDEL...................................................... 51 Fig. 32: Principle of a groundwater control/groundwater lysimeter with variable groundwater level . 51 Fig. 33: Principle of a hydraulic groundwater lysimeter....................................................................... 52 Fig. 34: Division of non-weighable and weighable lysimeters and their soil filling method ............... 62 Fig. 35: Charts of all lysimeters and seepage water samplers in Europe, classified according to their

main vegetation type (survey 2004)........................................................................................ 64 Fig. 36: Principle sketch of staggered lysimeters in Falkenberg .......................................................... 67 Fig. 37: Weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters with beeches (a), lysimeter cellar (b) Neuherberg

................................................................................................................................................ 69 Fig. 38: View on the lysimeter facility Fagnières (a), excavating soil monoliths in 1976 (b).............. 71 Fig. 39: View on the lysimeters at lysimeter facility Dedelow (a), lysimeter cellar (b) ....................... 72

9

Fig. 40: The lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz, Germany ..................................................................... 73 Fig. 41: Lysimeter facility Jülich; non-weighable lysimeters (a), lysimeter cellar (b) ......................... 75 Fig. 42: Lysimeter in Zürich-Reckenholz (a), facility in Bern-Liebefeld (b) ....................................... 77 Fig. 43: Lysimeters and meteorological station (a), weighing system in cellar (b) Groß-Enzersdorf .. 79 Fig. 44: Lysimeter facility Hirschstetten: part of the whole facility (a), lysimeter with measurement of

short wave reflex radiation (b) ................................................................................................ 80 Fig. 45: Crane facility and monolithic gravitation lysimeters (a), lysimeter with four compartments

and three variants of residential waste (b) in Seibersdorf ....................................................... 82 Fig. 46: Fields, new lysimeter vessel and cellar entrance of the facility Wagna at the beginning of

reconstruction (a), field lysimeter installed and catch crops growing (b)............................... 84 Fig. 47: Lysimeter facilities Karcag (a) and Szarvas (b) ...................................................................... 85 Fig. 48: Arrangement of lysimeters and weather station Lleida (a), lysimeter transversal section

showing container, irrigation system, load cells and access to accessible zone (b)................ 86 Fig. 49: Facility in Jokioinen with non-weighable monolithic and backfilled lysimeters .................... 88 Fig. 50: New monolithic gravitation lysimeters at the facility Johnstown Castle (a and b) ................. 89 Fig. 51: Monoliths in the laboratory (Louvain) .................................................................................... 92 Fig. 52: Window in a backfilled gravitation lysimeter (a), non-weighable monolithic field lysimeter

(b) in Gumpenstein ................................................................................................................. 95 Fig. 53: Scheme of the large lysimeter in Colbitz................................................................................. 97 Fig. 54: Cross-section of a large lysimeter in St. Arnold with measuring pit....................................... 98 Fig. 55: Schematic profile of lysimeter II-B with measuring tubes for neutron logging.................... 100 Fig. 56: Data collected from a mire lysimeter during May 26, 1988 to December 10, 1991 in Scotland

.............................................................................................................................................. 102 Fig. 57: Daily patterns of water consumption of pear trees (ETc, from a lysimeter), reference evapo-

transpiration (ETo, from a weather station) and adjusted ETc (Adj. ETc) in Lleida, Spain. 103 Fig. 58: Amounts of seepage water collected with seepage water samplers and a monolithic lysimeter

(Groß-Enzersdorf, Austria) ................................................................................................... 104 Fig. 59: Nitrate-N concentrations in seepage water of lysimeters cultivated by ploughing (PF) and

direct drilling (DS) 1999-2002 (Ettenhausen, Switzerland) ................................................. 105 Fig. 60: Seasonal distribution of nitrogen leaching losses of the unsaturated zone into groundwater of

two different cultivation systems .......................................................................................... 105 Fig. 61: Seepage water amounts of five lysimeters at BAL Gumpenstein, Austria............................ 107 Fig. 62: Amount of 15N labelled nitrate found in seepage water after application (Mühleggerköpfl) 107 Fig. 63: Precipitation and time dependent variation of the total efficiency factors, compartment B.. 108 Fig. 64: Example for presenting a lysimeter facility on the internet (European Lysimeter Platform) 114

List of Tables Table 1: Range of values for bulk density, porosity and void ratio...................................................... 18 Table 2: Comparison of different field measuring methods summarized according to SCHEFFER 2002,

MARSHALL et al. 1996, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994 and UMS 2001 and 2003 a, pdfs ........ 28 Table 3: Soils classified according to their KS values........................................................................... 31 Table 4: Goals and use of lysimeters in different fields of research .................................................... 38 Table 5: Comparison of different types of seepage water samplers (SWS) and lysimeters: advantages

and limitations/suggestions ..................................................................................................... 57 Table 6: All lysimeter sites, numbers of vessels, seepage water samplers/SWS and soil hydrology

measuring sites/SHMS in Europe according to the survey 2004............................................ 61 Table 7: Lysimeters/SWS installed in Europe in 2004 (according to different sources, survey 2004) 63 Table 8: Description of the lysimeter facility Falkenberg (Stendal), Germany, DE 8 ................. 65 Table 9: Description of the lysimeter facility Neuherberg, Germany, DE 41 .............................. 67

10

Table 10: Description of the lysimeter stations Fenns and Whixall Mosses, Bankhead Moss, Scotland, UK 4 .................................................................................................................. 69

Table 11: Description of the lysimeter facility Fagnières, France, FR 9 ...................................... 70 Table 12: Description of the lysimeter facility Dedelow, Germany, DE 6 .................................... 71 Table 13: Description of the lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz, Germany, DE 4 ......................... 72 Table 14: Description of the lysimeter facility Jülich, Germany, DE 23 ...................................... 74 Table 15: Descriptions of the lysimeter facilities Zürich and Bern, Switzerland, CH 3, CH 2 .... 76 Table 16: Description of the lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf, Austria, AT 11 ....................... 77 Table 17: Description of the lysimeter facility Hirschstetten/Wien, Austria, AT 9 ..................... 79 Table 18: Description of the lysimeter facility Seibersdorf, Austria, AT 13 ................................. 81 Table 19: Description of the lysimeter facility Wagna, Austria, AT 27 ........................................ 82 Table 20: Descriptions of the lysimeter facilities Karcag and Szarvas, Hungary, HU 2, HU 1 .. 84 Table 21: Description of the lysimeter station Mollerussa EEL fields (Lleida), Spain, ES 1 ...... 86 Table 22: Description of lysimeter facility Jokioinen, Finland, FI 1 ............................................ 87 Table 23: Description of the lysimeter facility Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Ireland, IE 1 ........ 88 Table 24: Description of the lysimeter facility North Wyke, United Kingdom, UK 7 ................. 90 Table 25: Description of the lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, BE 1 ...................... 91 Table 26: Description of the lysimeter facility Paulinenaue, Germany, DE 13 ............................ 92 Table 27: Description of the lysimeter facility Gumpenstein, Irdning, Austria, AT 22 .............. 93 Table 28: Description of the lysimeter facility Colbitz (Magdeburg), Germany, DE 12 ............. 96 Table 29: Description of the lysimeter station St. Arnold/Rheine, Germany, DE 10 .................. 97 Table 30: Description of the lysimeter station Karlsruhe-West I and II, Germany, DE 38 ........ 99 Table 31: Description of the lysimeter facility Grünewalde, Germany, DE 22 .......................... 100 Table 32: Assessment of the effect of five treatments on the water balance of the soil column........ 103

List of Appendixes Appendix A: Translation English/German (terms used in chapters 2 and 3) Appendix B: Questionnaire sent to operators of lysimetric sites in Europe Appendix C: Project plan of reconstructing the lysimeter facility Wagna, Styria (Austria) Appendix D: Data of Austrian soil hydrology measuring sites (Hydrographic Office) Appendix E: Table a) Lysimeter/SWS sites operating (including lysimeter sites with soil hydrology measuring sites/SHMS) Table b) Soil hydrology measuring sites (SHMS) of Europe Table c) Inactivated lysimeters, seepage water samplers (SWS), soil hydrology measuring sites or whole stations Table d) Lysimeter stations/facilities or SWS not known if inactivated or still operating Table e) Existing SWS or lysimeter sites without further details Table f) Lysimeters expected at following places

List of Enclosures Enclosure 1: Map 1, Lysimeter sites in Europe Enclosure 2: Map 2, Lysimeter sites in Germany, the Czech Republic, Austria and Slovenia Enclosure 3: CD ROM, All lysimeter facilities, stations and soil hydrology measuring sites in Europe according to the survey in 2004 (html files)

1 Introduction 1.1 Goals and Purpose of the Thesis

11

1 Introduction The occurrence of water is, moreover, not less important and hardly less general upon the land. In addition to lakes and streams, water is almost everywhere present in large quantities in the soil, retained there mainly by capillary action, and often at greater depths. (HENDERSON 1913 in COLEMAN and CROSSLEY 1996, p 1)

In 1913, the physical chemist and physiologist Lawrence J. HENDERSON published a book

which was then considered a landmark among books on biological topics: “The Fitness of the

Environment.” His thesis is that only one substance, water with its three phases—solid, liquid

and gaseous—and characteristics, is responsible for the different appearances of life and the

biosphere we know. The most important fact of soil science is that for many physicochemical

relationships of substances in the whole biosphere water is the combining link (COLEMAN

and CROSSLEY 1996, pp 1-2). Therefore, studying the soil cannot be just the interest of one

field of research—soil science or soil physics—but includes interests of chemistry, hydrology,

hydrogeology, agronomy, civil engineering or geography, for example. Geography includes

various fields of research, e.g. climatology/meteorology, geomorphology, soil science,

ecology, computer based sciences like cartography, remote sensing or GIS and all

anthropological parts (population, regional sciences, etc.).

For a better understanding of hydrological processes in the soil we need to investigate soil

water, substances and processes in this zone. However, this cannot be done without research

centres or special devices called lysimeters and other soil hydrological equipment.

1.1 Goals and Purpose of the Thesis

The main purpose of this thesis is to give an overview of research centres of soil hydrology

and lysimeter stations in Europe, to establish their goals, equipment, research results, with

special emphasis placed on the future developments of these facilities (chapters 4, 5 and 6).

But before focussing on research centres I’ll discuss the fundamentals of soil hydrology (see

chapter 2) with the basics of soil physics, soil water, and the measuring methods of the

unsaturated zone that are used at many sites and which are mentioned with the descriptions of

European stations in chapter 4.

1 Introduction 1.2 Theoretical Approaches and Methodology

12

Chapter 3 provides a survey and exact definitions of different lysimeter types and their use,

and will also compare the different types regarding their advantages and limitations. But my

thesis does not claim to show either all lysimeter stations in Europe or all lysimeter types that

can occur, but the types commonly used. Because of time limitations it is not possible to

consider all operators of lysimeter or soil hydrology stations in Europe; you cannot find all

facilities in specialized literature or on Web sites (see section 4.2 for search methods).

I will also provide a description and a project plan for restructuring the lysimeter facility in

Wagna, Austria (see map 2, AT 27 , table 19 and appendix C). In chapter 7, I introduce my

concept for a lysimeter platform on the internet which will soon be integrated in the Austrian

Lysimeter Research Group homepage http://www.lysimeter.at.

1.2 Theoretical Approaches and Methodology

To gather data about lysimeter sites, I developed a questionnaire (see section 4.1), which I

sent to operators around Europe; information collected was saved in a database. As the

survey primarily treats non-German speaking countries and as its results will be presented on

a Web site, this thesis was written in English. I used basic and specialized literature in

English and German (and one French book) as well as information about lysimeter types

and sites provided on the internet (see references). During an excursion of the Austrian

Lysimeter Research Group to Slovenia and Croatia as well as during several visits to lysi-

meter stations in Germany and Austria in spring and summer 2004 I was able to extend my

basic knowledge of soil hydrology and measuring devices used in this field.

To make all measuring sites mentioned in the text easy to find in the two maps enclosed, I

refer to each site using a country code (letters and numbers)—for example AT 27. Symbols

used in the text (e.g. , , ) are explained in the legends in both maps. Enclosure 1/map 1

provides information about the area investigated, with sites in most countries indicated; in

enclosure 2/map 2 all sites of four countries are marked, as the scale of map 1 did not allow to

show all sites in these countries (Germany, the Czech Republic, Austria, and Slovenia).

All details of my survey are available on the enclosed CD ROM. For information on all sites

see file Lys_sites_Euope.htm, for all operators see file Lys_operators_Europe.htm.

2 Fundamentals of Soil Hydrology 2.1 Definitions: Soil and the Unsaturated Zone

13


First, I will give a short compilation of important terminology concerning soil and soil

hydrology which will be used in the following chapters and which is relevant for soil

hydrology research. The text is supported by several figures for a better understanding.

German translations are provided in endnotes (e.g. soil1) and can be looked up in appendix A.

Soil1 is a rather thin layer over the earth’s surface consisting of porous material with

properties varying widely. It can be seen as a sand-silt-clay matrix, containing inorganic

products of weathered rock or transported material together with organic living and dead

matter (biomass and necromass) of the flora and fauna. The factors of a soil formation

process are the interaction of parent material, relief, climate, vegetation, organisms, and man

with his utilization—all acting through time. These influences coming from the lithosphere,

the atmosphere, the hydrosphere, and the biosphere overlap in the pedosphere2 (which

represents the entirety of soils) and form a union, see figure 1 (MARSHALL 1996, p 1 and

COLEMAN and CROSSLEY 1996, pp 5-7).

Fig. 1: The pedosphere: abiotic and biotic entities interacting in the soil matrix

(from FITZPATRICK 1984 in COLEMAN and CROSSLEY 1996, p 6) Die Pedosphäre: abiotische und biotische Faktoren wirken auf die Bodenmatrix ein

Soil is part of the ecosphere/biogeosphere3 that includes every part of earth that is populated

by living beings. The ecosphere is characterized by air, water and nutrient cycles connected to

each other. The principal tasks of soils can be summarized according to SCHEFFER 2002, p 3:


14

• Historical documentation: soils are an archive of natural and cultural history where

influences of man can be seen.

• Agricultural and forest utilization: soils are the basis and an important resource for raw

material (clay, sand, brick clay, etc.).

• Living space: life of micro-organisms, plants, animals, and human beings is based on

soil. The surface of the earth/soil is used for building settlements, transportation

facilities, for industrial usage, and for recreation areas.

• Regulation of different cycles: water, air, organic and inorganic substances. Soils act as a

medium for storage, filtering, buffering, emitting, and transforming substances. Loose

sediments and soil influence the water budget of landscapes by regulating the water

storage capacity and providing soil water which is in many regions the most important

source for potable water; if it is contaminated, a lack of drinking water can easily occur.

A more hydrological explanation for the zone between the earth’s surface and the

groundwater surface is to speak of the unsaturated zone4, also called zone of aeration

(WARD 1975). It characterises a layer that is not entirely filled with water and contains no

groundwater. Water of this zone is called soil water, percolating water or infiltration

water5, see section 2.3.1. Groundwater6, on the contrary, is that part of the underground

water that is contained in the zone of saturation—all empty spaces and pores are filled with

water, its upper limits are the upper confining bed or the water table7 (HÖLTING 1996, p 79 and

PFANNKUCH 1969, p 52). Of course, temporarily the unsaturated zone can also be saturated—

during/after heavy rainfall, for example (see section 2.3.3, field capacity). Geology calls the

underground layer consisting of sands, gravel or fractured, cavernous, porous rock and

transmitting water the aquifer (PFANNKUCH 1969, p 94 and MILLER and GARDINER 1998 in

glossary http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~doetqp-p/courses/env320/glossary.htm).

To get a better (physical) understanding and also to achieve descriptions of hydrological

processes—this is the main goal of soil hydrological research. Different types of devices

such as lysimeters or equipment for measuring soil water content are required. The processes

in soils like infiltration, drainage, evaporation, or redistribution (see section 2.3.5.2) occur

under different meteorological situations and are analyzed by hydrologists or researchers in

similar fields. The combined actions of these processes are considered in the transport of

solutes—see section 2.3.5.3 (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 13).

http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~doetqp-p/courses/env320/glossary.htm

2 Fundamentals of Soil Hydrology 2.2 Composition of Soil

15

2.2 Composition of Soil

The storage capability of water, temperature, and air correlates in different ways with the

morphological characteristics of soil particles and how they are distributed (SCHEFFER 2002,

p 155). First, we have to discuss the basics of the solid phase and the framework it provides

for the storage and passage of water and will then focus on the soil water.

2.2.1 Soil Fractions, Texture, and Structure

According to their size, particles of a soil framework can be divided into two classes:

• the clay fraction8, < 2 µm in diameter, has been formed as a secondary product from the

weathering of rocks (primary minerals) or from transported deposits,

• the non-clay fraction, > 2 µm, can be divided into the subclasses: silt, sand, and gravel9

(MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 3). Both fractions are shown in figure 2 at a logarithmical scale.

Size limits can differ between the German and the American classifications—compare the

different sizes in the sand fraction in figure 2, for example—therefore, limits are not

natural but defined by man (SCHEFFER 2002, p 157). This fraction consists of rock

fragments, even secondary concretions, and inert material (MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 3).

SCHEFFER 2002, p 156 provides another size dependent

classification: coarse soil10 has a size of > 2 mm and

fine soil11 < 2 mm. This is based on a suggestion by

ATTERBERG (1912) to use the number 2 as a limit

between fractions.

The system of the U. S. Department of Agriculture (see

figure 2, on the right) uses 50 µm as the limiting size

between silt and sand; other diagrams take limits of

20 µm or 60 µm (MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 4).

Fig. 2: Division of soil fraction sizes, German (left) and American (right) nomenclature (from SCHEFFER 2002, p 157)

Einteilung der Korngrößenfraktionen, deutsche (links) und amerikanische (rechts) Nomenklatur


16

Texture12 was once a term used to characterize agricultural soils and their workability: heavy

clay soils required more effort to till than lighter, sandy loams (COLEMAN and CROSSLEY

1996, p 13); but today texture means the composition of soil fractions/particles13 (LESER

1997, p 879). The triangular diagrams, figures 3 a and b, show percentages of clay, silt,

sand and the resulting soil types such as sandy, loamy or clayey soils. Loam14 is not a fraction

of its own but a mixture of sand, silt, and clay (SCHEFFER 2002, p 158). The connection

between the fractions and soil water content will be discussed in the following sections.

a b

Fig. 3: Texture triangles according to DIN 4220 (a) and according to the U. S. Soil Taxonomy (b) S, s = sand, sandy, U, u = silt, silty; T, t = clay, clayey; L, l = loam, loamy; • marks the percentages of

50 % sand, 20 % silt and 30 % clay (from SCHEFFER 2002, p 158) Textur-Dreieck nach der DIN 4220 (a) und nach der US-amerikanischen Boden-Einteilung (b)

A soil structure explains the size and shape of aggregates—the way in which soil particles

are arranged, clustered together to larger units, or grouped. It also refers to the pore spaces

within the structure. Depending on the size level, a distinction is made between single

grained, like loose sand grains, and massive aggregates, like large, irregular solid. The four

major types of structural forms are spheroidal, block-like, prism-like, and plate-like. Structure

is not only important for water retention but also for tillage or varying physical processes,

which are dependent on temperature and moisture like freezing/thawing, wetting/drying or

other processes like deformation/compression by fauna and roots. The organic matter—

coming from living and dead sources, such as roots, leaves, microbes—is the main agent of

soil structure (COLEMAN and CROSSLEY 1996, pp 12-13, MARSHALL et al., pp 199-200).*

* Details in soil biology can be looked up in COLEMAN and CROSSLEY 1996 and in MARSHALL et al. 1996.


17

2.2.2 Soil Porosity

The following is alternately extracted from and equations are standardized based on HÖLTING

1996, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994 and SCHEFFER 2002, if no other author is cited.

Between single particles or aggregates of porous media, there is small void space for the

storage and transport processes of water and air, space for plant roots and micro-organisms

(MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 7). These hollows are called pores or pore spaces15, denoting that

part of the soil space which is not filled by the soil’s solid phase. The rate of the volume of

pores (VP)* of the total volume of soil (VT) is called soil porosity (P)16. Multiplying this result

by 100, we obtain P in percent: VP related to the volume of solid soil phase (VS) by the void

ratio (e)17:

T

P

VVP = (eq. 1)

S

P

VVe = [%] (eq. 2)

If VT is not constant, as for example in clays when they shrink or swell (see section 2.3.1), the

void ratio is more appropriate than porosity. Soil porosity depends on the composition, texture

and structure of soil and P can range from less than 0.3 to more than 0.9 (according to

KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 16); see also table 1 which only shows approximate P values.

The effective porosity18, which is “the porosity concept only taking into account pore space

that will yield water under gravity” (PFANNKUCH 1969, p 629), can be determined by:

hP PVP −=* (eq. 3)

where P* = effective porosity† and Ph = volume of adherent water (water under gravity).19

The chart in figure 4 makes clear that the volume of pores in soils rises with the increase of

its clay content, and effective porosity is lowest; clay particles have a higher surface area due

to a more plate-like structure instead of being spherical and are arranged irregularly in the

matrix. Effective porosity reaches its maximum in loamy soils which therefore have best

conditions for aggregation and for agricultural use (see section 2.3.3, water retention curve).

* Most abbreviations according to KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 16-22; in MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 7-10, abbreviations are different: volume of soil water (Vw) and gas/air (Va) Vl and Vg = volume of pores VP, porosity P = є, VT = Vt, VS = Vs. † Abbreviations P* and Ph were taken over from HÖLTING 1996, p 86.


18

clay silt sand gravel stones0

30

60

10

20

%

50

40

Fig. 4: Relation of volume of pores, effective porosity and adherent water depending on fractions

(according to HÖLTING 1996, p 86, modified) Beziehung von Gesamtporen-, Nutzporen- und Haftwasserraum in Abhängigkeit von der Korngröße

The term “density” of soil particles is often used when the volume of soils or particles cannot

be determined. We have to differentiate between the density of the solid soil/particle

density20 (ρS), where mS = mass of solid quantity of soil is related to VS:

S

SS

Vm

=ρ [g•cm-3] (eq. 4)

and the bulk density of soil21 (ρB) which is the mass of soil dried at 105 °C related to VT:

T

SB

Vm

=ρ [g•cm-3] (eq. 5)

Porosity can then be determined according to the following equation (density method):

S

BSPρρρ −

= [g•cm-3] (eq. 6)

Values for ρS are close to the density of the main constituent of most soils, quartz with 2.65

g•cm-3, but can range from 2.6 to 2.7 g•cm-3. Comparing different parameters in table 1, we

can see that bulk density increases with the degree of compaction and also with depth in soil

profile because of being more disturbed and pressed by heavy loads. Sand tends to be denser

than fine textured soils when pore space between large particles is filled with smaller ones.

Table 1: Range of values for bulk density, porosity and void ratio Particle density is taken as 2.65 g•cm-3 (according to MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 9, modified) Wertebereich für Lagerungsdichte (ρB), Porosität (P) und Porenziffer (e)

Description Bulk Density (ρB) [g•cm-3] Porosity (P) Void Ratio (e) Sandstone 2.12 0.20 0.25 Particles of uniform size in closest packing 1.96 0.26 0.35 Sandy loam compacted by heavy traffic 1.90 0.28 0.39 Subsoil of sandy texture 1.61 0.39 0.65 Particles of uniform size in open packing 1.39 0.48 0.91 Surface soil of loam texture 1.28 0.52 1.07 Surface soil of wet clay 1.12 0.58 1.37

2 Fundamentals of Soil Hydrology 2.3 Basics of Soil Water and Measuring Methods of the Unsaturated Zone

19

Soil pores are divided into three categories, following laws of hydrodynamics and

hydrostatics (for further details see KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 20-21):

• Macropores or non-capillary pores: Capillary menisci are not formed. The flow of water

inside these pores can be turbulent or in the form of a film moving over the walls.

• Capillary pores: They are an interface between air and water and form the capillary

meniscus. The flow of water is laminar and dominant in soils.

• Sub microscopic pores: They are often neglected due to being small. As convection does

not occur in these pores, no fluid mechanics can work here.

2.3 Basics of Soil Water and Measuring Methods of the Unsaturated Zone

2.3.1 Soil Water and Soil Water Content

Soil water (see also section 2.1) is the liquid phase of soil, and every soil—under natural

conditions—contains water which is never pure but always contains dissolved organic

substances, mineral salts or gases. Precipitation, groundwater and condensation from the

atmosphere supplement soil water (SCHEFFER 2002, p 209). Percolating water22 moves

downwards because of gravity and is not retained by any of the following forces: capillarity,

adsorption, and osmosis.

Capillary forces develop an interface between soil water/soil solution (see section 2.3.5.3)

and soil air. When water meets solid soil particles a contact angle is formed, called a

meniscus, which gets bigger the more water is placed. Molecules of a water surface are

attracted by the molecules within the water body but only to a minor part by the water vapour

molecules in the air which is the principle of surface tension. Adsorption includes different

types, e.g. adsorption of gases upon liquid surfaces or upon solids or of liquids upon solids,

and thin film layers are formed on solid particles without menisci occurring. Osmosis (or

osmotic pressure of the soil solution) is another term for adsorption because the process is

equal to the process of a diffusion barrier (semi-permeable membrane) as dissolved salts

increase the force with which water is held in the soil. Plants cannot make use of the

adsorption water because it is bound by electrostatic forces to soil particles. The different

kinds of water retention which were explained above are shown in figure 5 (KUTÍLEK and

NIELSEN 1994, pp 28-30 and 45-55, MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 10-11 and 29, PFANNKUCH

1969, p 107, SCHEFFER 2002, pp 209-211, WARD 1975, pp 132-136).


20

mm

0 100

Capillary watera

Adsorbed water

Retention in pools

Capillary water

b

mm

0 1

Fig. 5: Kinds of water retention: Capillary water, menisci and adsorbed water in equilibrium (a),

retention of free-standing water on concave surfaces of coarse material (b) (according to WARD 1975, p 135, modified)

Arten der Wasserbindung: Kapillarwasser, Menisken und Adsorptionswasser im Gleichgewicht (a), Retention von freiem Wasser auf Grobmaterial mit konkaven Oberflächen (b)

The water remaining in soil after/during the infiltration process is according to SCHEFFER

2002, p 209 then to be called adherent water or soil moisture23. WARD 1975, pp 132-165

also uses the term soil moisture but rather meaning soil water/subsurface water. Other authors

(MARSHALL et al. 1996, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994) just use soil water but no other term.

PFANNKUCH 1969 explains soil water as “gravity and pellicular water contained in the soil

zone”24 and the soil water zone with “upper portion of the zone of aeration containing soil

water; belt of soil water”25 but mentions a “soil-moisture meter”26 to record soil moisture in

situ. See section 2.3.3 for details about soil moisture suction (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994,

pp 28-30 and 45-55, MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 10-11 and 29, PFANNKUCH 1969, p 107,

SCHEFFER 2002, pp 209-211, WARD 1975, pp 132-136).

Soil water content can be determined (among others) by a gravitational measuring method

(see section 2.3.4) and is the rate expressed either as the volumetric soil water content (θ)27

in relation to the volume of soil (VT), where VW = the volume of water:

T

W

VV

=θ (eq. 7)

or by the mass of dry soil, where mW = the mass of water, mS = the mass of dry soil and w =

mass soil water content by weight:

S

W

mmw = (eq. 8)

The volumetric water content in a special soil layer can be expressed by the height of a

water column, independent of the area, like precipitation. For example, if water content is

0.26 cm3•cm-3, this is 260 mm water in a soil of 1 m depth (1 mm water column = 1 l•m-2).


21

Porosity and soil volume are dependent on soil water content. Mainly loamy and clayey soils

shrink when being dried and swell when being wetted. Processes of volume reduction and

increase are called shrinkage and swelling28, whereby swelling only occurs after a process of

drying. Changes in volume have different effects, e.g. on soil structure, water movement or

stability for buildings (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 29 and p 58).

2.3.2 Concept of Soil Water Potential

Soil water is rarely in a rest but moves to a given point due to different forces (e.g. gravity or

hydrostatic pressure) under non-equilibrated conditions. Potential energy of water is of major

importance considering the movement of soil water whereas kinetic energy can be neglected.

Definition: the potential (Φ) of soil water is the amount of useful work that must be done to

transfer a certain (very small) quantity of water (volume, mass or weight) from one place to a

reference place. Work is to be determined as the work that is necessary to elevate this amount

of water from a pool of pure water to a specified elevation (pore) at standard atmospheric

pressure to the soil water at the point under consideration or to extract of the soil matrix

(WARD 1975, pp 136-138, SCHEFFER 2002, pp 212-215, MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 32-38).

KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 58-62 explain the parts of the total potential29:

Φ = Φg + Φw + Φo + Φa +Φe (eq. 9)

At the free water level, the potential (Φ) of water is zero; when the water particle is lifted in

the gravitational field to a certain elevation, the energy increases with the gravitational field—

this component of the total potential is then called the gravitational potential (Φg). The

particle is attracted by capillarity and adsorption to elevation and this composition of all

forces until this point and potential is called soil water potential (Φw), capillary or matric

potential (including all matric forces effecting water). On the other hand, particles could also

lose their energy and fall to the reference level.

The whole system is in equilibrium because of Φ = 0 (at the free water level), the same value

of Φ = Φg + Φw should exist everywhere. The osmotic potential (Φo) is the difference in the

chemical composition of the soil solution related to pure, free, bulk water at the same

elevation. It is the work necessary to get out a defined amount of water through a semi-

permeable membrane of a soil solute.


22

Air pressure inside the soil pores differs from the atmospheric pressure outside acting upon

the reference water and is considered to be the pneumatic potential (Φa). The magnitude of

the total potential change caused by a too big external mechanical pressure is expressed by the

envelope potential (Φe). The latter is only important for more clayey soils when pressure is

transferred via the thin water film from particle to particle. The pressure potential (Φp)30,

eq. 10, is measured by a tensiometer (see section 2.3.4). In sands, this potential is not altered

by this pressure as it is almost entirely transmitted by direct contact of the grains.

Φp = Φw + Φa + Φe (eq. 10)

2.3.3 Soil Water Retention Curve (SWRC), pF Curve

According to the potential concept (see section 2.3.2) soil water potential is connected to the

soil water content. The water potential is now expressed as (soil water) pressure head (h)31

due to easier measuring and computing reasons. The function h(θ) is shown by a soil water

retention curve (SWRC)32, also called water retention curve, (soil) moisture characteristic

curve, moisture characteristic or capillary pressure curve. When measuring matric potential

using a tensiometer (see next section), the potential is shown as negative values (cm or hPa);

as it is more convenient, signs are dropped and their numerical values are called matric

suction (s)33. Pressure head is often plotted with a logarithmic scale because it extends the soil

water content by many times and also small values are visible with this scale; the curve is

then called a pF curve34. The pF values correspond to the logarithmic value of pressure head

pF = log10h (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 70-86 and MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 29-31)*.

The chart (figure 6) shows the relationship between pressure head/matric suction and water

content: suction increases as sizes of pores are decreasing, meaning clayey soils keep more of

their water at low suctions than sandy soils. Sand (mostly uniform particle size) loses a big

portion of the entire water at low suctions until pF 1.8. Silty soils (loess) have the best capa-

bility to keep lots of water, see the wide range between pF 2.5 and 4.2 in the graph. Clay has

a very big portion of water still remaining in its pores which is not available for plants;

loam/silt only a small range (WARD 1975, pp 138-140 and SCHEFFER 2002, pp 215-217).

* WARD 1975, pp 138-142 mentions the terms soil moisture suction or negative hydrostatic pressure for pressure head. None of the authors uses tension (of soil water), MARSHALL et al. 1996 (index) refer to suction instead.


23

soil water availablefor plants

soil water notavailable for plants

Pressure head

0 1 1.8 2.5 3 4.2 5 6 7 [pF]

-1 -10 -60 -300 -103 -104.2 -105 -106 -107 [hPa][cm]

0

20

40

30

10

50

60FK PWP

Fig. 6: Combined soil water retention and pF curve showing relation between matric suction/

pressure head and water content; FK = field capacity, PWP = permanent wilting point (see text) (according to SCHEFFER 2002, p 216, modified)

Wassergehalts-/Wasserspannungs- bzw. pF-Kurve in einem Diagramm; FK = Feldkapazität, PWP = permanenter Welkepunkt (Erklärung siehe Text)

Figure 6 also provides information about very important soil water parameters:

Field capacity35 (synonyms are specific retention or retention capacity) determines the

amount of water in topsoil after the soil layer has been saturated and drained for two or three

days, downward movement of water has stopped and the field shows equilibrium; evaporation

does not occur. Values are between pF 1.8 and 2.5 and are dependent on soil fractions, soil

structure but also on the content of organic substances, etc. At the permanent wilting point36

(pF > 4.2) soil water is not available for plants anymore and it can be found when plants on

the field wilt and do not recover during the night, even when their leaves are kept in humid

atmosphere (MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 11, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 179-180, SCHEFFER

2002, pp 231-234 and 242 and MILLER and GARDINER 1998 in glossary http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/

~doetqp-p/courses/env320/glossary.htm).

The phenomenon of drying and wetting—effecting water content and matric suction—is

called hysteresis37. The curves are not the same at the processes of drying and re-wetting and

can also follow a different course within the limits set by the two boundary curves. The

SWRC is therefore not only dependent on grain size, structure etc. but is also connected to the




24

direction of the alteration of soil water content. Pores are often larger than their openings,

causing different behaviours when wetting or drying which is the so called ink-bottle effect

and causes hysteresis (MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 49-53, SCHEFFER 2002, p 217).

2.3.4 Measuring Techniques of Soil Water Content and Matric Potential/Suction

The following relates to descriptions in SCHEFFER 2002, pp 211-217, MARSHALL et al. 1996,

pp 29-78, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 30-70 and information provided by UMS GmbH,

2001, 2003. Common measuring methods are shown in table 2 at the end of the chapter and

are compared with each other. There are two main possibilities for measuring water content:

1) Direct/Destructive Method or Gravimetric Method

Undisturbed soil samples of 100 cm³ are taken from the field, are weighed in a laboratory,

dried in an oven at 105° C for a certain time (mostly 24 hours or three days, resepectively)

and weighed again. The loss of weight can be assumed to be the loss of water and therefore

the water content. Lower temperatures (usually 60-65° C) are suggested for organic soils.

2) Indirect/Non-Destructive Methods

The second possibility summarizes types of measuring sensors that are placed in the

undisturbed soil to register soil water content. Only the most important and commonly used

field techniques which were reported in the questionnaire are discussed:

• Time-Domain-Reflectrometry, TDR (Electrical Capacitance Method)

The dielectric constant of water—which is dependent on the polarization of its molecules in

an electric field—(~80) is much larger than that of the dry soil (~5) or the air (~1). Therefore,

the electrical capacitance of the parallel metallic rods (see figures 7 a and b), inserted verti-

cally, horizontally or at any angle within the soil profile, depends upon the soil water content,

and its changes can be determined by the propagation velocity38 of an electromagnetic wave.

The velocity of this pulse is derived from the length of the rods along which the wave goes.

By adding the dielectric constants of soil, water and air, soil water content can be determined

as being functionally dependent on the dielectric constant. A TDR consists of a signal

generator that produces the voltage pulse and a voltage sampler measuring voltage at selected

time intervals.


25

a b

Fig. 7: TDR probes (a) and pre-boring with extension tubes for installing probes in soil to avoid damaging the probe’s rods or rod tips (b)

(according to IMKO 2003, pdf; b: modified) TDR-Sonden (a) und der Einsatz von Vorbohrsonden für den Einbau in den Boden, um einem

Abbrechen der Sondenspitzen vorzubeugen (b)

• Neutron Moisture Meter (Neutron Method)

A neutron moisture meter utilizes a fast neutron source that is slowed down when interacting

with a surrounding medium. Hydrogen (1H) is the most effective atom for moderating

neutrons because of the mass of a proton and a neutron being very similar. The radioactive

fast neutrons are contained by a metallic cylinder; the electronic counting system is

surrounded by a protective shield. Slow neutrons are distributed when the probe is lowered

down to a hole with about 50 mm in diameter where the detector measures the density of the

neutron cloud. This distribution is proportional to the volumetric soil water concentration.

Details and sketches are provided by KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 39-41 and MARSHALL et

al. 1996, pp 55-58.

• Gamma Radiation Method (γ Ray Method)

Gamma radiation is a highly electromagnetic energy form. Beams of γ rays are emitted from

a source (e.g. caesium-137) and are diminished moving through soil. The degree of

attenuation gets higher according to the wet bulk density. Water content is then determined in

the laboratory with a detector and sources of γ rays installed at opposite sides of a soil

column. This method is not very commonly used in fields but of course in laboratories with


26

considerable precision. It supplies better results than the neutron probe in depth and near soil

surface* (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 37-39 and MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 59-60).

Matric potential can also be determined directly or indirectly:

1) Direct Method: Tensiometer and Piezometer

A tensiometer consists of a semi permeable (mostly ceramic) porous cup—permeable to

water but not to air in the range of measurements—buried in the soil and a manometer which

measures negative pressure heads of water directly. The signals can be displayed with a

voltmeter or with a display unit which transmits the electric signal in pressure unit hPa

(hectopascal). Figure 8 a shows the principle of a tensiometer: At equilibrium, matric suction

p (matric potential) corresponds to the distance to the groundwater level/GWL and is given by

ghp ρ= (eq. 11)

where ρ = density of the water, g = acceleration due to gravity and h = height of the open end

of a hanging water column relative to A (see figure 8 a). Pressure head is zero at atmospheric

pressure; the drier the soil, the more water has to be filled into the tensiometer to compensate

the loss (using an external filling, see figure 8 b); therefore the negative pressure shown by

the manometer decreases. Regarding the saturated zone and B in figure 8 a, the open end of

the water column is higher than the point of measurement and p or h have positive values;

positive pressure heads are measured with piezometers (water level transmitters). The SWRC

is identical to the distribution of soil water content above GWL in case of equilibrium.

Pressure transducer tensiometers offer continuous readings of matric suction and soil water

processes like infiltration, leaching, lateral or ascending water movements can be described.

Several types of tensiometers exist, and all of them provide water balance and

transportation studies for research in agriculture, forestry or plant physiology. Some of them

can be installed as a control sensor for irrigation systems or for soil water extraction and also

for monitoring studies with a data-logger or field bus. Impermeability of dump sites or

descriptions of leachate movements/capillary water ascent can also be investigated. Two types

are used for installation in lysimeter vessels or lysimeter sites (UMS, 2001 and 2003 a).

Figure 8 b shows one kind of tensiometers used at soil hydrology measuring sites.

* Another method is determination by remote sensing; see KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 43.


27

a b

Fig. 8: Principle of a tensiometer located above water table and a piezometer below water table in a column of static equilibrium (a), example of a tensiometer (b)

(a: from MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 30; b: according to UMS 2003 a, modified) Prinzip des Tensiometers über dem Wasserspiegel und eines Piezometers unter dem Wasserspiegel in

einer Bodensäule im statischen Gleichgewicht (a), Beispiel eines Tensiometers (b)

2) Indirect Method: Gypsum or Porous Block (Electrical Resistance Method)

Two metallic electrodes measure the electrical resistance which is changing according to the

change of soil water content, respectively a saturated CaSO4- solution. A small porous block

(mostly gypsum), where electrodes are embedded, is placed into soil. The porosity is suitable

for an uptake or release of soil water and because of the slight water solubility of gypsum the

block is electrically conductive; electrical conductivity (EC) is a function of water content.

Matric potential must be derived indirectly from water content of the material or from some

thermal or electrical property that varies in the water content. Hysteresis change within a

certain batch of blocks has to be taken into consideration for calibrating curves.

In a lab, suction plates are used to determine combined matric and osmotic potential out of

soil water content. This is not to be discussed here, see MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 66-75.

Field measurements are often essential, but which method should be used in the field? This

cannot be answered in general, because the choice of a measuring device is first of all

dependent on the research purpose—whether water content or potential is the better

parameter for one’s investigation. Further criteria are the labour involved in relation to costs,

the reliability, the precision required but also the availability of the equipment needed.


28

Table 2: Comparison of different field measuring methods summarized according to SCHEFFER 2002, MARSHALL et al. 1996, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994 and UMS 2001 and 2003 a, pdfs

Vergleich verschiedener Feldmessmethoden, zusammengefasst nach oben genannten Autoren

Measuring Device: determination of …

Advantages Limitations/Suggestions

Soil sample cylinder: soil water content (direct, gravimetric method)

• direct determination without calibration • simple and easy to carry out with a

laboratory equipment • allows checking water content change

over time for various purposes

• accuracy depends on the samples taken • time consuming method not suitable

for permanent registration and not for a large area

• samples only reflect conditions of one position

TDR probe: soil water content/ volumetric soil moisture (indirect, continuous method)

• small measuring volume—high spatial resolution and good accuracy

• low price • steep gradients on water content as well

as a freezing front in the soil can be detected

• easy installation • EC can be measured simultaneously as

dissolved salts influence the height of the transmitted impulse

• gaps between soil and rod have to be avoided (highest measuring sensitivity located there) in case of water saturated soils the values measured will be too high

• calibration for each soil required • limitations: clay content: >50 %, organic

content: >10 %, bulk density: <1.1 kg/dm³ or >1.7 kg/dm³

• limited to a maximum line length of 1 m

Neutron moisture meter: soil water content (indirect method)

• good accuracy (2 mm standard deviation in a total water content of 450 mm in the soil profile to a depth of 1.5 m – a 4 mm change can be resolved significantly

• it can be used directly to determine losses

• allows checking water content change within time for various purposes

• large sample volume sharp change in water content (at the horizon boundary), but no significant error in the water content

• probes should at least be placed in a depth of 0.3 m

• avoid cavities between soil and the lining material (aluminium polythene tubes)

Tensiometers: matric potential/ pressure head (direct, continuous method)

• tensiometers cover a much larger soil volume, as the measured pressure potentials spread out spherically

• few selective measuring points allow a large-area interpretation (in comparable soils with identical cultivation)

• disturbed pore volumes do not affect the readings installation deficiencies are more or less eliminated

• provide information on availability of soil water to plants and on water movement in soil

• new device: tensiometer with automatic self refilling and stand-alone control of the filling status and self-activation of soil water extraction assembled as a multiple level probe

• only suctions to -850 hPa/2.9 pF are indicated in the unsaturated zone (not much water is left in sandy soils but water still remains in soils with other textures, water is also available for plants though)

• when matric potential changes rapidly: transfer of water between tensiometer and soil may not be fast enough (depends on construction and con-ductivity of porous cup) employ pressure transducers to allow equilibrium

• must be filled with deionised and degassed water during dry periods; many tensiometers that provide an external refilling option can be refilled while they remain installed

Gypsum blocks: matric potential (indirect, continuous method)

• low price • can be used under drier conditions than

tensiometers and are more sensitive < -1000 hPa than for higher potentials

• determination of water content from resistance; individual calibration curves are necessary but will change after some time as solubility reduces the life of the block; nylon or fibre glass blocks are therefore recommended


29

2.3.5 Hydrodynamics of Soil Water

Section 2.3.2 explained the concept of potentials: soil water is almost never in a static balance

but is forced by the potential energy to move from positions of greater to those of lesser

energy; this is valid for water in the unsaturated as well as in the saturated zone. The basic

concept for water movement, DARCY’s law, and the processes related to water movement will

be discussed in the following sections.

2.3.5.1 Basic Concept: DARCY’s Law

To give an overview I extracted the most important formulas by trying to standardize them

and to give different expressions used in KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 87-104, MARSHALL

et al. 1996, pp 79-92, HÖLTING 1996, pp 106-113 and SCHEFFER 2002, pp 218-220.

Figure 9 shows a simple steady flow experiment on saturated soil columns: a cylinder filled

with soil is placed between two vessels containing water. The water in the right vessel is

lower than that on the left side, water flows to the right. In 1856, the French engineer Henry

DARCY demonstrated that discharge or the total amount of water per time (Q) [m³/s] flowing

through a cross-sectional area of the soil column (A) [m²] is proportional to the difference

between water levels on the left and right side (∆h) and a constant for a natural soil given

(KS) but inversely proportional to the length of the flowing distance (L)39:

ShS KAIKALhQ ⋅⋅=⋅⋅

∆= * [m³/s] (eq. 12)

where Ih is the hydraulic gradient ∆h/L [m/m], dimensionless. KS is called the hydraulic

conductivity40 varying according to the permeable media of the aquifer and to water

properties (density, viscosity, temperature), see table 3. KS is expressed as some kind of

velocity, where v = the rate of discharge per unit area (the flow in a saturated medium41):

hhS

Iv

AIQK =⋅

= [m³/s/m² = m/s] (eq. 13)

The greater the hydraulic gradient the smaller is KS—they are inversely proportional. v can

also be seen as the flux density or the Darcian flow rate (q) and is determined by:

hS IKAQqv ⋅=== [m/s] (eq. 14)

* Abbreviations according to KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, other abbreviations are: KS is k in WARD 1975 or K in MARSHALL et al. 1996, vp is v’ in MARSHALL et al. 1996.


30

The term “DARCY velocity” also exists, which is v referring to the cross-sectional area of the

entire soil body. The mean velocity (mean water flow rate) in the soil pore space vp42 is

necessary to determine the real speed of water and is described as:

θv

Pv

Pqvp === [m/s] (eq. 15)

where P = soil porosity and θ = water content per unit volume of the soil. Soil is to be

assumed as a homogeneous and isotropic medium to assure that the hydraulic conductivity

is laminar and uniform—which is not happening in nature—and is not dependent on the

direction of water flow.

Fig. 9: Steady flow experiment on a saturated soil column; abbreviations are explained in the text

(from KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 89) Experiment an einer gesättigten Wassersäule, gleichmäßiger Zu- und Abfluss; Abkürzungen siehe Text

DARCY’s law should be valid for all flow velocities in soil, when REYNOLD’s number* is

between 1 and 10. It is assumed that unsaturated flow in soils follows the same laws as

saturated flow but with KS being strongly dependent upon the matric potential and therefore

water content. An important basis for DARCY’s equation is the law of continuity: the

difference between input and output volumes equals the volume change in a control element.

Another term, permeability (Kp), is often used for hydraulic conductivity KS, which is not

correct. Permeability has a broad description, but the intrinsic permeability43, a constant,

explains the characteristics of the porous medium itself independent of flow of any fluid

(HÖLTING 1996, pp 106-107, WARD 1975, p 206). * REYNOLD’s number (German REYNOLDsche Zahl) Re is dimensionless and makes it possible to determine a transition from a laminar to a turbulent water flow. For further details see HÖLTING 1996, p 403 (10).


31

Table 3 provides two different classification systems for the permeability of soils where KS

values show certain deviations. Therefore it is very difficult to apply these values directly.

When working in the field, soil samples should be taken and investigated individually.

Table 3: Soils classified according to their KS values (according to KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 96 and HÖLTING 1996, p 111) Böden nach ihren kf-Werten klassifiziert

Permeability Fraction(s) KS [m/s] (KUTÍLEK) KS [m/s] (HÖLTING) very low clay < 10-7 < 10-8 low silty sand, clayey silt 10-6 to 10-7 10-6 to 10-8 medium fine and silty sand 10-5 to < 10-6 10-4 to < 10-6 high coarse and medium sand 10-4 to < 10-5 10-2 to < 10-4 excessive gravel > 10-4 > 10-2

Transmissivity (T)44 is important when determining pumping rates and is the product of KS

and the thickness of the permeable zone (b) through which water flows (HÖLTING 1996,

p 119, MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 89 and 143):

bKT S ⋅= [m²/s] (eq. 16)

2.3.5.2 Infiltration, Percolation, Drainage, and Capillary Rise

Infiltration, Percolation

In section 2.3.1 infiltration water was already mentioned. SCHEFFER 2002, pp 224-225,

KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 133 ff, WARD 1975, pp 166 ff define infiltration45 as a

process of water (precipitation) entering soil through the surface. The term percolation46 is

used when the downward flow/movement of water through the unsaturated zone is to be

explained. KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 133 denote the flux density of water (see section

2.3.5.1) across a topographical soil surface as the infiltration rate47 (formerly described as

infiltration capacity, infiltration velocity, infiltrability). The rate determines the maximum

water amount infiltrating soil under specified conditions in a given time, not limited by the

rate of supply. Soil surface condition substantially affects infiltration, when aggregates are

destroyed or a crust is formed after soil is choked with mud, for example (PFANNKUCH 1969,

p 60, SCHEFFER 2002, p 224, MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 134).

Drainage

Soil water content decreases after infiltration has stopped because of a downward flow of soil

water. According to KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 176-178 two cases are important: soil

water redistribution occurs when water percolates from wetted topsoil to the drier subsoil;


32

secondly the process of drainage to the groundwater level: when wetting front is not far

from groundwater level or reaches it, water flows at/near steady state conditions*. Excess

water is able to move directly from the topsoil to the groundwater after infiltration has ceased.

Capillary Rise

The natural upward movement in pores and capillary tubes of water caused by capillary

forces is called the capillary rise48. In case of evaporation or transpiration (explained in

section 2.3.6) capillary rise occurs because of the matric potential above groundwater level

being lower than corresponding to the balance with the free water table (SCHEFFER 2002,

p 226, WARD 1975, pp 160-165, PFANNKUCH 1969, p 16; see also sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2).

2.3.5.3 Transport of Solutes in Soils

In section 2.3.1 it was already mentioned that soil water always contains dissolved substances.

SPARKS 1995 (citing the Glossary of Soil Science Terms 1987) explains the soil solution49 as

“the aqueous liquid phase of the soil and its solutes.” Mostly, solutes are ions, occurring as

free hydrated ions or as various complexes with organic or inorganic ligands. We have to

consider that transport of solutes in soils (distribution, dilution, solute concentration) is not

only physical but also chemical and biological processes (SCHEFFER 2002, p 143, KUTÍLEK

and NIELSEN 1994, p 274). The exchange processes include various reactions, shown also in

figure 10 and explained as following (SCHEFFER 2002, p 143, SPARKS 1995, pp 81-82, p 99):

• plants (1, 2): for plants, soil solution is the most important medium for taking up

nutrients but also pollutants and to give off residues,

• sorption; adsorption and desorption (3, 4): ions can be sorbed on organic and inorganic

components of soil; sorbed ions can be desorbed (released) into soil solution,

• minerals (5, 6): when soil solution is supersaturated with any mineral in soil, the mineral

can precipitate (only to an equilibrium); when soil solution is undersaturated, the mineral

can dissolve (until equilibrium is reached),

• transport, runoff and evaporation (7, 8): ions can be transported through soil into

groundwater or removed through surface runoff or evaporation (see section 2.3.6 for a

description of the latter processes in the soil water balance), * “Steady” means that flux density does not change with position in the unsaturated soil nor in time, see KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 134-153 for further details.


33

• microorganisms (9, 10) can remove ions from the soil solution; when organisms die,

organic matter is decomposed and ions are released to the solution,

• gases (11, 12) are released to the soil atmosphere or are dissolved in soil solution.

Fig. 10: Reactions in soils at dynamic equilibria; processes (see numbers) explained in the text

(from John WILEY & Sons 1979 in SPARKS 1995, p 82) Bodenreaktionen im dynamischen Gleichgewicht; Prozesse (siehe Nummern) im Text erklärt

HÖLTING 1996, pp 371-375 summarizes the following transport processes; additional infor-

mation taken from SCHEFFER 2002, p 143: Transport in the unsaturated zone is predominated

by a vertical transport process (convection) of solutes because of gravity; therefore, an

input of substances into groundwater is possible. Gaseous substances are transported mostly

by diffusion, according to their natural gradient of concentration. In the saturated zone,

solutes are mostly transported laterally (advection), where leaching loss50 may occur and

substances may also get into surface water. Gaseous substances move downwards vertically.

MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 341 and KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, pp 275-284 explain another

two very important processes: First, the hydrodynamic (mechanical) dispersion which is

caused by fluid velocities that are different from one place to another in soil when solutions

are in motion. The second process is molecular diffusion, dependent on the thermal energy

of all the molecular and ionic entities present. For further details, see references above.


34

2.3.5.4 Soil Water Quality and Measurement of Soil Solution

Monitoring of soil water quality is of very great interest for several research fields, especially

to protect groundwater as potable water. Waste disposal sites, input from surface water,

dry or wet deposition from air and precipitation can cause pollution of soil as well as input

from agricultural land, when fertilizers are used, for example. For chemicals, the leaching

process is the main path to reach groundwater. To gain soil solution (seepage water) in

different soil horizons, the use of suction cups* or suction plates51 is a very common method:

solution will be sucked into sampling bottles/vessels after applying a vacuum, see figure 11.

According to UMS 2003 b, there are three possibilities for applying a vacuum: either with a

hand pump, with applying constant pressure or a vacuum adjusted in reference to the current

soil water pressure head (installing a tensiometer). Cups are made of ceramic, nylon/

polyethylene or glass sinter. The sketch (figure 11) shows schematically the installation of

suction cups in soil and sampling bottles in a pit (right side). Further details on vacuum

methods are given in section 3.4.1 (seepage water samplers with applied vacuum).

Fig. 11: System of vacuum applied to suction cups, sampling bottles

(from UMS 2003 b, pdf, complemented) Schema für Saugkerzeninstallation und angelegten Unterdruck sowie Sammelflaschen

Another method to sample soil solutions is provided by gravitation lysimeters, where water

is sampled after percolating through a vessel filled with soil (see section 3.4.2).

2.3.6 Soil Water Balance

Soil as an important storage medium can also be explained systematically in the following

soil water balance, where ∆W, the change of the amount of water stored in a certain period, is

according to MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 248 composed of:

* In the United States, for example, suction cups are also called lysimeters, see chapter 3 for definition of lysimeters and their types.


35

∆W = P + I – (A + D + E) (eq. 17)

Precipitation (P) and irrigation (I) are balanced against the amounts of losses of surface

runoff (A), underground drainage (D), and evapotranspiration (E) during a given period52.

Usually, quantities are given in mm. A can be negative when water runs from soil to the

surface and D is negative when (ground) water gets to the root zone.*

Precipitation (P)

The only natural input in this system is precipitation and its appearance can be divided into a

liquid (drizzle, rain, dew) and a solid type (snow, glaze, frost, hale†). The geographical

variations, the regional pattern of precipitation and its distribution during a year/month

with different variability (regime) are the most important aspects for hydrology and soil

hydrology. Rainfall intensity (amount of precipitation divided by duration) is relevant in

catchment areas of rivers/streams susceptible to floods. Whenever precipitation is collected

with any type of rain gauge, uncertainties about the amounts occur due to wind influence

(especially in mountain areas), the topography and site around the gauge, rain drop size, the

material and condition of the gauge itself or splash and gauge errors (WARD 1975, pp 16-34).

Irrigation (I)

While some areas have more than enough rainfall, agricultural land in other areas has to be

irrigated. Not only arid and semi-arid regions are irrigated but also subhumid areas where

irrigation supplements natural rainfall. Irrigation aims to recharge soil to the field capacity in

the layer from which roots absorb water. The amount of water applied depends on weather,

soil, plant, and economic conditions. Insufficient water supply leads to a decrease of yield but

too much irrigation will increase losses of percolation (and can cause a higher water table and

salinization of soil) and evapotranspiration, see below (MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 268-271).

Surface Runoff or Overland Flow (A)

In case the rainfall rate exceeds the infiltration rate, the surplus water travels over the ground

surface without infiltration to reach a stream channel and finally the outlet of the drainage

basin. On most soils covered with vegetation this is a rather rare phenomenon. The following

conditions are relevant for overland flow and the infiltration capacity, respectively: saturation * BAUMGARTNER and LIEBSCHER 1990, p 396 also take the subsurface flow (oberflächennaher Abfluss) and the interception/interception loss (Interzeptionsverlust), water retained by plants that is later absorbed or evaporated, into consideration in their balance. Interception can also be a water gain for plants, see WARD 1975, p 54. † Usually hale melts at the ground surface very fast and reacts like a heavy shower of rain.


36

of soil/topsoil, agricultural practices, freezing of the ground surface or when soils show a

hydrophobic nature (MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 261-264, WARD 1975, p 240).

Underground Drainage (D)

The amount of water percolating through soil to the water table and recharging groundwater

is to be considered as the underground drainage. Water flows downward to the groundwater

table, where water pressure corresponds to the mean air pressure (WARD 1975, p 193,

SCHEFFER 2002, p 209). More details are given in section 2.3.5.2, drainage.

Evapotranspiration (ET)*: Evaporation and Transpiration

Evaporation (E) is the water loss from bare soil or a free water surface to the atmosphere and

is not the same for these two kinds of surfaces because their properties are different, for

example the surface roughness (albedo), the area of air-water interface, the heat capacity and

heat conductance leading to different surface temperatures. Water extracted from soil by roots

to the dry organic matter of plants and then transported to the atmosphere is called

transpiration (TR). These two processes often cannot be separated and are then unified in the

term evapotranspiration ET = E + TR. Furthermore, a distinction has to be made between

the actual and potential evaporation/evapotranspiration; the actual E or ET (ETa) reflects

the real amount of evaporation resulting from given meteorological conditions of a surface

providing limited quantity of water for soil and plants; it is highly dependent on the water and

energy supply. In contrast, the potential E or ET (ETp) describes the maximal amount of

evaporation which is possible under given meteorological conditions. Maximal evaporation

will occur when enough water is supplied, for example above areas of surface water (KUTÍLEK

and NIELSEN 1994, pp 182-218, WARD 1975, pp 95-124, HÖLTING 1996, pp 15-35).

MARSHALL et al. 1996, pp 393-395 provides another balance, which is the water balance of a

lysimeter, respectively a certain amount of soil in a vessel (1 m² surface x 1.5 m depth):

P + I = E + D + A + ∆W (eq. 18)

∆W can be determined when the container is weighable or can be found out by other methods

discussed earlier. When I is known due to recording and P is measured by rain gauges, E can

be determined balancing input versus output variables. A simplified evapotranspiration

equation for lysimeters is provided by HÖLTING 1996, p 34 as the surface runoff on a

* KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN use E for evaporation and ET for evapotranspiration, also MARSHALL et al. in other chapters.

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.1 What Is a Lysimeter?

37

non-portable lysimeter is to be neglected and for longer periods also the storage of soil water

is negligible:

Ū = P - Ās = Ē (eq. 19)

Ū = Mean difference between precipitation (P) and the amount of seepage water of a

lysimeter (Ās) for a longer period (many years). There are several different kinds of such

lysimeters with various research possibilities which are the topic of the next chapter.

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.1 What Is a Lysimeter?

The term lysimeter is a combination of the Greek words “lusis” = solution and “metron” =

measure (MULLER 1996, p 9), and the original aim was to measure soil leaching (KUTÍLEK

and NIELSEN 1994, p 215). The first lysimeter was used by DE LA HIRE in 1688 (CEPUDER and

SUPERSBERG in BAL 1991, p 25). On page 13, MULLER provides the following definition: “un

lysimètre est un dispositif qui isole, entre la surface du sol et une profondeur donnée, un

volume de sol ou de terre et comporte á sa base un système de récupération des eaux qui

percolent” – “a lysimeter is a device that isolates a volume of soil or earth between the

soil surface and a depth given and includes a percolating water sampling system at its

bottom”53. According to DVWK 1980, p 3, KLAGHOFER in BAL 1993, p 13-14, KUTÍLEK and

NIELSEN 1994, p 215, HÖLTING 1996, p 33, and HAIMERL and STROBL 2004, p 34 the

explanation and the use of lysimeters are extended:

• soil is hydrologically isolated from the surrounding soil,

• lysimeters are containers filled with disturbed (= artificially filled) or undisturbed

bare soil or soil covered with natural or cultivated vegetation,

• seepage water is measured directly; vertical water movement is also to be determined,

• percolating water is collected either gravimetrically (= gravitation lysimeter) or

through suction cups/a suction plate with a negative soil water pressure head, identical

to that in the field next to the lysimeter (= suction lysimeter),

• an artificial groundwater level can be simulated,

• lysimeters are either weighable or non-weighable; weighable lysimeters provide

information about the change of water storage W for any time period; non-weighable

lysimeters collect only the water percolating from the soil column.

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.2 Lysimeters and Their Research Objectives

38

The difference of a lysimeter to a seepage water sampler is discussed in section 3.4.1. My

thesis does not treat “natural lysimeters,” meaning small catchment areas where drainage

water is caught (BAUMGARTNER and LIEBSCHER 1990, p 338).

3.2 Lysimeters and Their Research Objectives

Table 4: Goals and use of lysimeters in different fields of research (according to information reported by operators completing the questionnaire and BÖHM et al. 2002) Ziele und Einsatzgebiete von Lysimetern in verschiedenen Forschungsfeldern

Field of Research Research Purpose/Task Hydrology, Soil Hydrology, Soil Science, Hydrogeology, Water Economy

• Water budget/water balance: determination of evapotranspiration, seepage water amounts and groundwater recharge under different areas of land use (forest, grassland and arable land) and different climatic and topographic conditions (e.g. plain, mountain areas …)

• Water content, soil temperature, matric potential, water movement, seepage water velocity and infiltration rate of/in the unsaturated zone

• Water supply: groundwater quality; quality of potable water • Monitoring of seepage water (quality and quantity) and fluctuation of

groundwater level • Data gathering to calibrate and control soil water transport models;

modelling of the unsaturated zone • Tracer experiments • to gain soil water samples for water chemical investigations • to compare results of different lysimeter types • Riverbed infiltration measurements/measurement of surface water and

groundwater interactions Agronomy, Agricultural Economics/Economy, Forest Economy

• Anthropogenic substance input in the agro-ecosystem • Monitoring of movement of nutrients • Nutrient and pesticide/herbicide leaching losses (leaching of agrochemicals) • Investigations on catabolism and fate of radio-labelled plant protection

products in different soils, plants and different groundwater levels • Water demand of agricultural areas • Water and nutrient balances for agricultural areas • Comparison of different agricultural/grassland/forest cultivation systems

and their influence on seepage water amount and quality to evaluate possibilities of soil and groundwater protective cultivation systems

• to gain data for and to calibrate nutrient transport models • to assess risk of groundwater contamination from some herbicides • Planning precise irrigation scheduling (e.g. also for orchards)

Ecology, Environment Protection

• Seepage water prediction of polluted or contaminated sites • to gain data of seepage water quality and to use them as reference values for

validation of drainage water prediction for other abandoned polluted areas • Effect of precipitation on pollutant leaching losses • Investigation of effectiveness of surface-sealing systems for pits of former

surface-mining areas (which are now backfilled) • Studying water balance and the performance of a surface cover system and a

drainage composite • Examining sewage sludge coverings • Studies on seepage water amount and quality of post-mining landscapes

including simulating phreatic rise • Source term determination: contaminants released from contaminated

materials and modelling of transport of contaminants by the seepage water

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.3 Requirements for a Location for Lysimeter Stations

39

The original purpose—to determine transport and leaching losses of solutes—is not the only

one; lysimeters are also used for determining actual evapotranspiration and groundwater

recharge and therefore for setting up a water balance (see section 2.3.6). Weighable

lysimeters provide a good recording of evapotranspiration and are employed for that reason.

Due to an increase of pollution and contamination of groundwater, the original sense of

lysimeters gained more and more importance in the last decades and not only quantitative

but also qualitative aspects predominate (KLAGHOFER and FEICHTINGER in BAL 1993), see

table 4 for a summary of important operational areas of lysimeters which can also overlap.

3.3 Requirements for a Location for Lysimeter Stations

The choice for a future lysimeter site is very important and there are many factors to which

attention has to be paid when planning a lysimeter station. DVWK 1980, pp 4-5 and OECD

2000, pp 16-18 explain important requirements: organizational factors are important to

secure a long-term measuring with these devices, see figure 12. Lysimeters should of course

reflect natural conditions as much as possible; therefore the lysimeter site should correspond

to the same climatic, soil and vegetation conditions as well as to the same distance to

groundwater as the whole trial area. Otherwise, errors may occur (see section 3.5.1).

A station for observing climatic parameters is very important; at least air temperature,

precipitation, solar radiation, humidity and wind velocity/direction should be recorded.

Before, respectively while installing lysimeters, soil samples should be taken to determine

soil physical parameters, which were explained in chapter 2 (see figure 12).

Parameter determination

Lysimeter site

OrganizationNatural requirements

Proximity to traffic facilities

Climate

Soil

Vegetation

Distance to groundwater

Soil physics

Porosity, fractions, pFcurves etc.

Local climate

Precipitation, temperaturewind, humidity, sunshine

Maintenance

Property of operator

Protection against trespassers

Data evaluation Fig. 12: Requirements for planning a lysimeter station

(own diagram based on DVWK 1980, pp 4-5) Voraussetzungen für die Planung einer Lysimeterstation

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.4 Lysimeter Types: Construction and Function

40

3.4 Lysimeter Types: Construction and Function

Lysimeters differ in various characteristics, with the most important criteria being

• size: small (< 0.5 m²), standard (0.5–1 m²), large (> 1 m²)

• weighability: weighable, non-weighable

• soil filling method: disturbed (backfilled) or undisturbed (monolith/monolithic lysimeter)

• if groundwater occurs: groundwater lysimeter with a variable or invariable groundwater

level; lysimeter without groundwater contact and with or without applied vacuum

• vegetation: bare soil, grassland, arable land, forest

• soil fractions: sandy, silty, clayey soil (DVWK 1980, KLAGHOFER in BAL 1991, p 19,

OECD 2000, p 10).

The most commonly used lysimeter types are described in the following sections. An

overview of problems, advantages (use) and limitations is given in table 5, see section 3.5.2.

3.4.1 Seepage Water Sampler (SWS)

A seepage water sampler works as a gravitation lysimeter (collects the percolating water in a

vessel) but has no side border to the soil surface and is in general smaller than a lysimeter

(according to STENITZER in v. UNOLD 2003, pp 9-10). The terms small lysimeter or field

lysimeter (e.g. DACHLER in BAL 199254, CEPUDER in BAL 1993, 1994, 1997) were used but

are not correct regarding the exact definitions and should therefore not be used to avoid

confusion. STENITZER and FANK in v. UNOLD 2003 mention that soil above seepage water

samplers is backfilled—this applies to the first type described below. In the course of my

survey I realized that I needed to define additional types.

• SWS with applied vacuum

1) SWS According to E. STENITZER

This SWS consists of a (plastic) collection tray, porous (ceramic) suction plates, a suction

pipe to a sampling vessel and a vacuum bottle, see figure 13. Before installing a SWS, a pit

has to be dug in the soil; afterwards the tray with the ceramic plates is installed and the pit

refilled. This type is widely implemented around Austria, for example in Freistadt,

Schwertberg and Traun, Upper Austria (map 2, AT 2 , AT 5 , AT 7 , EDER in BÖHM et

al. 2002, pp 120-121 and J. RECHEIS, questionnaire 2004), at 9 different locations in southern

Styria (Wagna AT 27 and AT 28 , FANK 1999 and J. MASSWOHL, questionnaire 2004)


41

and at the lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf (AT 11 , see table 16, 4.4.2.5). The suction

applied at the bottom is only used to remove seepage water and guarantees the removal over a

longer period of time. Gravel is put above the ceramic plate in the tray to prevent the vacuum

from being continued in soil or being decreased (STENITZER in v. UNOLD 2003).

Fig. 13: Seepage water sampler (SWS) according to E. STENITZER

(according to EDER in BÖHM et al. 2002, p 121 modified); Sickerwassersammler nach E. STENITZER

2 a) Capillary Wick Sampler (PCAPs) or Drain Gauge (Monolithic)

A drain gauge/PCAP made of inert fibreglass is installed in undisturbed soil for collecting

percolating water into a pipe and wick system, see figures 14 a and b. Water is sampled in

wicks which apply a vacuum on soil profile. The information about water collected is sent to

a surface data logger. You can empty the water through a siphon, or water is extracted by

suction pipes from the surface into collecting bottles for further chemical analyzing. The goal

of this method is to gain reliable information on nutrient leaching under undisturbed field

conditions (STENITZER; YOON and KÜCKE in v. UNOLD 2003, DECAGON 2003, pdf).

a b

Fig. 14: Capillary wick sampler in Villié-Morgon, France (a, FR 19 ) (photo provided by J.-G. LACAS 2004); another example in DECAGON 2003/pdf (b); Passiv-

Sickerwassersammler in Villié-Morgon, Frankreich (a); ein Beispiel in DECAGON 2003/pdf (b)


2 b) Monolithic SWS

Soil horizons above the C horizon were excavated monolithically and put above an artificially

filled gravel layer (according to the natural soil) into a plastic vessel of 1.16 m ∅ and a

volume of 1 m³. At the bottom of the lysimeter, an outlet for leakage is implemented; suction

cups and a tensiometer were installed (DALLA-VIA and FANK 2003). A sketch of the entire

measuring site in the Grazer Feld (AT 25 ) is provided in figure 15.

Fig. 15: Monolithic seepage water samplers and measuring site south of Graz ((according to DALLA-VIA and FANK 2003, modified)

Monolithische Sickerwassersammler und Messstelle im Grazer Feld

• SWS without applied vacuum

Several vessels are used to collect seepage water of an undisturbed soil profile

1) Funnels and buckets: The water caught is led into sampling bottles, for exa

Heiliges Meer/Emsland, Germany (DE 7 , HERRMANN 2004). Even a fibre

plastic funnel to collect snow is in use in Achenkirch, Austria, (AT 19 , H

and ENGLISCH 2001 and SMIDT 2002). Buckets were used in a forest rese

Germany (Remstecken, DE G ), where two buckets were put into one anoth

filled with soil fits into a second one that has a hole for the drain pipe

(information provided by O. EUSKIRCHEN 2004 and Web site Wald in Gefahr, H
SWS SWS
42

AT 25 )

:

mple at sites in

glass fortified

ERMAN, SMIDT

arch station in

er: one bucket

and a funnel

ASS 2004).


43

2) Tray: A working pit has to be excavated to implement trays (filled with filter gravel) into

dug out horizontal shafts and pipes to a collecting vessel (can); the working hole is filled

with soil after installing water samplers. This type is used under fields and grassland in the

Czech Republic (see figure 17, trays are implemented in different depths) or in Croatia, for

example. In the latter, trays are implemented in a forest (Jastrebarsko, HR 1 , figure 16 a

and b) but also under fields (Popovača, HR 3 ). In Scotland, trays are used under heathland

(Allt a’Mharcaidh and Culardoch Experimental Sites, UK 2 and UK 3 , further details are

available on the enclosed CD).

a b

Fig. 16: SWS (filled tray, a) installed in a forest near Jastrebarsko; tray and collection vessel (b) (own pictures taken on October 1, 2004); Sickerwassersammler (befüllte Wanne, a) in einem

Waldgebiet in der Nähe von Jastrebarsko; Wanne und Sammelgefäß (b)

Fig. 17: Seepage water sampler side view (Czech Republic)

(sketch provided by M. FLORIÁN 2004, modified) Sickerwassersammler, Seitenansicht (Tschechische Republik)

150 cm

Intact soil Working hole

Wooden wall

Pit with collection vessels for percolating water

Seepage water samplers in 3 depths (40, 60, 80 cm)

min. 80 cm


44

3) Collection segments and cans: At the karstic Trnovo plateau in Slovenia, Sinji Vrh,

(SI 2 ), collecting segments are placed in a tunnel to sample percolating water in several

cans, see figure 18 b; figure 18 a shows the weather station.

a b

Fig. 18: Sinji Vrh: weather station (a); collecting segments and water samplers in a tunnel (b) (a: own picture taken on October 2, 2004; b: from ČENČUR CURK in BAL 2001, p 128)

Sinji Vrh: Wetterstation (a); Sammelsegmente und Sickerwassersammler im Forschungstunnel (b)

3.4.2 Gravitation Lysimeter (Monolithic or Backfilled)

Seepage water of gravitation lysimeters is collected by outlets or drain pipes leading water

into a vessel beneath the lysimeter or a sampling vessel placed in a measuring pit (figure

19 a). Gravitation lysimeters are often cylindrical, but mostly square cases—made for

example of concrete, brick, polyethylene—where soil is backfilled. A gravel filter layer with

grains of different sizes (quartz sand to gravel) is placed at the bottom of the container to

guarantee an undisturbed water flow, see figure 19 a (MULLER 1996, pp 11-20, DVWK 1980).

a b

Fig. 19: System of a gravitation lysimeter (a); weighable lysimeter with built-in probes (b) (a: according to MULLER 1996, p 14; b: according to KLOTZ, SEILER 1998, p 6; both modified)

System eines Schwerkraftlysimeters (a), wägbares Lysimeter mit eingebauten Sonden (b)


45

3.4.3 Monolithic Lysimeter

OECD 2000, p 13 describes a monolith/monolithic lysimeter as “consisting of an

undisturbed soil block or cylinder, embedded in an inert container (e.g. stainless or

galvanised steel, fibre glass) with a bottom permeable to drainage water or leachate (e.g. a

perforated bottom or a quartz sand filter bottom). A sampling device allows for collection of

the leachate.” Monoliths are either installed directly in a field (“field lysimeter”: allows same

cultivation method/management on the lysimeter as in the surrounding area), or the whole

containers with soil are transported to a facility and put into prepared sites. Monolithic

lysimeters of different sizes (small, standard or large) are in use around Europe, see 4.4.

Different techniques for excavating soil monoliths are possible; for example, the Friedrich-

Franzen system is described in DVWK 1980, the OECD 2000 provides a basic principle, and

SEYFARTH, MEISSNER and RUPP in BAL 2001, pp 231-232 present a new procedure whereby

the contour of the soil monolith is pre-bladed by a rotary tool that is connected to the

lysimeter container and only little force is needed to excavate the vessel. When this

technology is used, the monolith is hardly damaged and not deformed. One method of

pressing lysimeter containers into soil is provided in the next section.

3.4.3.1 Weighable Monolithic (or Backfilled) Lysimeter

To get precise information about water amount changes in lysimeters, the vessel has to be

weighed—e.g. with a weigh bridge or a crane facility (see Jülich, Germany, DE 23 or

Seibersdorf, Austria, AT 13 )—or by installing a weighing system under a (field) lysimeter.

Load cells instrumented under a lysimeter are shown schematically in figure 19 b.

In July/August 2004, two weighable monolithic lysimeters at the facility in Wagna,

Austria, AT 27 , were installed. I had the opportunity to take part in this reconstruction

during my internship at the JOANNEUM RESEARCH. The following pictures (they are all

own photos taken July, 26–August 6, 2004) show the most important steps of the procedure of

installing weighable lysimeters that allow mechanized cultivation that was developed by

UMS Munich, Institut für Kulturtechnik Petzenkirchen and JOANNEUM RESEARCH Graz

(FANK and v. UNOLD in KLOTZ 2004, pp 208-211); the working process is described and

crucial aspects are indicated ( ! ).


46

A project plan (prepared in MS Project) of the entire reconstruction of the facility is shown in

appendix C (according to project documentation by J. FANK, E. STELZL and C. LANTHALER).

Fig. 20: Vessel is pressed into the soil

• A lysimeter casing (1.13 m ∅, 2 m length) made of stainless steel is covered at the top with a thick steel plate and pressed carefully into the soil by the shovel of an excavator.

• The container has to be pressed into soil straight

(check with a spirit level, see figure 20) and soil inside must not be compressed—the length of a metal staff in the vessel is therefore measured and compared to the ground level.

• The process of pressing is done in several stages;

surrounding soil is removed and placed in horizons on the site area to guarantee a backfilling.

! Figure 20 shows the excavator knocking

cautiously on the vessel to press it into the gravelly subsoil. Stones can block the casing at the bottom and have either to be removed or pressed into the cylinder.

• The casing is pressed 2 m into the soil and a working pit is excavated.

• A stainless plate for shearing off soil is put into the

pit and it is pressed underneath the casing with the sharpened cutting edge at the head.

! Part of the soil has to be refilled at the other side

of the vessel so that the vessel does not move back-wards when the plate is pressed underneath it. • As some stones blocked the cutting plate, it was

easier to pull the vessel on the plate (using belts), see figure 21.

• The disadvantage of using such a plate is that soil is

compensated.

Fig. 21: Installing shear plate

Fig. 22: Cylinder is put on the ground

• The lysimeter cylinder filled with soil is then lifted

from the hole, turned round and put on the ground near the pit with the upside down, see figure 22.

• The bottom plate and about 12 cm of the natural soil

are removed. 7 suction cups (of different sizes) for collecting seepage water are installed. Soil is re-placed by different sizes of filter sand and gravel from top to bottom. This ensures an undisturbed water flow (in case that drainage water occurs despite of water being collected by the suction cups).

• The bottom of the lysimeter is covered with a fleece

and a stainless steel bottom plate is welt to the container.

At the same time, soil samples of all horizons are taken to be analyzed for different parameters.


47

• A concrete foundation has to be fixed at the given lysimeter position in the pit.

• The lysimeter vessel has to be turned around again

and probes (tensiometers, gypsum blocks, sensors for soil temperature, TDR and geophysical probes) are installed in different depths into the soil of the cylinder; cables of the probes are put into tubes (see tubes on top of the vessel in figure 23).

• A weighing equipment with three load cells is fixed

on the concrete foundation and rods for fine tuning the load cells are mounted.

• The container is carefully put on bases at the

weighing frame.

! Parts of the soil may break off!

Fig. 23: Container is put on concrete foundation

Fig. 24: Mobile ring is removed

• The outer cylinder (to protect the weighing system) is put on top of the foundation.

• The pit is backfilled horizon by horizon and

compressed by a rattling device to a level 60 cm below the ground surface.

• A wooden ring to prevent soil from trickling in is

mounted. • The mobile ring (35 cm depth) of the inner cylinder

is removed (see picture 24) and the topsoil is backfilled.

! Vessels have to be surveyed exactly!

• Both fields are ploughed down to a depth of 25 cm.

! A tractor must not drive over the lysimeter, only the plough may move over the vessel.

! As the soil is not homogeneous (see figure 25), the topsoil around the lysimeter container has to be exchanged manually. • Fields are harrowed and catch-crop (sunflower, vetch

and clover) is sown. • Position of the vessel has to be determined. • The mobile ring is put on the inner cylinder and

surrounding soil is dug away to remove the wooden ring between the outer and inner cylinders.

Fig. 25: Field after being ploughed


48

Fig. 26: Fine tuning of lysimeter

• The vessel is elevated on the load cells using the

rods for fine tuning (see figure 26).

! If the lysimeter “wags,” you can tell that the lysimeter is placed on the load cells. • A mobile ring is also put on top of the outer cylinder

and soil is backfilled.

! Make sure that soil does not get into the gap between the two cylinders.

Fig. 27: Lysimeter has been installed

Fig. 28: Lysimeter site on August 22, 2004

(own picture)

3.4.3.2 Non-Weighable Monolithic Field Lysimeter (Petzenkirchen System)

1) Modified Monolithic Field Lysimeter, Square

Using a sheet steel frame and a device for excavating the soil, a monolith is excavated; at its

bottom two suction cups and a filter gravel layer are installed. This monolith is placed into a

prepared site in soil again (with 4 cm gap between monolith and soil, see figure 29); the

frame is removed and the gap is filled with gravel that prevents a lateral flow from/to the

monolith and allows roots to grow through. Water is either gained through a drain pipe

(gravimetric) or by applying a vacuum (FEICHTINGER in BAL 1992, pp 59-62).

This type is currently only installed at the site of IKT (Institut für Kulturtechnik)

Petzenkirchen, AT 8 (EDER in BÖHM et al. 2002, p 122).


49

Fig. 29: Modified monolithic field lysimeter, Petzenkirchen system

(according to FEICHTINGER in BAL 1992, p 59, modified); Modifiziertes monolithisches Feldlysimeter, System Petzenkirchen

2) Non-Weighable Monolithic Field Lysimeter, Cylindrical

A cylindrical container with undisturbed soil and a bottom plate is put back into the site where

it was excavated (EDER in BÖHM et al. 2002, p 122) and works as a gravitation lysimeter

(see section 3.4.2). Figure 30 shows the scheme of the whole measuring site with a pit for

collecting drainage water and probes installed in an undisturbed soil profile.

Fig. 30: Equipment of a measuring site including a non-weighable monolithic field lysimeter and soil

hydrology probes; for example in Lobau, Vienna, Austria (according to HARTL et al. 2001, p 216, modified); Ausstattung eines Messplatzes mit einem nicht wägbaren monolithischen Feldlysimeter und bodenhydrologischen Sonden; z.B. in Lobau, Wien


50

In Austria, lysimeters of this type are implemented at several sites, for example in Eferding,

Schwertberg, Obere Pettenbachrinne, Upper Austria (AT 4, 5 and 12 a, b ), in Lobau/

Vienna (AT 10 ) and in Irdning (AT 21 ) at the site of BAL (Bundesanstalt für

alpenländische Landwirtschaft) Gumpenstein (EDER in BÖHM et al. 2002, own survey 2004).

3.4.4 Suction Lysimeter

By applying suction pressure to water permeable material (suction plate or suction cups at

the bottom of the lysimeter vessel) percolating water is collected; see principle of vacuum

applied to SWS in section 3.4.1. The porous plate should have a high resistance against entry

of air but good water permeability. At the range of low soil matric potential (25-150 cm water

column) the negative pressure is adjusted by a hanging water column but usually a constant

level between 25-600 cm is applied (DVWK 1980, pp 20-21).

To gain data about different soil parameters, probes are installed in the lysimeter vessel at

different depths, see figure 19 b, page 44. To check data of the soil horizons, probes should

also be implemented in the natural soil profile outside the lysimeter vessels.

3.4.5 Groundwater Lysimeter

1) A groundwater lysimeter with constant groundwater level is equipped with a device to

keep a certain groundwater level constant. A principle of such a groundwater lysimeter with a

continuous control of the groundwater level is shown in figure 31, Ig = short-term

groundwater recharge, Kg = capillary rise, Qe = amount of water withdrawn, Qz = amount of

water added. The difference between Qe and Qz corresponds to the groundwater recharge

(difference between Ig and Kg), and ETa is determinable (DVWK 1980, pp 13-14). When a

lysimeter is equipped with a permeable bottom plate and simulated water table at that depth,

this is called a zero-tension lysimeter (OECD 2000, p 10).

2) A groundwater lysimeter with variable groundwater level should provide a better

adjustment to the real conditions of a location. Ig, Kg and the difference of lateral water input

and losses (∆ Qg) have to be determined separately (DVWK 1980, p 15-20). KESSLER,

MEISSNER, and RUPP in BAL 2001, p 135-137 explain a newly developed groundwater


51

lysimeter to measure all parameters of the soil water balance—except evapotranspiration, see

figure 32: The bottom of the vessel is characterized by amounts of water added or drained and

groundwater level is controlled by a compensation device; at times of low groundwater level,

the lysimeter works as a gravitation lysimeter. A socket for ponded water is placed on top of

the container. When precipitation (P), ponded water (Pond), drainage and water added (Rab,

Rzu) and storage change (∆S) due to water fluxes are determined in high resolution, ETa may

be calculated: SRzuRabETPondP ∆±−+=+ )( .

Fig. 31: Principle system of a groundwater lysimeter equipped with a device to control the constant

groundwater level continuously, according to SCHENDEL (from DVWK 1980, p 14); Prinzip eines Grundwasserlysimeters nach SCHENDEL mit einer

kontinuierlichen Steuerung des konstanten Grundwasserspiegels

Fig. 32: Principle of a groundwater control/groundwater lysimeter with variable groundwater level (from KESSLER, MEISSNER and RUPP in BAL 2001, p 135)

Prinzip einer Grundwassersteuerung/eines Grundwasserlysimeters mit variablem Grundwasserstand


52

3) A hydraulic groundwater lysimeter without electronic components or electrical power

was developed and implemented in peatlands (mires) with shallow water tables in Scotland,

UK 4 , see also table 10 in section 4.4.1.2 and section 5.1 for research results. Figure 33

shows the principle of this “mire lysimeter”: An impermeable tank (lt) contains the monolith

(m) and is installed to the vegetated surface (vs) with minimal disturbance; the monolith is

connected via an orifice (o) and a discharge tube (dt) to a discharge bag (db) which is

implemented in a satellite pit (sp) with permeable walls. Water flows through internal wells

(iw) within the monolith. The hydraulic potential guarantees that water levels in the monolith

adjust to the ones ( ) outside the container. Seepage water is collected in the flexible bag

(INGRAM, COUPAR, and BRAGG 2001).

Fig. 33: Principle of a hydraulic groundwater lysimeter

(abbreviations explained in the text; from INGRAM, COUPAR, and BRAGG 2001) Prinzip eines hydraulischen Grundwasserlysimeters (Abkürzungen im Text erklärt)

3.4.6 Other Lysimeter Types

To distinguish between all lysimeter vessels mentioned before and larger test areas, I decided

to create a separate category for “large lysimeters/test areas,” meaning big trays or

geomembrane being backfilled with soil or substrate—only in North Wyke is the soil

undisturbed. Their surface is between 30 m² and 670 m² (according to information reported in

the questionnaires). Most large lysimeters of this type are square and used for testing surface-

sealing systems of dumps or for studies on water balance in forest areas; some examples are

presented in section 4.4.6. Details of the facility North Wyke, United Kingdom, UK 7 , are

provided in section 4.4.3.3.


53

In my survey, another lysimeter type was mentioned that does not belong to any of the other

types: A “groove lysimeter”55 with a module groove system made of stainless steel and a size

of 1.25 x 1.25 m is in use in Deutzen (DE 29 , A. PETERS, questionnaire 2004).

Using four important criteria, I standardized the types and named every lysimeter type of the

stations/facilities in my database according to the following combination. I decided to use

weighing possibility, soil filling technique, if seepage water is collected gravimetrically,

and groundwater connection instead of dividing types by their size or shape (square,

cylindrical) first because these parameters tell us more about the use of lysimeters at a

glance; the size and shape are dependent on the research purpose and topographic conditions.

Of course, the size (and shape if known) of each lysimeter is provided in the description of the

stations (see section 4.4 or CD). For example, combined types are called non-weighable

backfilled gravitation lysimeter, non-weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeter, weighable

monolithic gravitation lysimeter, weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeter, etc.

3.4.7 Soil Hydrology Measuring Site (SHMS)

At a soil hydrology measuring site, probes for measuring soil water content, matric potential

or for gaining samples of soil water such as TDR probes, gypsum blocks, tensiometers, or

suction cups etc. are installed (probes discussed in sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5.4). The term

“virtual lysimeter”56 has been commonly used in Austria and Germany since the

5th lysimeter congress 1995 in Gumpenstein (Irdning, Austria) to denote such probes or an

entire measuring site where different soil hydrological parameters are determined (e.g.

KASTANEK et al. in BAL 2001, p 17-21). As this term does not match the exact definition of

a lysimeter (see section 3.1) and is confusing, MURER in BAL 2003, p 11-12 suggests not to

use “virtual lysimeter” any more but “soil hydrological measuring site”57 instead. I use a

similar term—“soil hydrology measuring site/SHMS.”

In Austria, several soil hydrology measuring sites are operated by the Hydrographic Central

Office HZB (Hydrographisches Zentralbüro/Lebensministerium) and its subordinate offices

(Hydrographic Service in some provinces of the country/Hydrographischer Dienst in einigen

Bundesländern), for locations see map 2. Appendix D shows data about Austrian measuring

sites and probes installed there (G. FUCHS, e-mail 2004).

3 Lysimeters: Research Goals and Different Types 3.5 Lysimeter Errors and Comparison of Lysimeter Types

54

3.5 Lysimeter Errors and Comparison of Lysimeter Types

3.5.1 Lysimeter Errors

The lysimeter that is built in best is the one you don’t see!

When a lysimeter or a SWS is installed, the natural hydraulic conditions are disturbed.

Gravitational drainage from a vessel of finite length differs from that in the field; therefore,

the depth of a container should be as great as possible. The errors to which a lysimeter is

susceptible should be minimized when designing a lysimeter vessel.

FANK and V. UNOLD in KLOTZ 2004, pp 208-211, FANK, V. UNOLD and LEIS in BÖHM et al.

2002, MARSHALL et al. 1996, p 394, MULLER 1996, pp 20-22, DACHLER in BAL 1996, pp 27-

32, KASTANEK in BAL 1995, pp 93-102, KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 215, ROTH et al. in

BAL 1994, pp 9-21, and KLAGHOFER in BAL 1991, pp 19-23 mention the following

important errors and suggestions for avoiding them:

• Island/oasis effects: Values measured are only valid for a single position, and results

may not be transferred to larger areas. The lysimeter surface should be as highly as

possible representative of the field in which the vessel is installed to guarantee

comparable vegetative, hydrological and micro-climatical conditions.

Vegetation has to be of the same composition and the number of plants has to be (nearly)

the same on the vessel as in the surrounding field, and the adjacent soil has to correspond

to the soil in the lysimeter. Island effects also occur when the field is cultivated

mechanically but the lysimeter surface by hand; field lysimeters should be capable of

preventing such errors.

When the quality of the surface differs from the surrounding surface, evaporation/evapo-

transpiration rates deviate from the natural rate; also soil water content may be

different from the one in the natural soil. The temperature in a possibly existing cellar has

to be adapted to the one of the soil. Trees, buildings or an entrance to a lysimeter cellar

must not affect the micro-climate.


55

• Bypass fluxes: As the lateral water transport is suppressed in a closed vessel, bypass

fluxes can hardly be determined in lysimeter containers.*

• Boundary effects at the borders: A lysimeter has to reflect the same heat budgets as the

surrounding undisturbed soil; for example, the gap between the inner and outer cylinder

at a weighing lysimeter has to be kept as small as possible. Broad borders on the surface

should be avoided in any case as they get hot and cause higher evaporation.

Plants are prevented from spreading beyond the side border of the vessel; surface water

may run in an uncontrolled way along the wall of the container (“side-wall flow”, e.g.

when swelling/shrinkage processes occur). Surface water becomes less of a problem the

bigger the lysimeter container is. Also, a larger base compensates for boundary effects.

• Phenomena/boundary effects at the lysimeter bottom: Disturbances at the bottom

occur because the natural soil profile is interrupted; this causes irregularities of water

fluxes and pressure. Except for groundwater lysimeters, capillaries at the bottom are

interrupted and an interface between the soil and the atmosphere emerges. Seepage water

only occurs when hydraulic pressure exceeds air pressure (when pores are saturated); in

this case drainage water is dammed up (in contrast to the natural soil conditions).

Dammed water may be reduced by using bottom plates with several outlets.

In times of high evaporation/evapotranspiration, the interruption prevents capillary rise

of water in deeper soil horizons. The extent of this effect is highly dependent upon soil

characteristics, plant growth and meteorological parameters. These phenomena are

reduced when a vacuum system is applied.

• Disturbed profile: When soil is artificially backfilled into lysimeters/SWS, the soil is

mineralized due to aeration, and therefore a higher nitrate concentration occurs. This

higher concentration can be noticeable up to two years but depends on the amount of

drainage water. Therefore, disturbed vessels should be investigated for longer periods.

Soil has to be carefully compressed when backfilled and the organic layer of soil must

not be mixed with the mineral horizon(s). An advantage of using backfilled vessels are

* A bypass (interpedal pore or macropore) conducts water through root holes or cracks faster than soil water moves through the unsaturated zone, and it bypasses matric fluxes (KUTÍLEK and NIELSEN 1994, p 25).


56

moderate costs of construction (STENITZER and v. UNOLD in v. UNOLD 2003, SEEGER et

al. and v. UNOLD in BÖHM et al. 2002). A disturbed profile is acceptable for gravelly or

sandy soils; otherwise soil monoliths should be excavated to achieve the same internal

structure of the porous system as in the natural soil.

Furthermore, lysimeters should be protected against animals that may walk across the field

investigated, may cause damage or may rummage in lysimeter soil creating macropores.

3.5.2 Comparisons of Lysimeter Types: Advantages and Limitations

The following general statements are based on STENITZER, HÖSCH, v. UNOLD in v. UNOLD

2003, DECAGON 2003, MULLER 1996, KLAGHOFER in BAL 1993, pp 13-14.

Seepage water samplers/SWS: Sampling seepage water in sandy/gravelly soils causes no

problems as water is only weakly bound to soil matrix but vacuum has to be applied

continuously; otherwise the amounts of water sampled are too low. In contrast, in loamy soils

matrix suction is dependent on soil thickness and the size of the hanging water column; the

vacuum applied should correspond to the depth at which the SWS is built in. When suction

is too low, the sampler builds up a resistance and water flows around the vessel; at a too high

vacuum, soil is deaerated and CaCO3 is deposited, influencing the pH value*.

SWS and ceramic plates/suction cups are employed to determine the quality of seepage water;

to determine its quantity, the use of numerical models together with SWS is recommended as

well as verifying water amounts collected with a calculated water balance. SWS have to be

built in beneath the root horizon in agricultural areas. After dry periods, no adequate suction

can be built up, and the re-wetting of soil takes longer than in the adjacent soil.

Lysimeters: the volume of soil is known and therefore lysimeters allow measurement of

concentrations of solutes percolating through the soil filled in. A disadvantage of

conventional lysimeters is that they can hardly be integrated into mechanized cultivation—a

removable ring on top of the cylinder may remedy this problem.

* Details of amounts of suction applied to SWS and information about control systems for SWS are provided in v. UNOLD 2003, pp 14-16 and pp 30-31 and UMS 2003 b (pdf).


57

Lysimeters and SWS have to be employed according to their research purpose and results

have to be interpreted considering many influences of the construction method. SEEGER et

al. in BÖHM et al. 2002 point out that the “ideal lysimeter” does not exist. In table 5 I tried to

summarize the most important advantages and limitations of some lysimeter types;

suggestions for their use are provided as well.

Table 5: Comparison of different types of seepage water samplers (SWS) and lysimeters: advantages and limitations/suggestions

(according to STENITZER, YOON, KÜCKE, MASSWOHL, HÖSCH in v. UNOLD 2003, DECAGON 2003, EDER, SEEGER et al., PÜTZ, v. UNOLD in BÖHM et al. 2002, DACHLER in BAL 1996, MULLER 1996) Vergleich verschiedener Sickerwassersammler- (SWS) und Lysimetertypen: Vorteile und Grenzen

SWS/Lysimeter Type

Advantages Limitations/Suggestions

SWS with applied vacuum (according to E. STENITZER)

• may be installed easily in field (this SWS is mainly used below fields)

• only little space is needed • tray can be implemented at every

soil depth • mechanized cultivation is possible

without limitations • low costs of construction

• profile is disturbed • vacuum has to be kept constant; high

vacuum is used • water supply depends on matric suction • large deviations in water amounts occur • less water amount is sampled than

really occurs (because of missing side border)

SWS without applied vacuum

• may be installed easily in field • only little space is needed • tray can be implemented in every

soil depth • mechanized cultivation is possible

without limitations • low costs of construction

• results are only realistic when a coarse filter bottom is fixed under fine soil because this change in layers represents the natural soil horizons (hydraulic barrier)

Capillary wick samplers (PCAP, drain gauge)

• undisturbed profile • uses lower applied vacuum than

applied to other SWS • after adapting fibre glass wicks,

this method is the most suitable sampling technique to reach research goals nowadays

• less water amount is sampled than really occurs

• fibre glass wicks have to be adapted before they are used to determine cations, anions or organic compounds

Non-weighable gravitation lysimeters (made of concrete vessels and sheet steel primarily)

• low costs of construction • low costs for maintenance • results are valuable when being

gained during a longer period of time

• filter bottom has to be applied (see SWS without applied vacuum)

• research fields are limited • little transparency, lysimeter acts as a

“black box” Monolithic lysimeters • undisturbed soil guarantees natural

soil conditions • should be used for studies on

matric and macropore fluxes

• higher costs of construction • at sites/soils with coarse gravel, stones

may cause problems when excavating monoliths

Weighable lysimeters • precise determination water of budget parameters (evapo-ration/evapotranspiration)

• electronic modules/units are susceptible to malfunction

• higher costs of construction • higher costs of maintenance

Groundwater lysimeters • lysimeter depth extends watershed • higher construction costs Large lysimeters/test areas

• low costs for maintenance

• research fields are limited • higher construction costs • little transparency

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe 4.1 Developing a Questionnaire for Operators of Lysimeter Sites in Europe

58

When many lysimeters are used at one facility, the maintenance effort is very high. To

compare results of different soil fractions and soil types as well as cultivation methods,

vessels should be filled or cultivated in different ways. It is possible to measure parameters in

various depths using staggered lysimeters; various probes (tensiometers, TDR probes, etc.)

may also be built in different depths (SEEGER et al. in BÖHM et al. 2002, pp 164-177).

Today, the cylindrical shape of lysimeter vessels is preferred as they better withstand external

pressures than square ones. Some facts about construction material used are mentioned by

KRETZSCHMAR 1999, DACHLER in BAL 1992, SEEGER et al., v. UNOLD in BÖHM et al. 2002:

• sheet steel: not all criteria are determinable (e.g. heavy metals), but only little interaction

between soil and the inner wall occurs,

• stainless steel: negatively affects results of studies on heavy metals but material is

resistant against acid: the higher alloyed the steel the more resistant it is,

• polyethylene (PE): when high pressure occurs, PE may deform; PE is not suitable for

investigating organic substances (pesticides and contaminants) adsorption may not be

excluded; advantage: material is inert.

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe

4.1 Developing a Questionnaire for Operators of Lysimeter Sites in Europe

To gain data about lysimetric stations around Europe, I developed a questionnaire (in MS

Excel 2002) that I sent to operators by e-mail with a request to complete it. Operators in

Austria, Germany and parts of Switzerland got the questionnaire in German, to operators in

other European countries I sent an English version that is provided in appendix B. Therefore,

I do not list all questions in this section but only describe how I compiled the issues relating to

the subtitle of my thesis—“Purpose, Equipment, Research Results, Future Developments.”

I extracted general information about lysimeter types and soil hydrology measuring

equipment/methods and their use from proceedings of the lysimeter conferences/workshops

which were held in the Austrian BAL Gumpenstein (1991-2004, see reference list) and

arranged questions about research purpose of the stations, general data about lysimeter

types, number of lysimeters and seepage water determination. As I wanted to describe the

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe 4.2 Search for Operators and Lysimetric Sites; Lysimeter Database

59

lysimeter sites geographically, I added questions about the surrounding area (topographic

features), mean annual temperature and precipitation, etc. and also about the meteorological

parameters that are determined. To gather information about soil (fractions, types, horizons)

and vegetation types of the locations, I compiled questions related to these topics.

The survey also includes questions about data storing and managing and formulas used to

determine evapotranspiration and water balances or models used and their goals (e.g.

modelling of soil water budget or nutrient transport) to facilitate the exchange of information

among lysimeter operators. I asked the operators for contact information (address, Web site,

etc.). An important part of the survey is the future development of the stations (chapter 6).

I completed the questionnaire according to detailed information about lysimeter types provi-

ded in DVWK 1980 and according to a questionnaire by KRETZSCHMAR (see reference 1999)

which was sent to German lysimeter operators in 1996/1997. The first version of the ques-

tionnaire was developed in German and then translated into English using abstracts of con-

ference proceedings (BAL Gumpenstein), basic literature in English and several dictionaries.

4.2 Search for Operators and Lysimetric Sites; Lysimeter Database

Using addresses provided in proceedings of BAL Gumpenstein I looked up e-mail addresses

of operators on their university or research centre Web sites and sent the questionnaire to

several operators in Austria, Germany and Switzerland in June 2004. In an Excel sheet, I

documented names, addresses, contacts of operators and date of sending the numbered

questionnaires. During my internship at JOANNEUM RESEARCH/Department of

WaterResourcesManagement in July I searched for lysimeter operators all over Europe and

sent out the questionnaires and requests.

I used the Google Web search engine and looked for a country name plus “lysimeter” or “soil

hydrology” (in German or English, according to the respective country), cities plus

“lysimeter/soil hydrology” or universities/research centres and their departments that might

run lysimeter/soil hydrology measuring sites (departments of Geography, Agronomy,

Environment, Hydrology or Soil Science). I also contacted (agriculture) ministries and

national soil science societies. Some German lysimeter stations listed in the survey by

KRETZSCHMAR 1999 that I was looking for directly with their name and “lysimeter” could not

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe 4.3 Results of the Survey and General Information about Lysimeter Sites

60

be found or were inactivated already. In several issues of GSF Neuherberg (see references) I

found some operators and lysimeters too that I had not contacted before.

As it was not possible to find detailed information about research facilities of some

institutes/institutions on internet sites, I sent e-mails with a general inquiry to many

departments/institutes. More than 250 e-mails were sent—either with general inquiries or a

request to complete and return the questionnaire. Many institutions did not answer as they

probably do not run lysimeters and therefore I cannot provide the response rate.

After I had got back several questionnaires, I created an MS Access database to easily

arrange all the data, to build queries for several evaluations and to save lists as Excel sheets. I

collected data from June to the beginning of November 2004.

53 operators of lysimetric sites sent back a completed questionnaire, 22 sent information by

e-mail (and attached files with general information about their sites or research articles); four

operators provided site information by post; some operators sent additional research articles

by post. I also collected papers and information during the lysimeter excursion in October

2004 (Croatia and Slovenia) for my survey. If no details were available directly, I extracted

information from proceedings and excursion reports (BAL Gumpenstein/AG Lysimeter,

GSF Neuherberg), a survey by KRETZSCHMAR 1999 and his compilation of German

lysimeters, DVWK n.d. (descriptions of weighable lysimeters in Germany/current as of 1990)

and a number of Web sites and pdf articles provided on the internet. Except for three lysi-

meter stations in France, information about sites in that country was extracted from MULLER

1996, who lists lysimetric research centres in France up to 1990. I only considered stations

that were not closed by 1990 but did not look up whether they are operating at present.

4.3 Results of the Survey and General Information about Lysimeter Sites

268 data records are stored in the database (current as of November 8, 2004) providing

information about approximately 220 locations and the different lysimeter types used at these

sites (including all inactivated lysimeter sites, soil hydrology measuring sites/SHMS and

some with only little information). The exact number of sites cannot be quoted as some

operators use lysimeters at different locations which are summarized in the database and the

map. The area of investigation is shown in map 1 (enclosure 1): I sent inquiries to 37


61

countries, two of which are definitely not operating SHMS/lysimeters (Luxembourg and

Liechtenstein). In 17 countries it was not possible to find any lysimetric stations, or I did not

get a response.

According to my survey, 117 institutions are/were operating lysimeters but 138 operators in

18 countries are stored in the database because at some institutes/universities several persons

are in charge of lysimeter sites (e.g. JOANNEUM RESEARCH, Austria) or one organization

and its various research centres are operating lysimetric sites (e.g. INRA in France).

Table 6 shows figures of all lysimeter vessels operating in European countries. As

information on some stations, on numbers of vessels implemented at several stations or on

whether some vessels are still operating is missing, exact figures cannot be provided and the

total number of vessels and sites has to be higher.

Table 6: All lysimeter sites, numbers of vessels, seepage water samplers/SWS and soil hydrology measuring sites/SHMS in Europe according to the survey 2004

> or (>) means that there are more sites/vessels operating (expected to be operating) but details were not available Alle Lysimeterplätze, Anzahl der Gefäße und Sickerwassersammler/SWS sowie der boden-hydrologischen Messstellen/SHMS in Europa gemäß der Erhebung 2004

Country

Lysimeter/ SWS Sites

Number of All Vessels (Lysimeters

and SWS)

Number of Lysimeters

Number of SWS

Number of SHMS

Only Austria 28 > 143 104 > 38 8 Belgium 1 7 7 - - Croatia > 3 > 43 (>) 8 (>) 35 - Czech Republic 18 138 - 138 - Denmark 1 8 8 - - Finland 17 96 96 ? - France 21 214 190 24 17 Germany > 61 > 1468 > 1276 193 3 Hungary 2 368 368 - - Ireland 1 125 125 - - Italy 5 > 92 > 86 > 6 1 Poland 1 25 25 - - Republic of Macedonia 1? ? ? - - Slovenia 3 > 41 > 12 29 - Spain > 1 > 2 > 2 ? - Sweden 1 ? ? ? - Switzerland 4 88 88 - - United Kingdom > 9 > 72 > 45 > 27 2 Total number > 178 > 2930 > 2440 490 31

Figure 34 shows that the majority of lysimeter vessels (about 2054 vessels/84.2 %) are non-

weighable. This strengthens the “disadvantage” of ponderable lysimeters as the weighing


62

equipment is more expensive and in fields, weighable lysimeters are more difficult to build in.

More than two thirds (68.5 %) of the non-weighable lysimeters are backfilled, whereas

about 46 % of all ponderable lysimeter vessels are filled monolithically; to get better and

more precise data (parameters of the water balance, for example), soil should be excavated

monolithically when using weighing equipment, see chapter 3. Weighability of about 117

vessels (4.8 % of the total number) could not be determined. About 239 groundwater

lysimeters are in use around Europe—236 of them in Germany, three in Scotland, UK 4 ;

most of the groundwater lysimeters are non-weighable (weighable ones are used in

Falkenberg, DE 8 , for example). See descriptions of both sites in section 4.4.1.

Fig. 34: Division of non-weighable and weighable lysimeters and their soil filling method

(backfilled and monolithic, according to the survey 2004) Aufteilung der Lysimeter nach wägbaren und nicht wägbaren Gefäßen kombiniert mit der Art der

Bodengewinnung (monolithisch oder künstlich befüllte Lysimeter, Erhebung 2004)

The oldest vessels still operating were installed around 1880 at the site of Rothamsted

Research, United Kingdom, UK 6 (two non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters/

in situ), and at the Limburgerhof facility, Germany, DE 33 , 234 non-weighable back-

filled gravitation lysimeter vessels built in the years 1927/30 are still working.


63

The largest number of lysimeters at one site was counted in Szarvas, Hungary, HU 1 ,

where 320 non-weighable backfilled vessels are implemented, and at Limburgerhof, Ger-

many, DE 33 , (252 backfilled and monolithic lysimeters). More than 100 lysimeters exist

in Falkenberg, DE 8 , and Paulinenaue, DE 13 (both Germany), and Johnstown

Castle, Wexford, Ireland, IE 1 . In Wexford, 75 new monolithic lysimeters were built in

2003, with operation starting in 2004, see table 7 that shows all lysimeters installed in or

operating since 2004. Tables with all lysimeter and soil hydrology measuring sites operating

or being inactivated are provided in appendix E.

Table 7: Lysimeters/SWS installed in Europe in 2004 (according to different sources, survey 2004) 2004 eingebaute bzw. in Betrieb genommene Lysimeter/SWS in Europa

Country (Site) Number of Vessels and Lysimeter/SWS Type

Map (Number)

Austria (Wagna) 2 Weighable monolithic field lysimeters, standard size and SHMS

AT 27

France (Villié-Morgon) 4 Capillary wick samplers/soil hydrology measuring site FR 19 Germany (Munich/Freimann) 1 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter,

standard size (compost) DE 42

Germany (Braunschweig-Völkenrode)

8 Weighable backfilled lysimeters, large (under construction; start in 2005)

DE 11 a

Ireland (Johnstown Castle, Wexford)

75 Non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeter, small

IE 1

United Kingdom (Allt a’Mharcaidh Experimental Site, 5 plots)

3 Seepage water samplers UK 3

Lysimeters/SWS in Europe are used predominantly for agricultural research, see figures

35 a and b: More than half (1590) of all vessels and 62 % of all lysimeters (1511) but only

16 % of all SWS (shown in figure 35 c) are installed in arable land/fields, or crops,

vegetables, etc. are cultivated on the lysimeters. As the use of many SWS is not known, the

number of SWS installed in arable land could be much higher.

On about one fourth (755 lysimeters/SWS, 553 lysimeters), different types of grass are

planted (including peatland vegetation) and 126 lysimeters (5 %) are used under bare soil.

The figures change from season to season because of crop rotation (e.g. bare soil is then

cultivated) and the purpose of 104 vessels is variable. In forests, only 1 % of all lysimeters

(including four large lysimeters/test areas) are employed but the proportion of SWS used in

forests is much higher (8 %). A reason for this might be that smaller trays are easier to install

in forests than large lysimeters. 10 % (298) of the vessels were not classified. Lysimeters and

test areas at eight sites are used to investigate leaching of dumps/landfills or testing surface-

sealing systems, see section 4.4.6.

4 Lysimeter Stations and Facilities in Europe 4.4 Lysimeter Sites in Europe According to Their Vegetation Type

64

Fields(16%)

Grassland(41%)

Forests (8%)

Not known(35%)

SWS

Fig. 35 c

Fields(62%)

Grassland(23%)

Fallow(5%)

Forests(1%)

Variable(4%)

Not known(5%)

LysimetersFig. 35 b

Fig. 35 aFields(54%)

Grassland(26%)

Fallow(4%)

Forests(2%)

Variable(4%)

Not known(10%)

All vessels

Lysimeters and seepage water samplers/SWS installed in Europeaccording to their main vegetation type (survey 2004)

Fig. 35: Charts of all lysimeters and seepage water samplers in Europe, classified according to their

main vegetation type (survey 2004) Circle areas of charts in figures 35 b and c are proportional to the total number of vessels (chart a)

Diagramme aller Lysimeter und Sickerwassersammler in Europa, eingeteilt nach ihrem Bewuchs

4.4 Lysimeter Sites in Europe According to Their Vegetation Type

The following compilation shows only several important lysimeter facilities (sites classified

as at least three lysimeters or two lysimeters and several seepage water samplers/SWS; most

facilities have a lysimeter cellar) or stations (operating less than three lysimeters and SWS,

but not stations operating SWS only) in a clearly arranged table to offer an overview of

general information. Locations of all sites of my survey are shown in two maps (see

enclosures 1 and 2); all details of lysimeter sites and operators (contact addresses etc.) are


65

provided on the enclosed CD ROM. I wanted to compile details about large facilities as well

as a variety of different lysimeter types and consider information about many countries;

therefore the following stations were chosen. Lysimeter sites are sorted according to their

main vegetation type (arable land/grassland/forest) but some facilities use vessels in more

than one vegetation type and cannot be put exactly into one single category. A separate

section (4.4.6) has been prepared to describe stations investigating dumps/landfills and

polluted or post-mining areas in Germany.

4.4.1 More Than Two Different Vegetation Types and Peatland Vegetation

4.4.1.1 Germany

Table 8: Description of the lysimeter facility Falkenberg (Stendal), Germany, DE 8 (according to questionnaires 1997 provided by R. MEISSNER) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Falkenberg (Stendal), Deutschland

Operated by UFZ-Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle, Sektion Bodenforschung Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type

since 1995: studies on seepage water amount and quality of post mining landscapes including simulating phreatic rise

1982-1991: studies for agricultural cultivation and water protection areas; since spring 1991: land diversion and extensification (including change of land use)

since 1992: double tracer trials for determining water and nitrate movement in staggered lysi-meters; since 1995: transfer of organic pollutants in staggered lysimeters

Investigation of water and nutrient balances for grassland in the floodplain of the river Elbe with the help of newly developed lysimeter techniques

Altitude above sea level in m

21.2

Mean annual precipitation in mm

556

Surrounding area (topographic feature)

Plain (grassland)

Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, percentage of possible sunshine, wind velocity, evaporation pan existing

Lysimeter type Non-weighable

filled groundwater lysimeter

Non-weighable backfilled gravi-tation lysimeter

Non-weighable backfilled gravi-tation lysimeter (staggered)

Weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeter

Operating since 1995 1982 1989 2000 Number of lysimeters 4 117 20 4 Size classification standard standard small standard Exact size 1.2 ∅ x 1.78 m,

cylindrical 1 m² x 1.25 m, square

0.5 m ∅, 5 different heights, cylindrical

1 m², 2 m depth

Building material of container

PE-HD Sheet steel Galvanized steel pipe

Stainless steel

Lysimeter bottom Gravel filter layer Filter layer Filter layer (10 cm Filter layer


66

(25 cm, quartz), drain pipe

(25 cm): sand, gravel; drain pipe in gravel layer

gravel), perforated bottom plate (funnel-shaped)

Lysimeter cellar Ferro-concrete Ferro-concrete Concrete Groundwater contact yes no no yes Groundwater level variable

yes - - yes

Weighing equipment - - - Digital load cells, precision 60 g (0.06 mm)

Seepage water determination

Gravimetric; outlet into lysimeter cellar (tip balance)

Gravimetric; outlet into lysimeter cellar

Gravimetric; outlet into collection vessels (put up in the cellar); manual

Groundwater level regulated with compensation vessel; digital meter

Investigation of nutrients (balances)

Al, As, B, Ca, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, P, Pb, Sb, Zn, SO4, Cl, NO2, NO3, NH4, EC, pH, DOC

K, Na, Mg, Ca, NH4; Cl, SO4, NO3, NO2, PO4; EC, pH, DOC; balances: N, anions, cations

K, Na, Mg, Ca, NH4; Cl, SO4, NO3, NO2, PO4, some organic pollutants, Deuterium, 15N; no balances

N, P, SO42-

dynamics; also balances

Measuring interval(s) of substances

weekly to monthly continuously weekly

Soil fraction(s) Sand, gravel Loamy sand Soil type Pleistocene cover

loam and dump coal sand

Cambisol, Planosol, Chernozem

Cambisol Fluvisol

Soil thickness in m 1.5 1 0.25-3 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Arable land/field Fallow/uncultivated Grassland Crop rotation 2 lysimeters clover

and grass, 2 lysimeters succession

since 1991: integrated cropping (5-field rotation); grassland of different intensity; extensification (4, 5, 6 fields); land diversion

Ground cultivation complete fallow Irrigation yes no Amount of irrigation in mm/year

simulation of an annual precipi-tation of 800 mm

Tensiometers yes yes no yes Suction cups no yes no yes Suction plates yes no no no TDR no yes no yes Sensors for soil temperature

yes yes no no

Data logger no no no yes Server, database no yes yes yes Other details (data formats etc.)

FD probes sensors in 3 layers; also sensors for EC, redox poten-tial; DOS files

DOS files (climate data, seepage water amount and quality)

sensors in 4 layers

Evaporation determination

Evaporation tank Evaporation tank Evaporation tank

Water balance determination

yes P + Pond = ET + (Rab - Rzu) +/- S: Pond = banked up


67

water, Rab/Rzu = groundwater run-off or input

Remarks 1995: 117 lysi-meters; different soil types of origi-nal locations (open-cast lignite mining dumps Cospuden and Rötha, near Leipzig)

different soil types according to original locations of soil taking out

Lysimeter works as a gravitation lysimeter when groundwater level in the floodplain < 2 m; soil taken from Wörlitz and Schönberg Deich

Fig. 36: Principle sketch of staggered lysimeters in Falkenberg

(according to an enclosed sketch to a questionnaire 1997 provided by R. MEISSNER, modified) Prinzipskizze von tiefengestaffelten Lysimetern in Falkenberg

Table 9: Description of the lysimeter facility Neuherberg, Germany, DE 41 (according to information provided by D. KLOTZ, questionnaires 2004, KLOTZ and SEILER 1998 and visit in August 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Neuherberg, Deutschland

Operated by GSF-Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type

Fundamental studies: infiltration velocities, groundwater recharge

Effect of O3 and CO2 on beech (rhizosphere)

Studies on infiltration rates

Altitude above sea level in m

491


1000


Alluvial plain

Parent material Quarternary gravel, Tertiary sand Determination of meteo-rological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, wind velocity


68

Lysimeter type Weighable monolithic and backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter


Operating since 1996 1999 1999 Number of lysimeters 24 8 4 Size classification large large large Building material of container

Stainless steel V4A Stainless steel V4A Stainless steel V4A

Lysimeter bottom Filter layer (0.35 m) Filter layer (0.35 m) Filter layer (0.35 m) Lysimeter cellar Concrete Concrete Concrete Weighing equipment Measuring strips (elastic) Measuring strips

(elastic) Measuring strips (elastic)


Gravimetric; at monoliths outlets are divided into 8 compartments

Gravimetric; outlet Gravimetric; outlet


Main ions, DOC, tracers; also balances

Main ions, DOC, tracers; also balances

Main ions, DOC, tracers, organic and inorganic pollutants, indicators; also balances


weekly/monthly weekly/monthly weekly/monthly

Soil fraction(s) different Medium sand different Soil type Cambisols, Rendzina Natural C horizon with

contaminated material (Forest soil)

Soil thickness in m 2 2 1.2 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Wood/forest Fallow/uncultivated Kind of crop/tree Beech Crop rotation discontinuous crop rotation Ground cultivation manually on lysimeter,

mechanized outside

Use of fertilizers yes no no Used fertilizer/organic manure

no mineral fertilization, Mustard (catch crop)

Tensiometers yes yes yes Suction cups yes yes yes TDR yes yes yes Sensors for soil temperature

yes yes yes

Data logger yes yes yes Other details (data formats etc.)

Sensors installed in 5 layers



Water balance determination

by measuring by measuring by measuring

Malfunctions, problems, their removal or correcting

During a longer period no seepage water in outlet (bubble), suction was applied (suction cups) in different layers.

Remarks undisturbed: 3 soils, disturbed: 2 soils, soils taken from different locations

Soils taken from different locations; other GSF lysimeter facilities: pits in Scheyern, lysimeters in laboratory (equivalent to gravel lysimeters)

The lysimeter facility IGÖ Neuherberg (operated by the GSF department for Groundwater

Ecology, formerly Hydrology) on the same place was partly inactivated in 2004; the last small

non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters will probably be out of order in 2005. These


69

small lysimeters were used for tracer trials, determination of infiltration rates and source term

determination (KLOTZ, questionnaire 2004).

a b

Fig. 37: Weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters with beeches (a), lysimeter cellar (b) Neuherberg (own pictures taken on August 9, 2004)

Wägbare befüllte Schwerkraftlysimeter mit Buchenbestand (a), Lysimeterkeller (b) Neuherberg

4.4.1.2 United Kingdom (Scotland)

Table 10: Description of the lysimeter stations Fenns and Whixall Mosses, Bankhead Moss, Scotland, UK 4

(according to O. BRAGG, e-mail 2004 and INGRAM, COUPAR and BRAGG 2001) Beschreibung der Lysimeterstationen Fenns und Whixall Mosses, Bankhead Moss, Schottland

Operated by English Nature and Scottish Wildlife Trust (Geography Department, University of Dundee), Dundee

Purpose of this station to measure discharge from intact mire and exploring differences between small-scale vegetation types (undisturbed or carefully re-instated, natural vegetation)

Surrounding area (topographic feature) Mire/peatland Determination of meteor. parameters Precipitation Lysimeter type Non-weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeter Operating since 1995? Number of lysimeters 3 (2 at Fenns and Whixall Mosses, 1 at Bankhead Moss) Size classification standard Building material of container Black polypropylene domestic cold-water cistern (circular) Lysimeter bottom 75 mm orifice above the floor Lysimeter cellar (only a satellite pit) Groundwater level variable yes Seepage water determination Hydraulic mechanism; discharge tube to a flexible discharge bag Soil type Peat Vegetation/cultivation Natural vegetation A sketch of this lysimeter type is provided in section 3.4.5.


70

4.4.2 Arable Land/Fields

4.4.2.1 United Kingdom

Rothamsted Research (UK 5 and UK 6 ) operates non-weighable monolithic lysimeters for

studies on N leaching loss, leaching of agrochemicals, anions and to a lesser extent cations

(C. WEBSTER, questionnaire 2004).

4.4.2.2 France

Table 11: Description of the lysimeter facility Fagnières, France, FR 9 (according to information provided by B. NICOLARDOT, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Fagnières, Frankreich

Operated by NRA, Unité d'Agronomie Laon Reims Mons CREA 2, Reims cedex 2

Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type

to study the transfer and balance of elements in soil; behaviour of 15N fertilizer and 15N plant residues

to study the transfer and balance of elements in soil

to study the transfer and balance of elements in soil

Altitude above sea level in m 102 Mean annual temperature in °C 10.4 Mean annual precipitation in mm 630 Surrounding area (topographic feature)

Smooth slope (3.4 %)

Parent material Freeze-broken chalk (Santonian chalk) Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, wind velocity


monolithic lysimeter Non-weighable monolithic lysimeter

Non-weighable monolithic lysimeter

Operating since 1973 and 1976 1973 1973 Number of lysimeters 10 1 1 Size classification large large large Exact size 2 x 2 x 2 m 2 x 2 x 1.5 m 2 x 2 m not cut,

connected to subsoil Building material of container Concrete separated from soil with PVC and polyethylene Lysimeter bottom Perforated stainless steel Lysimeter cellar Concrete Seepage water determination Suction cups, outlet Gravimetric; outlet Suction cups Investigation of nutrients (balances) N; no balance Measuring interval(s) of substances monthly Soil fraction(s) Highly calcareous Soil type Rendosol Soil thickness in m 0.28 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field; 2

lysimeters: uncultivated Arable land/field

Kind of crop/tree Sugar beet, barley, wheat Crop rotation three years


71

Ground cultivation 2 lysimeters without ploughing

Used fertilizer/manure N, P, K, Mg Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha 120, 135 185 U N; others according to exportations Fertilization period one year Use of pesticide yes yes yes Suction cups yes no yes Data logger yes yes yes Server, database yes yes yes Other details (data formats etc.) Excel Further investigations or equipment Measurement of soil C and N every 3 years Evaporation determination PENMAN

a b

Fig. 38: View on the lysimeter facility Fagnières (a), excavating soil monoliths in 1976 (b) (pictures provided by B. NICOLARDOT 2004)

Sicht auf die Lysimeteranlage Fagnières (a), Aushub der Bodenmonolithe 1976 (b) The lysimeter station Avignon, France, FR 23 , has been operating a large non-weighable

monolithic lysimeter (2.5 x 2 x 2 m) and an SHMS since 2002 to investigate mass and particle

transport in heterogeneous soils of agricultural land (S. RUY, questionnaire 2004 and pdf

DI PIETRO 2004).

4.4.2.3 Germany

Table 12: Description of the lysimeter facility Dedelow, Germany, DE 6 (according to information provided by U. SCHINDLER, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Dedelow, Deutschland

Operated by ZALF Institut für Bodenlandschaftsforschung, Müncheberg Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type Fertilization and cultivation affecting yield, water and nutrient

balance; working on methodical questions Altitude above sea level in m 40 Mean annual temperature in °C 8.0 Mean annual precipitation in mm 500 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Terminal moraine Parent material Till Determination of meteorological parameters



72

Lysimeter type Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter Operating since 1989 Number of lysimeters 32 Size classification standard Exact size 1 x 1 x 2 m Building material of container Steel Lysimeter bottom 1989-2001: suction-controlled, since 2001 gravitation drain Lysimeter cellar Concrete Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances) yes; N balances Measuring interval(s) of substances monthly Soil fraction(s) Loam, sand Soil type Eutric Luvisol Soil thickness in m 2 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Kind of crop/tree Sugar beet, spring barley, pea, winter wheat (since 1989) Ground cultivation integrated Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral and organic Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha 0-200 Use of pesticide yes Tensiometers yes Suction cups yes TDR yes Data logger yes Further investigations or equipment Window for observing roots Evaporation determination TURC/WENDLING Malfunctions/their removal Vacuum system was functionally disturbed after short time in use

a b

Fig. 39: View on the lysimeters at lysimeter facility Dedelow (a), lysimeter cellar (b) (pictures provided by U. SCHINDLER 2004)

Sicht auf die Lysimeteranlage Dedelow (a), Lysimeterkeller (b)

Table 13: Description of the lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz, Germany, DE 4 (according to information provided by B. ZACHOW, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Groß Lüsewitz, Deutschland

Operated by University of Rostock, Institut für Umweltingenieurwesen, Rostock

Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type Investigation of water balance (since 1972) and N leaching under arable land (since 1991)

Altitude above sea level in m 35 Mean annual temperature in °C 8.2 Mean annual precipitation in mm 682


73

Surrounding area (topographic feature) Coastal area of Mecklenburg Parent material Till, locally over fine sand Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, short wave reflex and net radiation, wind velocity, evaporation pan existing

Lysimeter type Weighable monolithic

gravitation lysimeter Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters

Operating since 1972 1970 Number of lysimeters 6 4 Size classification standard standard Exact size 1 m² x 2.5 m, cylindrical 1.7 m² x 1.1 m, cylindrical Building material of container Steel Steel Lysimeter bottom 40 cm gravel filter layer Lysimeter cellar Concrete Weighing equipment Electronic balance - Seepage water determination Gravimetric Gravimetric Investigation of nutrients (balances) NO3; N balances NO3; N balances Measuring interval(s) of substances decade decade Soil fraction(s) Loamy sand Loamy sand Soil type Cambisol Cambisol Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Arable land/field, also grassland Kind of crop/tree Winter wheat, winter rye, maize

for silage

Crop rotation three-year field system (crop rotation); winter wheat, winter rye, maize for silage

Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral mineral Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha according to MINERVA guidelines Fertilization period yearly, as required yearly, as required Use of pesticide yes yes Tensiometers yes no Suction cups yes no TDR yes no Sensors for soil temperature yes no Data logger yes no Used model and goal of investigation MINERVA/HERMES/LEACHN; adjusting parameters,

determination of optimal amounts of fertilizers; water protection Evaporation determination ET = P - D - Delta Water balance determination KW = P - ET

Fig. 40: The lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz, Germany

(photo provided by B. ZACHOW 2004) Die Lysimeteranlage Groß Lüsewitz, Deutschland


74

Table 14: Description of the lysimeter facility Jülich, Germany, DE 23 (according to information provided by T. PÜTZ 2004, questionnaire and http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/ icg-iv/index.php?index=62, 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Jülich, Deutschland

Operated by Institut Agrosphäre, ICG IV, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type Investigation of the fate of anthropogenic substance input in the

environment/in the agro-ecosystem in consideration of the water balance (transport, sorption, reduction, volatilization) according to BBA or OECD guidelines

Altitude above sea level in m 91 Mean annual temperature in °C 9.8 Mean annual precipitation in mm 694 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Wood with large clearings/water meadow Parent material Gravelly medium/coarse sand Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, radiation from sky, net radiation, wind velocity

Lysimeter type Non-weighable mono-

lithic gravitation lysimeter/zero-tension lysimeter

Non-weighable and weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeter

Weighable monolithic lysimeter/zero-tension lysimeter

Operating since 1980 1986 2001 Number of lysimeters 20 30 10 Size classification standard standard large Exact size 0.7 x 0.7 or 1.0 x 1.0 x

1.2 m depth 0.7 x 0.7/1 x 1 x 1.2/1.13 m ∅ x 1.2 m depth

1.6 m ∅ x 2.6 m depth


Stainless steel

Lysimeter bottom Perforated bottom plate combined with a tray filled with graduated gravel/sand

Perforated bottom plate combined with a tray filled with graduated gravel/sand

Vacuum applied to a stainless steel porous bottom plate

Lysimeter cellar no no Ferro-concrete Applied suction no no yes Weighing equipment none 1 lysimeter: load cells Platform scale Seepage water determination

Gravimetric Gravimetric Sinter plates (metal)


standard: pH, DOC, volume; also balances dependent on research question


1-4 weeks

Soil fraction(s) Gravelly loam Soil type Orthic Luvisol and Gleyic Cambisol Soil thickness in m 1.1/2.45 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Kind of crop/tree all crops possible Crop rotation Sugar beet-winter wheat-winter barley Use of fertilizers yes Used fertilizer/organic manure

mineral, straw manuring

Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha/year

dependent on crop, nutrient balance

Fertilization period Autumn/spring Use of pesticide yes Amount of irrigation in mm/year

dependent on experiment

Tensiometer no no yes

http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/�icg-iv/index.php?index=62

http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/�icg-iv/index.php?index=62


75

Suction cups no no yes TDR yes yes yes Sensors for soil temperature yes yes yes Data logger yes yes yes Server, database yes yes yes Further investigations or equipment

Wind tunnel; use of radio-labelled tracers; plot around lysimeter for controlling

Use of radio-labelled tracers; plot around lysimeter for controlling

Use of radio-labelled tracers; air-conditioned cellar; plot around lysimeter for controlling

Malfunctions, problems, their removal or correcting

Bird damage on ripening coarse grains, wire cage reduced light falling in and negatively influenced distribution of precipitation; solution: net tunnel was stretched before ripeness (very efficient)

Remarks Highest grant for use of radio-labelled tracers in field experiments/lysimeter facilities in Germany; semi-automatic sprayer for application of radioactive solutions

Near Jülich, in Merzenhausen and Krauthausen, SHMS are implemented to study the trans-

ferability of lysimeter data on field scale and to use various instruments to gain soil solution

and to compare data; preferential flow under variable boundary conditions and evaporation

are also determined and data are used for modelling. Equipment: 1 field lysimeter; suction

cups and tensiometers are installed at five measuring sites in Merzenhausen. In Krauthausen,

64 multi-level samplers are employed to survey substances of groundwater; permeability of

the sediment is determined as well (see further details on the internet: http://www.fz-

juelich.de/icg/icg-iv/index.php?index=62).

a b

Fig. 41: Lysimeter facility Jülich; non-weighable lysimeters (a), lysimeter cellar (b) (own pictures taken on April 26, 2004)

Lysimeteranlage des Forschungszentrums Jülich; nicht wägbare Lysimeter (a), Lysimeterkeller (b)

http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-iv/index.php?index=62



76

4.4.2.4 Switzerland

Table 15: Descriptions of the lysimeter facilities Zürich and Bern, Switzerland, CH 3, CH 2 (according to information provided by E. SPIESS, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlagen Zürich-Reckenholz und Bern-Liebefeld, Schweiz

Name of facility, location

Lysimeter facility Zürich-Reckenholz

Lysimeter facility Bern-Liebefeld

Operated by

Agroscope FAL Reckenholz, Eidg. Forschungsanstalt für Agrarökologie und Landbau, Zürich


Nutrient leaching (mainly nitrate); water balance

Nutrient leaching (mainly nitrate)

Altitude above sea level in m 443 560 Mean annual temperature in °C 8.5 8.0 Mean annual precipitation in mm 1043 1028 Surrounding area (topographic feature)

Plain Plane surface in a settlement area

Determination of meteorological parameters:


Lysimeter type


Weighable and non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Operating since 1980 1982 inactivated no partly Year of inactivation 17 vessels in 1990 Number of lysimeters 12 64 Size classification large standard Exact size 2 m ∅ x 2.5 m depth, cylindrical 1.13 m ∅, 1.5 m depth, cylindrical Building material of container Plastic Glass fibre reinforced polyester Lysimeter bottom Sand and gravel filter layer Sand and gravel filter layer Lysimeter cellar Concrete Concrete Weighing equipment Weigh bridge 3 vessels weighable Seepage water determination Gravimetric Gravimetric Investigation of nutrients (balances)

N, K, Ca, Mg; also balances: fertilization and extraction by plants

N; also balances: fertilization and extraction by plants


fortnightly monthly

Soil fraction(s) Silt/clayey silt Silt/clayey silt Soil type Alluvial deposits (6 vessels) and

moraine loam Luvisol

Soil thickness in m 2 1.4 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Fields and grassland Kind of crop/tree Extensive meadow (3 vessels); reed

(2 vessels) Crop rotation Maize-winter wheat + catch crops-

potatoes-winter wheat-winter barley-meadow-meadow (7 years)

Maize for silage-winter wheat + catch crops-sugar beet-winter wheat + catch crops-kind of pea-winter barley-meadow (7 years)/42 vessels

Ground cultivation conventional conventional; 6 vessels with direct drilling

Use of fertilizers yes yes Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral organic-mineral Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha/year

6 vessels according to guideline, others reduced N

according to guidelines 2001

Fertilization period March-July March-July


77

Use of pesticide yes yes Sensors for soil temperature yes no Data logger yes no Server, database no yes Used model and goal of investigation

LeachN MODIFFUS to determine diffusive N losses on a meso-scale level; data from lysimeters serves as basic data for the nutrient flow model

Remarks Fertilization according to guidelines for arable farming and fodder growing 2001

a b

Fig. 42: Lysimeter in Zürich-Reckenholz (a), facility in Bern-Liebefeld (b) (from lysireckenholz.pdf and lysiliebefeld.pdf, n.d.)

Lysimeter in Zürich-Reckenholz (a), Anlage in Bern-Liebefeld (b) Six non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters are used at a facility in Ettenhausen,

CH 2 , for the measurement of nitrate leaching; to study soil salinization processes and

pesticide transport in the unsaturated zone, six weighable/non-weighable backfilled lysimeters

exist in Lausanne, CH 1 , under bare soil (T. ANKEN, P. HÖHENER, questionnaires 2004).

4.4.2.5 Austria

Table 16: Description of the lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf, Austria, AT 11 (according to information provided by P. CEPUDER, questionnaire 2004, visit in August 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Groß-Enzersdorf, Österreich

Operated by Department für Wasser - Atmosphäre - Umwelt, Institut für Hydraulik und Landeskulturelle Wasserwirtschaft, Universität für Bodenkultur, Wien


to determine para-meters (evaporation and seepage water)

to determine variability of seepage water amounts and concentration

to determine seepage water amounts

Altitude above sea level in m 156 Mean annual temperature in °C

10.0


510


Terrace (Marchfeld/Praterterrasse)

Parent material Gravel


78

Determination of meteo-rological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, wind velocity, net radiation, evaporation pan existing; on weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter: short wave reflex radiation

Lysimeter/SWS type Weighable

backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Seepage water sampler Non-weighable monolithic field lysimeter

Operating since 1982 2003 2003 Number of lysimeters 2 6 1 Size classification large small/standard standard Exact size 2 m ∅ x 2.5 m depth 0.3/0.4/1.05 m ∅ x 0.3-1 m

depth 1.3 m ∅ x 1.5 m depth


Polyester PVC Steel

Lysimeter bottom hemispherical plane Lysimeter cellar Concrete Suction-controlled lysimeter no yes/no yes/no Weighing equipment Balance, precision 0.1

mm - -

Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Gravimetric; outlet, suction plates, suction cups

Gravimetric; outlet, suction cups


NO3; N balances


weekly

Soil fraction(s) Sandy loam Soil type Chernozem Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field

(fallow) and grassland Arable land/field Arable land/field

Crop rotation different Ground cultivation manually Used fertilizer/manure mineral Use of pesticide yes Irrigation yes Suction cups no yes yes Suction plates no yes no TDR yes yes yes Sensors for soil temperature yes yes yes Data logger yes yes yes Other details (data formats etc.)

Neutron probe 6 suction cups in different depths

Remarks All lysimeters and SWS installed on the BOKU trial area (20 ha); soil was taken from the surrounding area and is represen-tative for the March-feld

6 small lysimeters, 1 PVC SWS + outlet, in different depths; soil was taken from the surrounding area

Soil monolithically excavated in Fuchsen-bigl (Marchfeld)

In the Tulln Basin (AT 6 ), six seepage water samplers and a soil hydrology measuring site

were implemented in cooperation with the government of Lower Austria in 1992 to measure

seepage water amounts (CEPUDER, 2002 and questionnaire 2004; paper Landwirtschaft und

Grundwasserschutz 2003, provided by M. TSCHULIK, e-mail 2004).


79

a b

Fig. 43: Lysimeters and meteorological station (a), weighing system in cellar (b) Groß-Enzersdorf (own pictures taken on August 10, 2004)

Lysimeter und Wetterstation (a), Wägesystem im Lysimeterkeller (b) Groß-Enzersdorf

Table 17: Description of the lysimeter facility Hirschstetten/Wien, Austria, AT 9 (according to information provided by J. HÖSCH, questionnaire 2004, AGES (n.d.), DANNEBERG and BAUMGARTEN 2001, and visit in August 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Hirschstetten/Wien, Österreich

Operated by Österreichische Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit GmbH, Wien


to get a better understanding of the influence of agricultural measures on nutrient and pesticide fluxes and their effects on soil and groundwater; to determine filter properties of different soil types and to assess how effective simulation models are

Altitude above sea level in m 160 Mean annual temperature in °C 10.2 Mean annual precipitation in mm 520 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Terrace (Praterterrasse) Parent material Sediment Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, wind velocity; 1 lysimeter: short wave reflex radiation

Lysimeter type Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter Operating since 1995 Number of lysimeters 18 Size classification large Exact size 3 m² x 1.5 m depth, cylindrical Building material of container Chrome-nickel steel (Cr/Ni : 18/9) Lysimeter bottom 0.5 m gravel filter layer Lysimeter cellar Concrete Seepage water determination Outlet, tip balance and collection vessel Investigation of nutrients (balances) NO3, PO4, Cl, SO4, K, Na, Ca, Mg, partly heavy metals; N, P, K

balances Measuring interval(s) of substances fortnightly; soil solutions monthly


80

Soil fraction(s) Sandy silt Soil type Chernozem (3 types) Soil thickness in m 2 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Kind of crop/tree Coarse grains, potato, maize, catch crops Crop rotation Crop rotation dependent on purpose, catch-crop growing Ground cultivation conventional Use of fertilizers yes Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral; P and K according to guidelines Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha/year N crop dependent, max. 150 kg Fertilization period P and K in autumn, N in spring Use of pesticide yes Amount of irrigation in mm/year if required, 0-130 mm Tensiometers yes Gypsum blocks yes Suction cups yes TDR yes Sensors for soil temperature yes Data logger yes Server, database yes Other details (data formats etc.) Gypsum blocks partly installed; all sensors in different depths of

lysimeter vessel; ORACLE database Used model and goal of investigation SIMWASER (determination of soil water balance), STOTRASIM

(determination of nutrient transport) Malfunctions, problems, their removal or correcting

In dry areas tensiometer usage is limited; third soil type: heavy swelling and shrinkage; little amount of seepage water at well-grounded soil types

Remarks 3 soil types are typical for the climatic region (Marchfeld) and differ in soil depth, permeability and texture; facility located in the same climatic region as the soil excavation locations (Fuchsenbigl and Orth/Donau)

a b

Fig. 44: Lysimeter facility Hirschstetten: part of the whole facility (a), lysimeter with measurement of short wave reflex radiation (b)

(own pictures taken on August 10, 2004) Lysimeteranlage Hirschstetten: Teil der gesamten Anlage (a), Messung der kurzwelligen

Reflexstrahlung an der Lysimeteroberfläche (b)


81

Table 18: Description of the lysimeter facility Seibersdorf, Austria, AT 13 (according to information provided by B. WIMMER, questionnaire 2004, KRENN 2001, Austrian Research Centres (n.d.) and visit in August 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Seibersdorf, Österreich

Operated by ARC Seibersdorf research GmbH, Environmental Research/Geschäftsfeld Umweltforschung


Fate of pesticides Studies on contaminated soil/polluted areas


Plain

Parent material Gravel/Tertiary, Quarternary sediments Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, short wave reflex and net radiation, wind velocity

Lysimeter type Non-weighable and weighable

monolithic gravitation lysimeter Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Operating since 1996 2001 Number of lysimeters 18 1 Size classification standard large Exact size 1 m² x 1 m depth, cylindrical Building material of container Stainless steel Epoxy resin coated concrete Lysimeter bottom Filter layer (quartz sand) Filter layer (quartz sand) Lysimeter cellar none Concrete Weighing equipment only 1 lysimeter weighable

(tip balance)

Seepage water determination Outlet Outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances)

different pollutants and parameters; balances of pollutants (e.g. pesti-cides, 14C)

parameters relevant for conta-minated areas, gas composition; ion and heavy metal balances


weekly to monthly monthly

Soil fraction(s) Silty loam, sand Loamy sand Soil type Calcic Chernozem (9), Eutric

Regosol (9 vessels) Covering layer: loamy sand and compost (mixed)

Soil thickness in m 1 2.8 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Grassland Kind of crop/tree Wheat, barley, catch crops Lucerne, poplar (2004) Crop rotation Crop rotation, catch-crop growing Ground cultivation manually Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral none Use of pesticide yes no Amount of irrigation in mm/year partly, project dependent ca. 300 mm Tensiometers yes no Gypsum blocks yes yes Suction cups yes yes TDR yes no Sensors for soil temperature yes yes Data logger yes yes Server, database yes yes Other details (data formats etc.) 2 reference lysimeters with all

sensors ACCESS

Used model and goal of investigation

HYDRUS 2D, modelling of a tracer trial, inverse modelling (deter-


82

mination of soil hydrology parameters)

Further investigations or equipment

14C labelling of pollutants; crane for lifting out steel cylinders; groundwater conditions can be simulated

Gas composition (weekly), yield, biomass

Evaporation determination PENMAN-MONTEITH Water balance determination yes Remarks Monoliths/Chernozem filled in

Fuchsenbigl, sands taken from the former flood plain (Marchfeld/ agricultural sites, same climatic region as lysimeter facility)

Lysimeter has 4 compartments; 3 variants of residential waste; project until 2005

a b

Fig. 45: Crane facility and monolithic gravitation lysimeters (a), lysimeter with four compartments and three variants of residential waste (b) in Seibersdorf

(own pictures taken on August 12, 2004); Krananlage und monolithische Schwerkraftlysimeter (a), Lysimeter mit vier Kammern und drei Hausmüllvarianten (b)

Twelve non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters (standard size) for the investigation

of the fate of radioisotopes were inactivated in 2003 due to disposal reasons.

Table 19: Description of the lysimeter facility Wagna, Austria, AT 27 (according to FANK 1999, FANK, v. UNOLD in KLOTZ 2004 and details collected during my internship) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Wagna, Österreich

Name of facility, location Lysimeter facility Wagna Lysimeter facility Wagna “new”

Operated by JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH, WaterResourcesManagement, Graz


Research on water movement and nutrient transport in the unsaturated zone under arable land with natural cultivation; hydrochemical analyses; isotopes studies; to calibrate water and nutrient transport models

Altitude above sea level in m Mean annual temperature in °C 8.8 Mean annual precipitation in mm 914 Surrounding area (topographic feature)

Terrace (Würm), plain

Parent material Gravel, Quarternary deposits Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, short wave reflex radiation, wind direction


83

Lysimeter type Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Weighable monolithic field lysimeter/soil hydrology measuring site

Operating since 1991 2004 Number of lysimeters 2 2 Size classification standard standard Exact size 1 m² x 1.5 m depth, square 1 m² x 2 m depth, cylindrical Filling method disturbed/soil filled in undisturbed/monolithic Building material of container PVC Stainless steel; mobile ring on top Lysimeter bottom Filter gravel layer with suction cups Lysimeter cellar Concrete suction-controlled lysimeter no yes Weighing equipment Balances installed under lysimeters in

field; precision 0.05 mm Seepage water determination Continuously, digital: tip balances

at outlets (0.2 mm precision) Suction cups; Weighing


N, NO3 balances


Soil fraction(s) Loamy sand Soil type Dystric Cambisol Soil thickness in m 0.7/1.1 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Kind of crop/tree Maize, winter corn, rape Crop rotation Single-crop farming with complete fallow (maize); crop rotation (4 breaks)

with catch crops Ground cultivation Organic and conventional culti-

vation, manually on lysimeters Organic and conventional cultivation, mechanized

Used fertilizer/manure Liquid manure Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha 120-180 kg NH4-N Fertilization period Spring, autumn Tensiometers no yes Gypsum blocks no yes Suction cups no yes TDR no yes Sensors for soil temperature no yes Data logger yes yes Server, database yes yes Other details (data formats etc) Probes installed in lysimeter vessels

and in undisturbed soil profile in 4 depths; in vessel: also geophysical probes

Used model and goal of investigation

SIMWASER (determination of soil water balance), STOTRASIM (determination of nutrient transport)


Groundwater gauge, groundwater temperature at 5 locations, EC at one measuring point; investigation of groundwater quality

Evaporation determination PENMAN (ETp), RENGER & WESSOLEK (ETa) Water balance determination

Remarks Facility situated on trial area of LFI/Land Steiermark (Styrian government)


84

In 1991, 5 seepage water samplers (according to STENITZER) were installed as well; two of

them are still in use. The non-weighable monolithic field lysimeters (square) were removed

in the course of the reconstruction of the facility in 2004.

a b

Fig. 46: Fields, new lysimeter vessel and cellar entrance of the facility Wagna at the beginning of reconstruction (a), field lysimeter installed and catch crops growing (b)

(own pictures taken on July 26 and August 22, 2004) Felder, neues Lysimetergefäß und Kellereingang der Anlage Wagna am Beginn des Umbaus der

Anlage (a), eingebauter Feldlysimeter und Zwischenfrüchte (b)

4.4.2.6 Hungary

Table 20: Descriptions of the lysimeter facilities Karcag and Szarvas, Hungary, HU 2, HU 1 (according to information provided by J. ZSEMBELI and I. ZIMA SZALOKI, questionnaires 2004) Beschreibungen der Lysimeteranlagen Karcag und Szarvas, Ungarn

Name of facility, location Lysimeter facility Karcag

Lysimeter facility Szarvas

Operated by Karcag Research Institute of CAS University of Debrecen, Karcag

Research Institute for Fisheries, Aqua-culture and Irrigation, Szarvas


Soil reclamation research

Soil cultivation research

to examine water and nutrient balances; utilisation in different water and nutrient supply treatments

Altitude above sea level in m 89 95 Mean annual temperature in °C 10.4 10.7 Mean annual precipitation in mm

500 500


Plain Plain

Parent material Infusion loess Sediment Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, wind velocity, evaporation pan existing

Temperature, precipi-tation, relative humi-dity, atmospheric pressure, wind velocity, “A” pan existing


85

Lysimeter type Non-weighable monolithic and filled zero-tension lysimeter


Non-weighable back-filled gravitation lysimeter

Operating since 1983/1984 1992/1993 1970 Number of lysimeters 42 6 320 Size classification standard large standard Exact size 0.73 m² x 2 m depth 2 m² x 1 m depth 1 x 1 x 1 m Building material of container Plastic Plastic Aluminium Lysimeter bottom Gravel Gravel Aluminium Lysimeter cellar Concrete Plastic Concrete Weighing equipment no Electronic load cells no Seepage water determination Gravimetric Gravimetric Gravimetric Investigation of nutrients (balances)

N, P, K balances no N, P, K balances


biweekly when infiltration occurs

Soil fraction(s) Clay Clay loam Soil type Meadow Solonetz Meadow Chernozem Meadow Chernozem Soil thickness in m 1.9 1.85 0.9 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field Arable land/field Arable land/field Kind of crop/tree also vegetables Crop rotation Non-fixed rotation Rotation of 7 years Crop rotation Ground cultivation conventional reduced tillage traditional Used fertilizer/organic manure Artificial fertilizer Artificial fertilizer Fertilizer; N, P, K in

ration 2:1:1 Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha/year

subject of crop subject of crop 4 different levels (100-400 kg)

Fertilization period split application ad hoc annually Use of pesticide no no yes Amount of irrigation in mm/year

subject of crop and weather

subject of crop and weather

4 different levels

Tensiometers no no yes Sensors for soil temperature yes yes no Server, database no no yes Further investigations or equipment

phenological observa-tions (e.g. top of plant)

Water balance determination E = P + I – D + ∆W ET = P + I +/- Smdiff - Inf; Smdiff = soil moisture difference between spring/autumn;

a b

Fig. 47: Lysimeter facilities Karcag (a) and Szarvas (b) (photos provided by J. ZSEMBELI, I. ZIMA SZALOKI); Lysimeteranlagen Karcag (a) und Szarvas (b)


86

4.4.2.7 Spain

Table 21: Description of the lysimeter station Mollerussa EEL fields (Lleida), Spain, ES 1 (according to information provided by J. GIRONA I GOMIS, e-mail 2004 and paper GIRONA et al., n.d.) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Mollerussa EEL fields (Lleida), Spanien

Operated by Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries (IRTA), Cap de l'Àrea de Tecnologia Frutícola, Centre UdL-IRTA

Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type to determine orchard water requirements for irrigation scheduling and evapotranspiration of apple and pear trees


Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, wind velocity

Lysimeter type Weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter Operating since 1999? Number of lysimeters 2 Size classification large Exact size 9.5 m² x 1.7 m depth Filling method disturbed/soil filled in Lysimeter cellar Concrete Weighing equipment 4 load cells (capacity: 15 t each) Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Vegetation/cultivation Orchard Kind of crop/tree Apple and pear trees Amount of irrigation in mm/year depending on evapotranspiration Data logger yes Other details (data formats etc.) Load cells are connected to a logger Further investigations or equipment Irrigation recipients (100 l each): daily refilled at night with a similar

amount of water lost the day before, water is again used to irrigate the lysimeter; automated weather station

Evaporation determination (formula) PENMAN-MONTEITH (Eto) Water balance determination crop coefficients values (Kc) determined as: Kc = ETc/Eto; Etc

obtained directly from lysimeters Other analyses or formulas used Light interception determined weekly (ceptometer) Remarks Each lysimeter is located in the centre of a plot (apples and pears).

Sensitivity of load cells is 0.5 kg which allows us to detect water consumption of 0.053 mm.

a b

Fig. 48: Arrangement of lysimeters and weather station Lleida (a), lysimeter transversal section showing container, irrigation system, load cells and access to accessible zone (b)

(sketches from GIRONA et al., n.d.); Aufteilung der Lysimeter und Wetterstation Lleida (a), Lysimeterquerschnitt: Gefäß, Bewässerungssystem, Wägezellen und begehbarer Schacht (b)

B

Pear Lysimeter Apple Lysimeter

Weather station


87

4.4.2.8 Italy

According to FRANCAVIGLIA and CAPRI, n.d. (pdf), a lysimeter facility was built in Central

Italy, north of Rome, IT 4 , in 1987 to assess risk of groundwater contamination from

some herbicides commonly used in the Mediterranean area and to gain data for a simulation

model. Current data was not available about this facility. Different lysimeter types are used at

the facility in Udine, IT 2 , to investigate N leaching losses under maize and soya, to

determine water regime of orchards and to determine different variants of soil water supply

(according to MURER, EDER, and BÖHM, excursion report AG Lysimeter 1997).

4.4.3 Grassland (Lowland)

4.4.3.1 Finland

Table 22: Description of lysimeter facility Jokioinen, Finland, FI 1 (according to information provided by R. LEMOLA, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Jokioinen, Finnland

Operated by MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Jokioinen Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type to study the effect of different agricultural management to

nutrient leaching (especially nitrogen) Mean annual temperature in °C between 4-5 Mean annual precipitation in mm 644 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Terrace Determination of meteorological parameters

Precipitation

Lysimeter type Non-weighable monolithic

lysimeter Non-weighable backfilled lysimeter

Operating since 1981 1981 Number of lysimeters 8 88 Size classification standard Exact size 0.9 m ∅ x 1.7 m depth Building material of container Glass fibre reinforced plastic Lysimeter bottom Glass fibre reinforced plastic; 0.6 m filter sand Lysimeter cellar Concrete Suction-controlled lysimeter yes Seepage water determination Outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances) tot-N, NO3-N, NH4-N, Kok-P, PO4-P, Cl-, total solids; balances not

prepared but possible Measuring interval(s) of substances 10-15 samples annually Soil fraction(s) Clay, sand, loam or Carex peat Soil thickness in m 1.1 Vegetation/cultivation Variable, depends on research projects Irrigation yes Amount of irrigation in mm/year possible TDR yes


88

Sensors for soil temperature yes Other details (data formats etc.) manual Further investigations or equipment Meteorological data of Meteorological observatory of Jokioinen is

available Remarks Use of pesticide: if necessary MTT Agrifood Research Finland also operates four leaching fields in Jokioinen, Toholampi,

Maaninka and Lintupaju to collect surface and drainage water (R. LEMOLA, e-mail 2004).

Fig. 49: Facility in Jokioinen with non-weighable monolithic and backfilled lysimeters

(picture provided by R. LEMOLA 2004) Anlage in Jokioinen mit nicht wägbaren monolithischen und gestört befüllten Lysimetern

4.4.3.2 Ireland

Table 23: Description of the lysimeter facility Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Ireland, IE 1 (according to information provided by K. RICHARDS, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Irland

Operated by Teagasc, Johnstown Castle, Wexford Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type

Cut grass on N leaching

Examine effect of tillage on leaching

Grazed grass on N leaching

Mean annual precipitation in mm 900 Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, partly radiation from sky, evaporation pan existing


monolithic gravitation lysimeter

Non-weighable backfilled lysimeter

Non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeter

Operating since 1992 1982 2004 Inactivated in - 2004? - Number of lysimeters 50 24 75 Size classification small small small Exact size 0.3 x 0.3 x 0.9 m 0.45 m ∅ x 0.9 m depth 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.95 m Building material of container Fibre glass Concrete HDPE high density

polyethylene Lysimeter bottom Fibre glass HDPE Seepage water determination Gravimetric; drain

pipe Gravimetric; drain pipes

Gravimetric; drain pipe

Investigation of nutrients NO3-N, NH4-N, K, Cl; NO3-N, NH4-N NO3-N, NH4-N, P,


89

(balances) N inputs and N outputs including N2O balances

DOC, Cl, K, Na, Ca, Mg; N inputs and N outputs including N2O balances


monthly weekly to fortnightly

Soil fraction(s) Varying from clay to sandy loams

Coarse loam over fine loam

Varying from clay to sandy loams

Soil type 5 types (Eutric Dystrochrept, Orthic Typudalf)

Brown soil 3 types

Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Arable land/field and Fallow

Grassland

Kind of crop/tree Herbage Barley Herbage Use of fertilizers yes/no yes yes/no Used fertilizer/organic manure Fertilizer and manure

experiments Fertilizer and urine

Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha up to 350 kg up to 350 kg N/ha plus ~400 kg as urine

Fertilization period February to September February to September Use of pesticide no yes no Amount of irrigation in mm/year - variable - Tensiometers yes no no Gypsum blocks yes no no TDR no no yes Other details (data formats etc) manually collected

and stored in Excel Considering installing

TDR sensors Used model and goal of investigation

Currently no models being used

trying to develop a model on nitrate leaching from grazing under simulated and actual grazing


N2O emissions using chambers; 6 hydrologically isolated fields with subsurface flow collection at 1 m below ground; we also measure all overland flow

Evaporation determination FAO PENMAN-MONTEITH Water balance determination Drainage = rainfall - actual evapotranspiration

a b

Fig. 50: New monolithic gravitation lysimeters at the facility Johnstown Castle (a and b) (pictures provided by K. RICHARDS 2004)

Neue monolithische Schwerkraftlysimeter der Anlage Johnstown Castle (a und b)


90

4.4.3.3 United Kingdom

Table 24: Description of the lysimeter facility North Wyke, United Kingdom, UK 7 (according to information provided by P. BUTLER, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage North Wyke, Vereinigtes Königreich

Operated by Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research (IGER), North Wyke


to provide information on the vertical transport of water/ nutrients/pathogens through 4 different soil types; SWS: to study percolation of 1 m² blocks; large lysimeters: to study runoff of 30 m² plots

Altitude above sea level in m 180 Mean annual temperature in °C 9.5 Mean annual precipitation in mm

1300


Sloping grassland


Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind velocity, evaporation pan existing

Lysimeter/SWS type Non-weighable monolithic

gravitation lysimeter Seepage water sampler

Large lysimeter/test area (undisturbed)

Operating since 1984 2002 1998 Number of lysimeters 16 24 24 Size classification standard standard large Exact size 0.5 m² x 1.35 m, cylindrical 1 x 1 x 0.3 m 10 x 3 x 0.3 m Building material of container Fibre glass? Lysimeter bottom Gravel Clay Clay Lysimeter cellar Concrete no no Seepage water determination Drains into large vessels Drain cut into one

side French drains to tipping buckets


Experiments looking at P in the waters and pathogens following slurry; P balances

N N and P, etc.; P balances


Variety according to experiment

Soil fraction(s) Sandy clay loam Soil type 4 x: Tedburn, Radyr,

Newport, Frilsham Hallsworth series Hallsworth series

Soil thickness in m 1.35 0.3 0.3 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Use of fertilizers yes Used fertilizer/organic manure Slurry Triple super phosphate,

slurry Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha Variable according to

experiment Variable according to

experiment Fertilization period According to experiment According to

experiment Data logger no no yes Other details (data formats etc.) Data stored with indivi-

duals according to experiment

Collection of flow data

Water balance determination yes yes According to BUTLER, this facility also operates several overland and drained flow pathways

with drains into weirs collecting surface water and drain flows or drains into tipping buckets.


91

4.4.3.4 Belgium

Table 25: Description of the lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, BE 1 (according to information provided by M. JAVAUX, questionnaire 2004 and Web sites of UCL Unité de génie rural, 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgien

Operated by Université catholique de Louvain, Department of environmental sciences and land use planning, Agricultural Engineering Unit, Louvain


Quantitative hydro-logical measure-ments, reference evapotranspiration measurements

studying solute and water transport under controlled boundary conditions on an undisturbed soil


Plateau



Lysimeter type Weighable backfilled

gravitation lysimeter Non-weighable monolithic lysimeter (laboratory)

Non-weighable monolithic lysimeter (laboratory)

Operating since 1996 (1975) 1999 2002 Number of lysimeters 1 3 3 Size classification standard standard standard Exact size 1.13 m ∅ x 1.8 m

depth, cylindrical 0.77 m ∅ x 1 m depth, cylindrical

0.77 m ∅ x 1 m depth, cylindrical

Building material of container Polyester Lysimeter bottom Polyester/steel Lysimeter cellar Concrete Suction-controlled lysimeter no yes yes Weighing equipment Balance with automatic

equilibrium device - -

Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Suction cups, outlet Suction cups, outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances)

no; no balances continuous EC/pH meter; no balances

continuous EC/pH meter; no balances

Parent material Loess deposit on top of Tertiary sediment

Loess Quarternary sandy sediment

Soil fraction(s) Loam Loam/Sand Sand Soil type Haplic Luvisol Haplic Luvisol Gleyic-Plaggic

Anthrosol (from Bocholt)

Soil thickness in m 1.8 1.05 1 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Fallow/uncultivated Fallow/uncultivated Tensiometers no yes yes Suction cups no yes yes TDR no yes yes Sensors for soil temperature no yes yes Data logger yes yes yes Server, database no yes yes Used model and goal of investigation

Basic field hydrological balance model, reference evapotrans-

Analytic transport model, numerical water flow models


92

piration according to FAO guidelines


Rainfall simulator with accurate pumps to ensure constant and uniform simulated rainfall events

Evaporation determination FAO reference Malfunctions, problems, their removal or correcting

Data set is not conti-nuous. University is not going to maintain monitoring device long-term; data are of good quality when PhD students are using them (and hence follow the monitoring).

Remarks Monoliths are placed and equipped within the laboratory under controlled boundary conditions

Two non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters in the lab containing Bruxellian sand/

sediment were inactivated in 2003 (M. JAVAUX, questionnaire 2004) and are not listed above.

Fig. 51: Monoliths in the laboratory (Louvain)

(from http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projets/Javaux/index.htm, 2004) Monolithe im Labor (Louvain)

4.4.3.5 Germany

Table 26: Description of the lysimeter facility Paulinenaue, Germany, DE 13 (according to information provided by A. BEHRENDT, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Paulinenaue, Deutschland

Operated by ZALF Research Centre for Agriculture Paulinenaue ZALF-Forschungsstation für Landwirtschaft Paulinenaue

Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type Research on nutrient leaching and processes (balances); evapo-transpiration and formation of yield on different hydromorphic soils cultivating different kinds of grasses, forage plants, coarse grains, rape, reed, sedges, medicinal and spice plants

Altitude above sea level in m 30.5 Mean annual temperature in °C 9.0 Mean annual precipitation in mm 513 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Plain, lowmoor Parent material Sand (fine/medium) Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, wind velocity, evaporation pan existing

http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projets/Javaux/index.htm


93

Lysimeter type Non-weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeter Operating since 1968 Number of lysimeters 103 Size classification standard Exact size 1 m², 1.5 m depth, cylindrical Building material of container Steel Lysimeter cellar Stone, steel, concrete Groundwater contact yes Groundwater level variable yes/no Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances) N, P, K, Ca - also balances; pH Measuring interval(s) of substances monthly Soil fraction(s) Sand, loamy sand, sandy loam, sandy clay Soil type Eutric Histosol, Fluvisol, Gleysol and Planosol Soil thickness in m 1.5 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland, also arable land Kind of crop/tree Forage grasses, reed, sedges Ground cultivation cutting Use of fertilizers yes/no Used fertilizer/organic manure KAS, TSP, Kamex, feces of fallow-deer Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha variable Fertilization period Spring; N to every growth Data logger yes Further investigations or equipment Gas measurement Evaporation determination different ones Water balance determination ET = N + Z - A

4.4.4 Grassland (Mountain Areas in Austria)

Table 27: Description of the lysimeter facility Gumpenstein, Irdning, Austria, AT 22 (according to information provided by G. EDER and information in BAL 1991-2003) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Gumpenstein, Irdning, Österreich

Operated by Bundesanstalt für alpenländische Landwirtschaft (BAL) Gumpenstein, Irdning


Nutrient leaching of fertilized and non fertilized grassland in an alpine area, nutrient leaching of arable land in and alpine area

Altitude above sea level in m 700 Mean annual temperature in °C 6.8 Mean annual precipitation in mm 1013 Determination of meteorological parameters:

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, global radiation, wind velocity, short wave reflex radiation, sky and net radiation, evaporation pan existing


Glacial terrace Glacial terrace Glacial terrace/Slope (5%)

Parent material Glacial deposits, quartz phyllite

Glacial deposits, quartz phyllite

Glacial deposits, quartz phyllite

Lysimeter/SWS type Non-weighable back-

filled gravitation lysimeter

Seepage water sampler (according to STENITZER)

Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Operating since 1967 1992/1994 1991/1992 Number of lysimeters 12 5 9


94

Size classification large small standard Exact size 1.2 x 1.2 x 0.5/1.0/1.5 m

depth, square 0.2 ∅, 0.25 m height/in 1 m depth

1 m² x 1 m depth, square


Concrete stones Polyethylene cylinder Concrete stone

Lysimeter bottom Gravel (Danube gravel), steel funnel

Bottom plate (poly-ethylene), silicone sealing

Concrete funnel, light gradient, gravel (Danube gravel)

Lysimeter cellar Concrete stones no no Suction-controlled lysimeter

no yes no


Gravimetric, plastic collection vessels

Suction pipe to collection vessel, vacuum membrane system

Gravimetric, outlet (metal pipes into plastic collection boxes, seepage water is weighed)


N, NH4, NO3, NO2, P, Na, Ka, Ca, Mg, Norg; also balances

N, NH4, NO3, NO2, P, Na, Ka, Ca, Mg, Norg; also balances

NO2, NO3, NH4; also balances


weekly

Soil fraction(s) Loamy sand, sandy loam Sandy silt Sandy silt Soil type Rendzina (Gössl),

Dystric Cambisol (Gumpenstein)

Dystric Cambisol (Gumpenstein)

Dystric Cambisol with glaciofluvial deposits

Soil thickness in m 0.5-1.5 1 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Grassland and arable land Grassland and arable land Kind of crop/tree Different variants Barley Crop rotation Field trial at the same

time Different grassland variants, same soil and same cultivation

Ground cultivation manually Use of fertilizers yes/no yes yes Used fertilizer/manure Liquid and stable manure (field) Amount of fertilizer(s) in kg/ha/year

as required

Fertilization period Spring (maize), autumn (rye) Tensiometers no yes no Suction plates no yes no Other details (data formats etc.)

Tension control does not work, therefore tension not variable

Further investigations Phenological observations, root mass determination, soil aggregate determination Evaporation determination

PENMAN-MONTEITH

Malfunctions/problems Problems with sealing, data since 1995

Remarks 2 x 6 lysimeters in a row

Five non-weighable monolithic field lysimeters of standard size (see figure 52 b) were

implemented at this facility in 1999/2000 to compare seepage water amounts and nutrient

leaching of gravitation lysimeters, seepage water samplers and monoliths. On the

lysimeters—equipped with tensiometers, TDR probes and sensors for soil temperature—

maize for silage, winter rye, and a grass-clover mixture are grown. One problem occurred at


95

the time of melting of snow when seepage water infiltrated the monoliths through gaps

(personal information by G. EDER and A. BOHNER, visit August 2004).

a b

Fig. 52: Window in a backfilled gravitation lysimeter (a), non-weighable monolithic field lysimeter (b) in Gumpenstein

(own pictures taken on August 11, 2004); Fenster an einem befüllten Schwerkraftlysimeter (a), nicht wägbarer monolithischer Feldlysimeter (b) in Gumpenstein

The BAL Gumpenstein operates six non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters and a

soil hydrology measuring site in Winklhof, Oberalm near Hallein, AT 18 . They use

various fertilizing and cultivation methods to determine leaching losses of crop rotation in an

area of heavy precipitation with about 1400 mm/year (W. HEIN, questionnaire 2004 and

MURER 2001).

Four weighable backfilled lysimeters were implemented in 2000 at the Tyrolean Kaser-

stattalm, alpine region Stubaital, AT 21 , to analyze the changes of evapotranspiration in

mountain grassland areas with different types of land use or areas which have been abandoned

(NEWESELY in BAL 2001, pp 75-78 and NEWESELY et al. in BAL 2004, pp 57-62).


96

4.4.5 Forests (Lowland and Mountain Areas)

4.4.5.1 Germany

Table 28: Description of the lysimeter facility Colbitz (Magdeburg), Germany, DE 12 (according to questionnaires 1997 provided by R. MEISSNER) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Colbitz (Magdeburg), Deutschland

Operated by UFZ-Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle, Sektion Bodenforschung


Studies on water balance of a growing common pine population, determination of seepage water and precipitation quality

Values of groundwater recharge and evaporation for heathland with different vegetation are determined

Altitude above sea level in m 67 72 Mean annual precipitation in mm 560 560 Surrounding area Growing common pine population Clearing, surrounded by white

birches and shrubs Determination of meteorological parameters

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, percentage of possible sunshine, wind velocity

Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, percentage of possible sunshine, wind velocity, atmospheric input

Lysimeter type Large lysimeter/test area Weighable monolithic

gravitation lysimeter Operating since 1973 1968 Number of lysimeters 1 12 Size classification large standard Exact size 29.26 m ∅, 4 m height, cylindrical 1.14 ∅, 2.05 m height, cylindrical Building material of container Prestressed concrete Steel Lysimeter bottom Drain pipes, 2 % gradient to a

percolation pit (concrete); gravel filter layer

Gradient; perforated steel bottom, gravel filter layer (1.5 cm)

Lysimeter cellar no Ferro-concrete Weighing equipment - Balance (1 for 2 lysimeters); load

cells Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet, percolation pit

(in the middle of lysimeter), tip balance

Gravimetric; outlet into lysimeter cellar (automatically); tip balance


K, Na, Mg, Ca, NH4, Al; Cl, SO4, NO3, PO, EC, pH, total and alkaline hardness; ion and water balance

K, Na, Mg, Ca, NH4, Al; Cl, SO4, NO3, PO, EC, pH, total and alkaline hardness; ion and water balance

Measuring interval(s) of substances daily to monthly continuously Soil fraction(s) Gravelly sand Sand (fmS-cS) Soil type Cambisol, Luvisol Vegetation/cultivation Wood/forest Grassland Kind of crop/tree Common pine/permanent Description of vegetation planted in 1973, thinned out in 1982

and 1996 Vegetation is different on lysimeters: wood small reid, wood meadow grass, wavy hair grass, blackberry, ling

Tensiometers yes Suction cups yes Data logger yes yes


97

Server, database yes Other details (data formats etc.) DOS files; sensors in 10, 30, 60 and

100, 200 and 300 cm depth DOS files


2 measuring fields of the University of Göttingen, Institut für Bodenkunde und Waldernährung; analysis of wood quality and yield; stem run-off

Population valuation

Evaporation determination manually (through weighing) Malfunctions, problems, their removal or correcting

After long use: leaky lysimeter bottom (probably due to moisture influence), reconstructing bottom (PE)

Remarks Property of Staatliches Umweltamt für Umweltschutz Magdeburg, 39015 Magdeburg

Fig. 53: Scheme of the large lysimeter in Colbitz

(according to an enclosed sketch to a questionnaire 1997 provided by R. MEISSNER, modified) Schema des Großlysimeters in Colbitz

Table 29: Description of the lysimeter station St. Arnold/Rheine, Germany, DE 10 (according to SCHROEDER 1984 and http://www.uni-muenster.de/Biologie.Pflanzenoekologie/staff/ armbruester.html, 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeterstation St. Arnold/Rheine, Deutschland

Operated by Staatliches Umweltamt Münster Purpose of this facility/lysimeter type

to determine and to compare hydrological parameters (groundwater recharge, evapotranspiration) and solute budgets/nitrogen turnover in different habitats


Temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, global radiation, wind velocity, percentage of possible sunshine

Lysimeter type Large lysimeter/test area (backfilled) Operating since 1965 Number of lysimeters 3 Size classification large

http://www.uni-muenster.de/Biologie.Pflanzenoekologie/staff/�armbruester.html

http://www.uni-muenster.de/Biologie.Pflanzenoekologie/staff/�armbruester.html


98

Exact size 20 x 20 x 3.5 m, square Building material of container Foundation: ferro-concrete; walls put up Lysimeter cellar yes Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Investigation of nutrients (balances) Ca, Ka, Mg, NO3, NO2, NH4, SO4

2, P, PB, Cd, Zn; N balance Soil fraction(s) Gravelly, sandy material Vegetation/cultivation Wood/forest and grassland Kind of crop/tree Deciduous forest (Quercus robur, Fagus silvatica) and coniferous

forest (Pinus strobus) Further investigations or equipment Stem run-off; chemical analysis of water samples Evaporation determination yes Water balance determination yes

Fig. 54: Cross-section of a large lysimeter in St. Arnold with measuring pit

(according to DVWK 1980, p 12, modified) Querschnitt durch ein Großlysimeter in St. Arnold mit Messschacht

4.4.5.2 Austria

Detailed flux investigations—input of atmospheric deposition, internal fluxes (nitrogen

cycle), output by seepage water and N2O losses—, impact of N on groundwater quality and 15N tracer experiments are carried out in a forest in Achenkirch/Mühlegger Köpfl, AT 19 .

A non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeter and soil hydrology measuring site as well

as a “snow lysimeter” is used at this site (HERMAN, SMIDT, ENGLISCH 2001 and SMIDT 2002).

4.4.6 Dumps/Landfills, Polluted or Post-Mining Areas in Germany

Predictions for transport of contaminants by seepage water and source term

determination for waste are important research fields for lysimeter studies in Waldfeucht,

DE 18 , with 20 non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters (used under bare soil).

One weighable and one non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeter are used to determine

water balance (T. DELSCHEN, questionnaire 2004, B. SUSSET, e-mail 2004 and papers/pdf).


99

To gain data of seepage water quality and to use them as reference values for validation of

drainage water prediction for other Bavarian abandoned polluted areas, eight weighable

monolithic gravitation lysimeters were installed in Wielenbach, DE 44 , in 2002

(SCHEITHAUER and BERGER in KLOTZ 2004).

Table 30: Description of the lysimeter station Karlsruhe-West I and II, Germany, DE 38 (according to information provided by V. GIURGEA, questionnaire and papers 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeterstation Karlsruhe-West I und II, Deutschland

Name of facility, location Sanitary landfill Karlsruhe-West (I)

Sanitary landfill Karlsruhe-West (II)

Operated by Lehrstuhl f. Angewandte Geologie der Univ. Karlsruhe, property of Stadt Karlsruhe, Amt für Abfallwirtschaft


to optimize sealing layers; proof of equivalence in comparison to the German regulations (TA-Si); control of the effectiveness of the system; long-term investigation of the hydraulic conductivity of the mineral clay liner

Altitude above sea level in m 120 Mean annual temperature in °C 10.1 Mean annual precipitation in mm 742 Surrounding area (topographic feature) Upper-Rhine plain Parent material Layers of waste/capillary barrier/mineral clay/gravel/recultivation Determination of meteorological parameters

Precipitation

Lysimeter type Large lysimeter/test area

(backfilled) Large lysimeter/test area with 4 compartments (backfilled)

Operating since 1993 1999 Number of lysimeters 1 1 Size classification large large Exact size 40 x 10 x 2.20 m 10 x 10 x 3.10 m Building material of container Tray made of a plastic sealing web Lysimeter bottom Tray (plastic sealing web) on sand Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet (drain pipes) Investigation of nutrients (balances) temporary; no balances Measuring interval(s) of substances irregular Soil fraction(s) Gravel, sand Silty sand Soil thickness in m 1 2 Vegetation/cultivation Grassland Kind of crop/tree Grass and small shrubs Tensiometers yes no Server, database yes Other details (data formats etc.) 1 ASCII file/month containing run-off data Used model and goal of investigation HELP (Hydrologic Evaluation of

Landfill Performance) - numerical model for water balance of a landfill surface-sealing system

Further investigations or equipment 4 measuring tubes for determination of soil water content through neutron logging

8 measuring tubes for determination of soil water content through neutron logging

Evaporation determination Eta: difference of all balance terms (monthly) Water balance determination P = Sum of lysimeter seepage water -/+ soil water storage/loss +

evapotranspiration; using HELP Malfunctions/problems Mineral clay liner dried up due to a too thin soil layer


100

Fig. 55: Schematic profile of lysimeter II-B with measuring tubes for neutron logging

(from GIURGEA, HÖTZL and BREH, n.d.) Schematisches Profil des Lysimeters II-B mit Messrohren der Neutronensonden

Another two large lysimeters/test areas with the purpose to study water balance and

effectiveness of two different covering systems exist in Aurach, “Im Dienstfeld”, DE 35 ,

according to information provided by U. HENKEN-MELLIES, questionnaire 2004.

Table 31: Description of the lysimeter facility Grünewalde, Germany, DE 22 (according to information provided by M. GAST, questionnaire 2004) Beschreibung der Lysimeteranlage Grünewalde (Lauchhammer), Deutschland

Operated by Forschungsinstitut für Bergbaufolgelandschaften e.V./Research Institute for Post-Mining Areas, Finsterwalde


Effects of dump substrates, substances of melioration and cultivation intensity on water and nutrient balances

Effect of recultivation covering layers on groundwater quality


Former surface mining area/glacial valley (Lusatia)

Parent material Tertiary dump substrates Determination of meteorological parameters


5 Results of Lysimeter Studies 5.1 Results for Peatland/Moorland

101

Lysimeter type Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeter

Non-weighable backfilled groundwater lysimeter

Operating since 1993 1998 Number of lysimeters 16 9 Size classification standard standard Exact size 1 x 1 x 3 m 1 x 1 x 3 m Building material of container PE Lysimeter bottom Drainage pipe in 4 cm filter layer (gravel) Lysimeter cellar Concrete Groundwater level variable - yes Seepage water determination Gravimetric; outlet Suction cups Investigation of nutrients (balances)

pH, EC, Al, Feges, Fe II, Mn, SO4, NH4, NO3, Ca, K, Mg, P, Si, DOC, SM; input/output balances

pH, EC, Redox, Al, Feges, Fe II, Mn, SO4, NH4, NO3; no balances


monthly, four times a year monthly

Soil fraction(s) carbonated loamy sand carbonated loamy sand, sand Soil type (Lockersyrosem) Dump soil, Anthroposol,

(Lockersyrosem) Soil thickness in m 3 3 Vegetation/cultivation Arable land/field and lawn Fallow/uncultivated Crop rotation Crop rotation for recultivation (7 years): coarse grains, 3 years lucerne,

coarse grains Use of fertilizers yes no Used fertilizer/organic manure mineral Use of pesticide yes no Suction cups no yes Data logger yes no Further investigations Use of calcium carbonate or ash (of power station) to raise pH value to 1 m

depth; yield determination

5 Results of Lysimeter Studies

This chapter only summarizes selected examples of research results (mostly published

recently), divided into the same categories as the use of lysimeters in section 4.4. Research

reports are available in the proceedings of lysimeter conferences (BAL or GSF) and in other

specialized literature (see references) and will be provided on the internet as well, see

chapter 7 for the homepage concept. For general information about lysimeter studies see 5.7.

5.1 Results for Peatland/Moorland

Discharge results from groundwater lysimeters installed in peatland together with the

position of the water table—at the time of each reading—show that the net change in

storage was approximately zero during three years of investigation. An example of data

5 Results of Lysimeter Studies 5.2 Results for Arable Land

102

collected from mire lysimeters is provided in figure 56. A high water table indicates that the

maximum storage capacity has been reached (INGRAM, COUPAR and BRAGG, 2001).

Fig. 56: Data collected from a mire lysimeter during May 26, 1988 to December 10, 1991 in Scotland

(according to INGRAM, COUPAR and BRAGG, 2001, p 698, modified); Gesammelte Daten eines im Moor eingebauten Lysimeters von 26. Mai 1988 bis 10. Dezember 1991 in Schottland (obere Linie:

mittlere tägliche Sickerwassermenge; untere Linie: Grundwasserstandsganglinie) Six sites with different forms of land use in a lowmoor area in Saxonia-Anhalt (Germany)

were chosen for a research project to study effects of change of land use and high ground-

water levels on nitrogen, phosphorus and dissolved organic carbon concentrations in water.

Due to an increase of P concentrations in the ground and surface water as well as in soil

solution after re-wetting of these fen soils, an increase of P amount is to be expected when

the groundwater level rises again (see RUPP, MEISSNER, LEINWEBER in BAL 2003, pp 133 ff).

5.2 Results for Arable Land

Evaporation, Soil Cultivation and Seepage Water

In Lleida, Spain (ES 1 ), crop evapotranspiration (ETc, determined by large weighing

lysimeters) compared to reference evapotranspiration (ETo from a nearby weather station,

PENMAN-MONTEITH equation) was investigated in 2002. The results show that diurnal

patterns of ETo and ETc are very similar (see figure 57); some variability in hourly water

consumption was corrected by adjusting data. The pear crop coefficient (ETc/ETo ratio) Kc,

calculated from daily observed water consumption data, shows that in days with irrigation or

rainfall, Kc increases as soil evaporation does (for further details see GIRONA et al., n.d.).


103

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

Solar time

ETc

(mm

/hou

r)

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

ETo

(mm

/hou

r)

ETc

ETo Adj. ETc

Pear 26-07-02

Fig. 57: Daily patterns of water consumption of pear trees (ETc, from a lysimeter), reference evapo-

transpiration (ETo, from a weather station) and adjusted ETc (Adj. ETc) in Lleida, Spain (from GIRONA et al., n.d., p 5); Tagesgang des Wasserverbrauches von Birnenbäumen (ETc,

Lysimeterwerte), der Referenzwerte der Evapotranspiration (ETo, gemessen an der Wetterstation) und der angepassten Evapotranspiration (Adj. ETc) in Lleida, Spanien

Weighable lysimeters at the Karcag Research Institute, Hungary (HU 2 ) were used for an

eight-year experiment to determine water balance under different climatic and hydrologic

conditions. ZSEMBELI 2001 summarizes that weighable lysimeters supply very accurate data

for water regime of soil columns with different surface covering treatments and for

comparing these data. But he figured out that these lysimeters are not really suitable to

investigate water balance of soil covered by crops. His half-year water balances show a high

exponential correlation of water input and evaporation; a valuation of different kinds of

soil treatment is provided in table 32. Evaporation is always to be decreased using crust

breaking methods; the monthly water balances also corroborate this fact (ZSEMBELI 2001).

Table 32: Assessment of the effect of five treatments on the water balance of the soil column (according to ZSEMBELI 2001, p 7, modified) Auswirkung von Bodenbearbeitungsmaßnahmen auf die Wasserbilanz einer Bodensäule (Schätzung)

Evaporation mitigating effect Infiltration increasing effect Treatment evaporation/input category drain water/input category control 94 % poor 14 % poor

cloddy 85 % medium 17 % medium mellowed 84 % medium 20 % good mellowed + crust breaking method

77 % good 22 % good

mellowed + covered 77 % good 31 % very good


104

A comparison of results from SWS and monolithic lysimeters in arable land in Groß-

Enzersdorf (AT 11 ) show that curves are very heterogeneous (see figure 58) because of

different soil composition although the profile is the same. The amounts of drainage water

are equally good: In 1999, 15 mm were measured by SWS, 23 mm by the lysimeter; in 2000,

results amounted to 106 (SWS) and 100 mm (CEPUDER in BÖHM et al. 2002).

Fig. 58: Amounts of seepage water collected with seepage water samplers and a monolithic lysimeter

(Groß-Enzersdorf, Austria) (according to CEPUDER in BÖHM et al. 2002, p 127, modified), Sickerwassermenge im Vergleich von

Sickerwassersammlern und einem monolithischen Lysimeter (Groß-Enzersdorf, Österreich)

Nitrate Leaching, Different Crops and Cultivation Methods

In Swiss communities/villages, for example, the nitrate concentration in potable water was

too high (year 2002). Different kinds of soil cultivation methods affecting nitrate leaching

were investigated from 1999 to 2002 by analyzing seepage water collected by non-weighable

monolithic field lysimeters in Ettenhausen (CH 4 ). The fields (crop rotation) were either

tilled with a plough (PF) or no tillage was applied (direct drilling/DS). According to

ANKEN et al. 2003 many authors have established different results so far—the research in

Ettenhausen concluded that differences in the results of these two soil management systems

are lower than expected.

Figure 59 shows nitrate leaching but no systematic differences are to be seen; in the first

winter, leaching losses amounted to 70 kg NO3-N/ha (40 kg NO3-N/ha at PF). In 2000, little

nitrate was leached (only 30 kg at PF and DS each): the plants absorbed nitrogen very well. In

spring 2001, high leaching losses were determined, most likely because of fertilizing in spring

(in winter 2000, amounts were very low). As the results show, it is very important to use

proper amounts of fertilizers and to apply them at the right time (ANKEN et al. 2003).


105

Fig. 59: Nitrate-N concentrations in seepage water of lysimeters cultivated by ploughing (PF) and

direct drilling (DS) 1999-2002 (Ettenhausen, Switzerland) (from ANKEN et al. 2003, p 6); Nitrat-N-Konzentrationen im Sickerwasser von Lysimetern bei Pflügen

(PF) und Direktsaat (DS) 1999-2002 (Ettenhausen, Schweiz)

In many European lowlands, a higher use of fertilizers and pesticides worsens the ground-

water quality. In southern Styria (Wagna, Austria, AT 27 )—in the Quarternary gravelly

and sandy aquifer—nitrate/pesticide concentration exceeded limiting values in the 1980s.

Different lysimeter and SWS types have been used since 1991 to investigate nitrate leaching

and seepage water amounts. Figure 60 shows nitrogen losses calculated from nitrate

concentrations in a seasonal distribution for two cultivation systems: maize (single-crop

farming/MM) and crop rotation (FF), 1992-2002 (FANK in BAL 2004, p 63-72). Leaching

losses are very high in the days of higher precipitation amounts and higher infiltration rates.

Fig. 60: Seasonal distribution of nitrogen leaching losses of the unsaturated zone into groundwater of

two different cultivation systems (MM = maize single-crop farming, FF = crop rotation), 1992-1999 in Wagna, Austria

(from FANK in BAL 2004, p 66); Jahreszeitliche Verteilung des Stickstoffaustrages aus der ungesättigten Zone in das Grundwasser für zwei unterschiedliche Bewirtschaftungsarten

(MM = Maismonokultur, FF = Fruchtfolge), 1992-1999 in Wagna, Österreich

5 Results of Lysimeter Studies 5.3 Results for Grassland (Lowland)

106

5.3 Results for Grassland (Lowland)

On five soils, effects of fertilizer (N) and pig or cattle slurry—applied in winter or early

spring—on nitrate leaching was investigated in a two-year project in Ireland (IE 1 ). Data

from monolithic gravitation lysimeters sown to perennial ryegrass showed a high nitrate

concentration in seepage water usually from December to February but results varied

according to soil type and kind of fertilizer applied (mineral or mineral combined with slurry).

The maximum admissible NO3-N concentration was exceeded by applying pig slurry (117 kg/

ha/year) in November combined with fertilizer N (300 kg/ha/year). For further details see

RYAN and FANNING 1996, pp 126-136 and RYAN in BAL 1999, pp 187-188.

5.4 Results for Grassland (Mountain Areas in Austria)

A study on the fate of heavy metals—in the course of applying sewage sludge and waste

compost on permanent grassland (soil is not ploughed or mechanically mixed) was carried

out in Gumpenstein (AT 21 ). Results supplied by non-weighable disturbed gravitation

lysimeters show that heavy metals concentrate in the upper layers of topsoil but no higher

adsorption by plants was indicated. Leaching losses of heavy metals in seepage water were

almost not determinable. Soil of grassland therefore has a good filter effect but it is advised

against a permanent use of sewage sludge/waste compost as not all heavy metals were inves-

tigated and some could negatively affect health (EDER and BOHNER in KLOTZ 2002, pp 95 ff).

Non-weighable monolithic field lysimeters were used to determine water balance for May

2002 to September 2003. The amounts for the years 2002 and 2003 deviated from mean

annual precipitation (1018 mm): 1371 mm (135 %) in 2002, only 862 mm (63 %) in 2003. On

lysimeter 05 grasses are grown; the others are used for various crops. Seepage water amount

for grassland from May 2002 until July 2003 amounts to 450 mm, lysimeters with agricul-

tural crops measured 700-800 mm, see figure 61. According to the calculated evapotrans-

piration, water balance turned out negative for one of the “crop lysimeters” in December

2002 and for the others in March 2003. Isotope investigations showed that melted snow

infiltrated the lysimeters between the container and the mobile ring on top, see description in

table 27 and further details in section 4.4.4 (EDER et al. in KLOTZ 2004, pp 73-78).

5 Results of Lysimeter Studies 5.5 Results for a Spruce Forest (Austria)

107

Fig. 61: Seepage water amounts of five lysimeters at BAL Gumpenstein, Austria

lysimeter 05 = lysimeter with grass vegetation, on all other lysimeters various crops are grown (according to EDER et al. in KLOTZ 2004, p 75, modified)

Sickerwasseranfall von fünf Lysimetern am Gelände der BAL Gumpenstein, Österreich; Lysimeter 05 = Lysimeter mit Grasbewuchs, auf allen anderen wachsen Ackerpflanzen

5.5 Results for a Spruce Forest (Austria)

In order to investigate nitrate transport in the North Tyrolean Limestone Alps (AT 18 ) 15N labelled nitrate was applied in a lysimeter experiment (see section 4.4.5.2). 52 % of the

nitrate applied was determined in leachate after collecting 300 l water in 130 days, see

figure 62. This high leaching potential is possibly a worst-case scenario within this forest

ecosystem and data should not be transferred to field scale directly (HABERHAUER et al. in

SMIDT 2002, pp 37-41).

Fig. 62: Amount of 15N labelled nitrate found in seepage water after application (Mühleggerköpfl)

(from HABERHAUER et al. in SMIDT 2002, p 40); Werte von 15N angereichertem Nitrat im Sickerwasser nach der Applikation von 15N (Mühleggerköpfl)

5 Results of Lysimeter Studies 5.6 Results for a Sanitary Landfill

108

5.6 Results for a Sanitary Landfill

An example for the efficiency of applied thickening of the vegetation support layer (from

1 to 2 m) at the sanitary landfill Karlsruhe-West (DE 38 ) is shown by results of lysimeter II

B in figure 63: A total efficiency factor Etot is determined, based on the monthly precipita-

tion and the outflow from the capillary block (GIURGEA, V. I., H. HÖTZL and W. BREH, n.d.).

Fig. 63: Precipitation and time dependent variation of the total efficiency factors, compartment B

(from GIURGEA, V. I., H. HÖTZL and W. BREH, n.d.) Niederschlagsmengen und zeitabhängige Variation des Gesamtwirkungsgrades für die Kompartimente Bt und Bb, 2000-2003 (Karlsruhe-West)

5.7 General Statements on Lysimeter Studies

• Lysimeter data are always results of measurement at one position and should be

combined with other methods (e.g. using techniques of tracer hydrology) to verify data;

lysimeter errors (see section 3.5.1) and the compound of soil are very important.

• Results supplied by lysimeters that have been in use for long periods of time are suitable

for comparing data (quality and quantity) of different land use systems, for investigating

effects of land use change and for gaining data for nutrient balances.

• Measuring results with high precision in time and space combined with results of

lysimeters/soil hydrological probes at different depths are important for calibrating new

and adjusting existing numerical water and nutrient balance/transport models. RODE

1999 in SEEGER et al./BÖHM et al. 2002 notices that even today it is a challenge and an

unsolved problem for soil hydrological research to transfer micro scaled gained data to

larger areas (FANK and SEEGER et al. in BÖHM et al. 2002).

6 Future Developments

109


Many facilities were closed during the past few years, see table c in appendix E, due to old

lysimeters not functioning any more, due to monitoring programmes or projects being stopped

or because of other management/organisational reasons. Some new lysimeters were imple-

mented (see table 7 in section 4.3). However, the future of some large facilities is uncertain.

What are the future developments of research centres?

In my questionnaire, I asked the European operators of lysimeters about their plans, and

during my visits in Germany, Austria, Slovenia and Croatia I got several answers which I

discuss below by providing categories of the activities planned. If no other source is cited, all

statements were reported in the questionnaires 2004; map codes are no longer provided.

• Reduction of Number of Lysimeters or Closing Stations

In Falkenberg, Germany, the number of lysimeters will be reduced as traditional questions

for cultivation are losing significance; lysimeters should be mainly used for process studies.

The facility Bern-Liebefeld, Switzerland, was partly inactivated and is expected to be closed

in a few years and to be replaced by a new one in Zürich-Reckenholz. 24 backfilled lysimeters

operating since 1982 are projected to be inactivated in 2004 at Johnstown Castle, Wexford,

Ireland (H. RUPP, e-mail 2004, E. SPIESS and K. RICHARDS).

• Development Not Certain

Due to new orientating of research facilities and new fields of research, the future of the

facilities in Neuherberg, Germany, and Hirschstetten, Austria, is not sure. Also in

Göttingen, Germany, the development is not certain; the possibilities are to close the facility

or to restructure it completely (D. KLOTZ and J. HÖSCH, visit 2004 and K.-W. BECKER).

• Investigations or Tests Planned

In Germany, the following activities are planned:

Groß Lüsewitz: monitoring and realization of WFD/European Water Framework Directive

(B. ZACHOW); Waldfeucht: long-term monitoring of nutrient leaching of waste of soil (T.

DELSCHEN); Deutzen: soil hydraulic parameters will be determined by multistep outflow

experiments; an extensive irrigation test is planned to solve seepage water problem (A.

PETERS); Speyer, Rinkenbergerhof: nitrogen balances under conditions of intensive and


110

improved vegetable crop rotation (R. BISCHOFF); Mönchengladbach: Data commercializing;

search for financing by research facilities (D. SCHUMACHER); GSF, Neuherberg: Seepage

water prediction project: source term determination of pollutants of contaminated waste and

behaviour of pollutants during percolation process; Effect of O3 and CO2 stress on beeches

and their rhizosphere (D. KLOTZ).

In Seibersdorf, Austria, the main purpose—influence of agricultural measures on nutrient

movement in soil—will remain the same; maybe a change in cultivation type will be carried

out. Further studies on fate of pollutants in soil and evaporation determination are planned

(B. WIMMER, questionnaire and visit 2004).

The BAL Gumpenstein, Austria, plans to compare data of different lysimeter types and will

focus on intensifying research on soil chemistry—to determine seepage water quality for

modelling, based on inorganic and organic N and dissolved organic C. The present research

project—using various fertilizing and cultivation methods to determine leaching losses of

crop rotation—will be continued in Winklhof, and a new research project concerning organic

cultivation will be submitted (A. BOHNER, G. EDER, W. HEIN, visit 2004).

Sinji Vrh, Slovenia, plans the following investigations: Microbiological study, isotope and

hydrogeochemical study of additional fast flow monitoring during storm events, tracer

experiments (NaCl, uranine ...) with injection beneath soil cover and geophysical studies

(M. PREGL, visit 2004 and VESELIČ and ČENČUR CURK, 2004).

Popovača, Croatia is searching for partners and will focus on research on special variations of

soil samples and comparing data of soil samples using models (M. MESIĆ, visit 2004).

• New Lysimeter Types or Stations

Germany: The Institute of Crop and Grassland Science will install wick samplers (PCAPS) in

plots to compare data (water and nutrient transport) of surrounding undisturbed soil with

lysimeter data in Braunschweig Völkenrode (M. KÜCKE). An additional facility/cellar with

6 lysimeters (completion date 2005) will be implemented in Buttelstedt to investigate

characteristics of leaching in different soil types but same cultivation method (R. GÜNTHER).

The UFZ-Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle (Falkenberg/Colbitz) was asked to

develop new lysimeter measurement methods (H. RUPP, e-mail 2004); to reduce construction


111

costs and to reduce susceptibility of measuring methods, research on innovative techniques

should be pushed (SEEGER et al. in BÖHM et al. 2002, p 177).

Agroscope FAL in Zürich-Reckenholz, Switzerland, will install new lysimeters after Bern-

Liebefeld has been closed (E. SPIESS). In Austria, BAL Gumpenstein is going to implement a

new alpine lysimeter at the Stoderzinken, Styria (A. BOHNER, G. EDER, visit 2004). Teagasc

at Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Ireland, is currently (2004) establishing 75 new monolithic

lysimeters, see table 23/description in section 4.4.3.2 (K. RICHARDS) and in Wagna, Austria,

two newly developed weighable monolithic field lysimeters with a mobile ring (to make

mechanized cultivation possible) were built in in summer 2004.

Estonia is running a lysimeter field trial in the south of the country and plans to carry out

another one in the northern part (J. KANGER, e-mail 2004).

• Modelling

At the facility in Fagnières, France, modelling of nitrogen data is planned (B. NICOLARDOT)

and Sinji Vrh in Slovenia plans the use of models for water flow and solute transport

(evaluation of the obtained NaCl, uranine and other field tracer tests data, VESELIČ and

ČENČUR CURK, 2004).

In Austria, modelling is becoming increasingly important in Seibersdorf (B. WIMMER) and

for the JOANNEUM RESEARCH and its stations in the Grazer Feld and the facility

Wagna: For the years 2005/2006, the goals are to calibrate simulation/water and nutrient

transport models connected to a GIS (Geographical Information System), to regionalize

and determine actual nitrogen amounts and amounts for optimized cultivation management.

For the Grazer Feld, a groundwater protective field vegetable farming system should be

derived, whereas in Wagna, the difference between organic and conventional farming for the

Leibnitzer Feld will be investigated and a groundwater protective farming system for this area

will be derived (project BIOLBGW).

• Non-European Information

I got back one questionnaire completed by an operator in Brazil (Sete Lagoas, MG, Brasil)

running 9 units, a type for drainage with runoff collection capability for water dynamics and

water quality studies in arable land (backfilled gravitation lysimeters). They are looking for


112

MSc, PhD students or post-doc colleagues to help analyze and publish existing data and to

plan further actions and for partners to write proposals and seek funding (C. L. T. ANDRADE).

• Summary and General Developments of Future Research

The most important research goals for the future are:

to determine seepage water quality and quantity for modelling; to calibrate and verify

water movement and solute transport models; to determine water and nutrient

balances,

to investigate soil and groundwater protective cultivation systems (organic

farming),

to compare lysimeter data with data of undisturbed soil outside the vessels and to

compare results (leaching) of different soil types under same cultivation conditions,

seepage water prediction: source term determination (contaminants released of

contaminant materials/waste soils), (long-term) monitoring of fate of pollutants in soil,

to determine soil hydraulic parameters,

to investigate groundwater recharge and solute balance in post-mining areas;

lysimeters are an effective tool to investigate landuse changes (MEISSNER et al. 2000).

The results in the compilation above correspond to a summary of the Austrian Lysimeter

Research Group (ZOJER in BAL 2003, pp 3-5). The regionalization of data measured is an

integral part of lysimeter research; numerical models connected to a GIS application are an

important possibility to solve these complex problems. Model concepts were not only

developed for agricultural cultivation systems but also for forests, dumps or post-mining

areas. Several EU guidelines (nitrate, sewage, etc.) oblige member countries of the

European Union to protect groundwater resources and to force sustainable landuse

(WEISS in BAL 2001, pp 1-4). Seepage water quality must be predictable before

cultivation (according to an EU guideline, ZOJER in BAL 2003, p 5) and lysimeters are used

as test devices at several stations for such research questions (e.g. OBERACKER et al. in KLOTZ

2002, pp 184-190).

Important Developments in Agricultural Management

When agricultural activities are carried out in groundwater protective areas, it is very

important to reduce the amount of fertilizers but of course, the profitability must not be

disregarded. Therefore, agricultural advisers have to find a sensible connection between

7 Concept for the European Lysimeter Platform (EuLP) on the Internet

113

economy and groundwater protection in the future. In southern Styria, possible methods are

biogas facilities and cropping of maize for silage crop rotation with catch-cropping

growing. For the lowlands of the river Mur south of Graz, a programme has been introduced

to reduce diffuse input in agricultural areas in cooperation with scientific organizations,

administration, water works and farmers (FANK and MASSWOHL in BAL 2004, pp 63-72).

Climate Change

Hydraulic parameters (effective porosity, dispersion, intrinsic permeability) are highly

dependent on soil water content that is connected to soil temperature. Human activities

and climate change affect the biosphere and should be considered in future. As was

concluded from lysimeter research, substances are transported faster and in higher

concentration into groundwater at increasing temperature (in fine sand). Evapotranspiration

rises—soil dries up and cracks occur; when precipitation intensity increases, the rate of

bypass fluxes gets higher (KLOTZ in KLOTZ 2002, pp 203-208).


1. Purpose: To show clearly arranged descriptions about lysimeter and soil hydrological

measuring sites/SHMS and to provide access to their research results on a Web site for

making an exchange of experience possible and information easily accessible.

2. Target group: Researchers interested in lysimeter studies, operators of lysimeter stations

who want to get information about other sites or who want to get in contact with researchers

in other countries, or research centres looking for cooperation. The EuLP Web site will be

integrated in the homepage of the Austrian Lysimeter Research Group/AG Lysimeter

http://www.lysimeter.at; it is directed at all users of this homepage.

3. Software used: Macromedia Freehand 10.0 and Fireworks MX (map design, Web site lay-

out), Adobe Photoshop 7.0 (photo and graphic editing) and Macromedia Dreamweaver MX

(site management). Content of MS Access database and Excel tables is imported as txt (text).

4. Usability: Following usability guidelines (see KommDesign.de), the Web site is clearly

arranged in tables to view information of lysimeter operators and sites at a glance; users will

http://www.lysimeter.at/


114

easily and quickly find details of their desired site; maps with clickable symbols for

lysimeter locations, photos and sketches of lysimeters and facilities increase the information

content; research reports of lysimetric studies are provided for downloading (pdf files).

For higher usability/ergonomics, a site is to be viewable as a whole without scrolling.

There-fore, the Web site is designed for a 15” screen (notebook) to assure that information

requested is really found. Header and bottom were designed rather narrow to gain space for

the main part. One of the main goals was to optimize storage space and to guarantee fast

loading. For this reason file size of photos/sketches/maps is kept small (for example, in

Adobe Photoshop, use menu File Save for web (German Für Web specimen). In the map,

the symbol of the active lysimeter site turns yellow, see figure 64.

Fig. 64: Example for presenting a lysimeter facility on the internet (European Lysimeter Platform)

(own map design and HTML layout, 2004) Beispiel für die Präsentation einer Lysimeteranlage im Internet (Europäische Lysimeter Plattform)

5. Structure and navigation: The main menu provides links to a list of all European

research centres/lysimeter locations (arranged by countries), a list for downloading research

reports, important lysimeter links to research centres, a link to the sitemap (structure of the


115

Web site) and the possibility to go back to the main site. Underlining identifies white text on

blue background as a hyperlink. Yellow/red is used for rollover effects and for visited links.

Sites can either be chosen by clicking on a country in the main page and then clicking the

appropriate symbol on the map or by displaying a list of all stations (see main menu at the

top of the site). When a facility runs several lysimeter types, yellow forward and backward

arrows lead to the next/previous type. Blue arrows take users to the next or previous lysimeter

site/SHMS (next/previous number).

6. Layout:

• Colours the same red, blue, and yellow as for the main page of the AG lysimeter are

used to guarantee a homogeneous appearance. Most text is kept in white (on blue

background) as this increases readability, and the operator information is red on white.

• Font sans-serif fonts (formatting option Verdana/Arial/Helvetica/sans-serif) in three

sizes (10, 11 and 12 pt) are used to guarantee high on-screen readability; bold is used in

the title of a facility or for highlighting the operator names. A cascading style sheet (CSS)

makes text formatting easy.

7. Contents and types of media: The information platform should provide contact

addresses of lysimeter operators (see figure 64, left side) and general information about the

lysimeter sites/SHMS (see blue/white table). If a lot of detail about lysimeter types used at

one facility is available, two pages are offered (click on “…more details about this type”): the

first page shows the most important information on lysimeters/SWS installed—the

purpose of the station/facility, details about the lysimeter types used (size, number, building

material, etc.), information about seepage water and nutrients measured, soil fractions/types/

thickness, vegetation and probes installed and—if provided—details about further equipment/

investigations and remarks. On the second page, details about the location can be seen:

altitude, determination of meteorological parameters, details on cultivation, fertilizing, irri-

gitation, etc. and malfunctions, if details are available.

As mentioned earlier, text is supported with other media: maps for navigation and showing

locations of lysimeter stations/facilities/SHMS as well as photos or sketches are provided to

support users; pdf files (research reports) are provided for downloading.

8 Conclusions

116

8 Conclusions

Soil hydrological studies in general and lysimeter studies in particular are of paramount

importance for various fields of research. They are used to investigate topics related to

agriculture, forest economy, hydrology and ecology (polluted or post-mining areas).

Lysimeter experiments were also carried out to research interactions between surface and

groundwater (riverbed lysimeter).

A big advantage of seepage water samplers (SWS) is that they can be easily installed in fields

or forests. However, lysimeters are also being implemented in situ in agricultural areas to

measure seepage water amounts under nearly real-life conditions. Using a flexible ring and

mechanized cultivation help to minimize island effects to gather more reliable data.

As the weighing equipment and probes installed at lysimeter stations are getting more and

more precise, better data are delivered and results are more conclusive. In the future,

improving technical solutions will be an important task for anybody who plans, installs, or

operates lysimeters. This technological advance can be seen from the fact that new, well

equipped vessels are being built in at several sites, while at the same time outdated containers

are being inactivated or replaced.

Apart from departments and institutes of grassland, agricultural, environmental, ecological,

health, geology, soil and plant cultivation/crop sciences and hydrographic offices, geography

departments around Europe also are involved in lysimetric research, such as the geography

departments at the university of Dundee (Scotland) or at the university of Trier (Germany).

This reinforces the interdisciplinary approach taken by (physio-)geographers who need to

cover climatic, soil physical, hydrological, geological, agricultural and plant physiological

parameters when they interpret lysimeter results.

Both the topic and the survey met with great interest as operators sent additional research

reports, etc. that went beyond the information requested in the questionnaire. This confirms

the importance of this survey that covered many European countries. Several operators

specifically asked for the compilation of all lysimeter stations and are interested in the

presentation of the results on the internet.

8 Conclusions

117

The outcomes of the survey should help operators to find partners for joint projects and to

advance the exchange of ideas and know-how. Operators can get information on other

research stations, their goals and the state of lysimeter technology in Europe.

To present, analyze and regionalize lysimeter data, various numerical models are in use;

geographical information systems (GIS) visualize results provided by these models.

Calibrating new and adjusting existing numerical water balance and solute transport

models should be a main goal for future research.

In order to assure sustainable soil cultivation, it is very important to improve the efficiency

of water use, to control the soil water regime and soil water processes by comparing

several different cultivation methods. Lysimeters/SWS and soil hydrology measuring sites

and research centres are able to contribute to achieving the most vital goals for the European

environment development in the future: sustainable landuse and protection of ground-

water resources.

One way of reaching these goals is to do more research on the effects of changes in

cultivation management (such as organic farming) on soil and groundwater quality.

Furthermore, the development of soil temperature—due to climate change—should be

monitored to investigate its influence on soil hydrological conditions.

Lysimeters and SWS are efficient tools to make soil hydrological studies possible and to

learn more about the unsaturated zone and soil water processes going on there. Measuring

leaching losses of solutes as well as a precise determination of parameters of the water

balance using weighable vessels are only examples of their research purpose.

It will be interesting to see which new measuring methods are going to be developed and

how lysimeter research will be able to contribute to answering further environmentally

relevant questions.

9 References

118

9 References

Style Guides for Scientific Publications

HODGES, J. C. AND M. E. WHITTEN, 198610: Harbrace College Handbook. – Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich, Publishers, Orlando, 553 p The University of Chicago Press, 199314: The Chicago Manual of Style. The Essential Guide for

Writers, Editors, and Publishers. – Chicago, 921 p Basic Literature, Dictionaries, and Maps AMMON, F. v., 1985: Wörterbuch der Wasserchemie/Dictionary of Water Chemistry/

Dictionnaire de la Chimie de l’Eau. – VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Weinheim, 203 p BAUMGARNTER, A. and H.-J. LIEBSCHER, 1990: Lehrbuch der Hydrologie, Band 1 Allgemeine

Hydrologie. – Gebrüder Bornträger, Berlin, Stuttgart, 673 p COLEMAN, D. C. and D. A. CROSSLEY, JR., 1996: Fundamentals of Soil Ecology. – Academic Press

Inc., San Diego, 205 p HAENSCH, G. and G. HABERKAMP DE ANTÓN, 19865: Dictionary of Agriculture in six languages. –

BLV Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, München, 1264 p HÖLTING, B., 19965: Hydrogeologie, Einführung in die Allgemeine und Angewandte

Hydrogeologie. – Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, 441 p KUTÍLEK, M. and D. R. NIELSEN, 1994: Soil Hydrology. – GeoEcology textbook, Catena Verlag,

Cremlingen-Destedt, 370 p LESER, H. (ed.), 1997: DIERCKE-Wörterbuch Allgemeine Geographie. – Deutscher

Taschenbuch-Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, München und Westermann Schulbuchverlag GmbH, Braunschweig, 1037 p

MARSHALL, T. J. et al., 1996: Soil Physics. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 453 p PFANNKUCH, H.-O., 1969: Elsevier’s Dictionary of Hydrogeology – In Three Languages. –

Elsevier Publishing Company, New York, 168 p SCHEFFER, F., 200215: Lehrbuch der Bodenkunde, SCHEFFER/SCHACHTSCHABEL. – Spektrum

Akademischer Verlag GmbH, Heidelberg, 593 p SPARKS, D. L., 1995: Environmental Soil Chemistry. – Academic Press Inc., San Diego, 267 p WARD, R. C., 19752: Principles of Hydrology. – McGraw-Hill Book Company (UK) Limited,

367 p archo student-online gmbh, 2004: student-online, Wörterbuch Deutsch – Englisch,

http://www.student-online.net/woerterbuch.shtml

http://www.student-online.net/woerterbuch.shtml

9 References

119

Gouvernement du Québec (2002), 2004: Le grand dictionnaire terminologique, http://www.granddictionnaire.com/btml/fra/r_motclef/index1024_1.asp

LEO DictionaryTeam 1995-2004, 2004: LEO – Ein Online-Service der Informatik der

Technischen Universität München, Wörterbuch Englisch – Deutsch, http://dict.leo.org/ Multimap.com, 2004: Online Maps to Everywhere, http://www.multimap.com/ (used for

searching for lysimeter sites) University of Texas Libraries, August 2004: Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection, Europe

Maps, http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/europe_ref_2003.jpg (used for digitalizing) Specialized Literature (Including pdf Files) AGES/Österreichische Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit GmbH, n.d.:

Lysimeteranlage Hirschstetten, Kurzbeschreibung. – 5 p ANKEN, T. et al., 2003: Einfluss der Bodenbearbeitung auf die Nitratauswaschung. Unterschiede

sind kleiner als erwartet. – FAT_Bericht_598_D.pdf, in: Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Agrarwirtschaft und Landtechnik (FAT), Tänikon, Nr. 598, pp 1-8

Austrian Research Centres/Österreichisches Forschungszentrum Seibersdorf Ges.m.b.H, n.d.:

Lysimeter Seibersdorf. – Brochure, 4 p BAL/Bundesanstalt für alpenländische Landwirtschaft Gumpenstein (ed.), 1991, 1992, 1993,

1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003: Berichte über die Lysimetertagungen. – BAL Gumpenstein/Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft bzw. Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft, Irdning

BAL (ed.), 2004: Bericht über das Seminar Landwirtschaft und Grundwasserschutz. Die

Bedeutung der Lysimeterforschung für die landwirtschaftliche Praxis. – BAL Gumpen-stein/Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft, Irdning, 82 p

BÖHM, K. E. et al., 2002: Lysimeter – Anforderungen, Erfahrungen, technische Konzepte/

Lysimeter – Demands, Experiences, Technical Concepts. – Beiträge zur Hydrogeologie 53, Graz, pp 115-232

CEPUDER, P. and R. KAITNA, 2002: Studie über Maßnahmen zur Senkung des Stickstoffeintrags in

das Grundwasser. Endbericht der Untersuchungsjahre 1996 bis 2001 inklusive der Daten des Vorprojektes 1992-1995. – tullnebr.1202.pdf, Institut für Hydraulik und landeskulturelle Wasserwirtschaft/Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Vienna, 203 p

DALLA-VIA, A. and J. FANK, 2003: Der Einfluss des Feldgemüsebaus im westlichen Grazer Feld

auf die Nitratgehalte im Grundwasser, 2. Zwischenbericht – Projektjahr 2003, unver-öffentlichter Projektbericht des JOANNEUM RESEARCH Graz, 49 p

DANNEBERG, O. H. and A. BAUMGARTEN, 2001: Lysimeteranlage Hirschstetten. BFL/Bundesamt

und Forschungszentrum für Landwirtschaft, Institut für Agrarökologie – in: Mitteilungen der Österr. Bodenkundl. Ges., Heft 63, Vienna, pp 196-208

http://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/droitsauteur.html

http://www.granddictionnaire.com/btml/fra/r_motclef/index1024_1.asp

http://www.leo.org/dict/about_de.html

http://dict.leo.org/

http://www.multimap.com/

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/europe_ref_2003.jpg

9 References

120

DECAGON, 2003: Drain Gauge—GEE Passive Capillary Lysimeter in Environmental Bio-physical Instrumentation. – http://www.decagon.com/info/agcatalog03.pdf, DECAGON Catalog Volume 6, Number 1, USA, 20 p

DI PIETRO, L. et al., 2004: Infiltration, recharge, écoulements préférentiels et transport de

polluants vers les nappes. – Rapport-Jan2004.pdf, Centre de recherches, INRA Avignon Domaine St Paul, Rapport N° 1, 31 p

DVWK/Deutscher Verband für Wasserwirtschaft und Kulturbau e. V. (ed.), 1980: Empfehlungen

zum Bau und Betrieb von Lysimetern. – DVWK-Regeln zur Wasserwirtschaft, Heft 114, Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg und Berlin, 52 p

DVWK, n.d.: Wägbare Lysimeter im Gebiet der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. – Anlage 2, Karte

A2; Weiterführung einer Erhebung von Lysimeterstandorten in Deutschland zur DVWK-Schrift im Heft 86 (1990), pp 113-132

FANK, J. 1999: Die Bedeutung der ungesättigten Zone für Grundwasserneubildung und Nitrat-

befrachtung des Grundwassers in quartären Lockersediment-Aquiferen am Beispiel des Leib-nitzer Feldes (Steiermark, Österreich). Beiträge zur Hydrogeologie 49/50, Graz, pp 101-388

FRANCAVIGLIA, R. and E. CAPRI, n.d.: Lysimeter experiments with metolachlor in Tor Mancina

(Italy). – http://www.isnp.it/files/4_bis.pdf, Istituto Sperimentale per la Nutrizione delle Piante (ISNP), Ministry of Agricultural Policies, Rome, Italy, 12 p

GIRONA, J. et al., n.d.: Pear Crop Coefficients Obtained in a Large Weighing Lysimeter. – Institut

de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries (IRTA), Àrea de Tecnologia Frutícola, Centre UdL-IRTA, 6 p

GIURGEA, V. I., H. HÖTZL and W. BREH, n.d.: Studies on the long-term performance of an

alternative surface-sealing system with underlying capillary barrier. – Giurgea-Ion-307.pdf, Department of Applied Geology and FZU, Environmental Research Center, University of Karlsruhe, 10 p

HAIMERL, G. and T. STROBL (ed.), 2004: Groundwater Recharge in Wadi Channels Downstream

of Dams, Efficiency and Management Strategies. – Berichte des Lehrstuhls und der Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau und Wasserwirtschaft der Technischen Universität München. Munich, 167 p

HARTL, W. et al., 2001: Lysimeteranlage Lobau. – in: Mitteilungen der Österr. Bodenkundl. Ges.,

Heft 63, Vienna, pp 209-217 HERMAN, F., S. SMIDT and M. ENGLISCH (ed.), 2001: Stickstoffflüsse am Mühleggerköpfl in den

Nordtiroler Kalkalpen./Nitrogen Fluxes at Mühleggerköpfl in the Northern Tyrolean Limestone Alps. – FBVA-Berichte 119, Forstliche Bundesversuchsanstalt Wien Wald-forschungszentrum, 144 p

HERRMANN, M., 2004: Einfluss der Vegetation auf die Beschaffenheit des oberflächennahen

Grundwassers im Bereich von Heide, Wald und landwirtschaftlichen Nutzflächen. – Abhandlungen aus dem Westfälischen Museum für Naturkunde, Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, 66. Jg., Heft 2, Münster, 166 p

IMKO Micromodultechnik GmbH, 2003: TRIME-EZ/-EZC/-IT/-ITC, User manual. – TRIME-

IT_EZ-manual.pdf, Ettlingen, 17 p (provided by UMS)

http://www.decagon.com/info/agcatalog03.pdf

http://www.isnp.it/files/4_bis.pdf

9 References

121

Informationen zur Lysimeterstation an der Waldökostation Remstecken, n.d.: 2 p (information provided by O. EUSKIRCHEN)

INGRAM, H. A. P., A. M. COUPAR and O. M. BRAGG, 2001: Theory and practice of hydrostatic

lysimeters for direct measurement of net seepage in a patterned mire in north Scotland. – Hydrology & Earth System Sciences, 5 (4), pp 693-709

KLOTZ, D., K.-P. SEILER, 1998: Die GSF-Lysimeteranlage Neuherberg. – GSF-Bericht 23/98,

GSF – Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit GmbH, Neuherberg, 56 p KLOTZ, D., 2002: Untersuchungen zur Schadstoff-Migration in Lysimetern. – GSF-Bericht 05/02,

Institut für Hydrologie, GSF-Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit GmbH, Neuherberg, 215 p

KLOTZ, D. (ed.), 2004: Untersuchungen zur Sickerwasserprognose in Lysimetern. – GSF-Bericht

02/04, Institut für Grundwasserökologie, GSF – Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit GmbH, Neuherberg, 218 p

KRENN, A., 2001: Lysimeteranlage Seibersdorf and Das Altlastenlysimeter Seibersdorf –

Lysimetereinsatz zur Gefährdungsabschätzung von Altlasten. – in: Mitteilungen der Österr. Bodenkundl. Ges., Heft 63, Vienna, pp 218-230

KRETZSCHMAR, R., 1999: Lysimetermessungen. Erfassung von Stoff-, Wasser- und Wärme-

haushaltsgrößen von Böden, Standorten und Landschaften unter weitgehend natürlichen Bedingungen. – Selbstverlag Kirchbarkau, 22 p

Landwirtschaft und Grundwasserschutz – unvereinbare Gegensätze?, 2003: Broschüre 0603.pdf,

21 p Lysimeteranlage Bern-Liebefeld, n.d.:

http://www.reckenholz.ch/doc/de/forsch/umwelt/wasser/lysimeter/lysiliebefeld.pdf Lysimeteranlage Zürich-Reckenholz, n.d.:

http://www.reckenholz.ch/doc/de/forsch/umwelt/wasser/lysimeter/lysireckenholz.pdf MEISSNER, R. et al., 2000: Novel lysimeter techniques – a basis for the improved investigation of

water, gas, and solute transport in soils. – in: Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 163, Weinheim, pp 603-608

MULLER, J.-C. (ed.), 1996: un point sur… trente ans de lysimétrie en France (1960-1990). Une

technique, un outil pour l’étude de l’énvironnement. – INRA, editions, Comifer, Paris, 390 p MURER, E., G. EDER, K. BÖHM, 1997: Bericht über die Auslandsdienstreise der österreichischen

Arbeitsgruppe Lysimeter nach Oberitalien in den Raum Udine, Pordenone und Padua vom 26.5.-29.5.1997, 5 p

MURER, E., 2001: Bericht über die Errichtung von Lysimeter- und Saugkerzenanlagen am

Versuchsfeld der LFS-Winklhof, Salzburg. – Bundesamt für Wasserwirtschaft/Institut für Kulturtechnik und Bodenwasserhaushalt, 16 p

OECD, 2000: Guidance Document for the Performance of Out-door Monolith Lysimeter Studies.

– OECD_22_00087252.pdf, OECD Series on Testing and Assessment, Number 22, Paris, 26 p

http://www.reckenholz.ch/doc/de/forsch/umwelt/wasser/lysimeter/lysiliebefeld.pdf

http://www.reckenholz.ch/doc/de/forsch/umwelt/wasser/lysimeter/lysireckenholz.pdf

9 References

122

RYAN, M. and A. FANNING, 1996: Effects of fertiliser N and slurry on nitrate leaching – lysimeter studies on 5 soils. – in: Irish Geography, Volume 29(2), pp 16-136

SCHROEDER, M., 1984: Die Interzeptionsmessungen an der Großlysimeteranlage St. Arnold. – in:

Deutsche Gewässerkundliche Mitteilungen 28, H. 5/6, pp 164-171 SMIDT, S. (ed.), 2002: Nitrogen Fluxes in the Tyrolean Limestone Alps. – Environmental Science

and Pollution Research, International Vol. 9, Special Issue 2, Landsberg, 52 p SUSSET, B. et al., n.d.: Stoffaustrag aus mineralischen Untersuchung der zeitlichen Quellstär-

keentwicklung in Großlysimetern des LUA NRW. – GWA37LUANRWSusset.pdf, 17 p UMS/Umweltanalytische Mess-Systeme GmbH, 2001: T4 Pressure Transducer Tensiometer with

external refilling, User Manual Version 2.0. – T4-engl.manual.pdf, Munich, 36 p UMS/Umweltanalytische Mess-Systeme GmbH, 2003 a: Bestimmung der Wasserspannung mit

Tensiometern. – Tensiometer-Poster-dt.pdf, Poster, Munich, 1 p UMS/Umweltanalytische Mess-Systeme GmbH, 2003 b: Vacuum techniques for soil water

extraction. – Vacuumtechnic-engl.pdf, Poster, Munich, 1 p v. UNOLD, G., 2003: Workshopbericht Sickerwassersammler vom 8. und 9. April 2002. –

Anforderungen an die Sickerwasserbeprobung, BAL – Workshopbericht April 2002.pdf, UMS GmbH, Munich, 35 p

Web Sites (All Visited from July to October 2004) Forschungszentrum Jülich, Institut für Chemie und Dynamik der Geosphäre (ICG), Agrosphäre

(ICG IV), 2004: Themenbereich 2.3.: Stofffrachten im Feldmaßstab, http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-iv/index.php?index=62

HASS, H., 2004: Wald in Gefahr, Forschendes Lernen in der Meßstation Remstecken,

Waldökostation Koblenz, http://www.fh-koblenz.de/koblenz/remstecken/ waldingefahr/walddeposition/deposition.1992/92.waldingefahr.html

Institute of Plant Ecology WWU Münster (1996-2003), 2004: Großlysimeter St. Arnold/

Rheine, http://www.uni-muenster.de/Biologie.Pflanzenoekologie/staff/armbruester.html R.W. MILLER & D.T. GARDINER (1998), 2004: Soils in our Environment, 8th Edition. Prentice-

Hall Publishers, Upper Saddle River, NJ., http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~doetqp-p/courses/env320/glossary.htm

Stadt Koblenz, 2004: Die Waldökostation Remstecken – Das Naturzentrum von Koblenz,

http://www.waldoekostation.koblenz.de UCL and Mathieu Javaux, 2004: Solute transport in a heterogeneous unsaturated subsoil:

experiments and modelling, Ph. D Thesis of Mathieu Javaux, May 2004, http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projets/Javaux/index.htm

UCL Unité de génie rural, 2004: Les monoliths, http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/

equipement/monolithes/index.htm and Le lysimètre de Louvain-la-Neuve, http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/equipement/lysimetre/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



http://www.uni-muenster.de/Biologie.Pflanzenoekologie/staff/armbruester.html


http://www.waldoekostation.koblenz.de/

http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/projets/Javaux/index.htm

http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/equipement/monolithes/index.htm

http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/equipement/monolithes/index.htm

http://www.geru.ucl.ac.be/recherche/equipement/lysimetre/

9 References

123

WIRTH, T., 2004: KommDesign.de, http://www.kommdesign.de/texte/index.htm Suggested Further Reading HARTGE, K. H., 19993: Die physikalische Untersuchung von Böden. – Ferdinand Enke Verlag,

Stuttgart, 304 p ROWELL, D. L., 1997: Bodenkunde: Untersuchungsmethoden und ihre Anwendungen (Translation

of „Soil Science, Methods & Applications“) – Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 614 p SCHROEDER, M., 1976: Grundsätzliches zum Einsatz von Lysimetern. Erfahrungen aus Nord-

rhein-Westfalen./Reflections on the Use of Lysimeters. Practical Experiences in North-Rhine Westphalia. – in: Deutsche Gewässerkundliche Mitteilungen, 20. Jg., H. 1, pp 8-13

STRAHLER, A. H. and A. N. STRAHLER, 1999: Physische Geographie. – UTB für Wissenschaft,

Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, 680 p Further Sources Used for Data Collecting (Not Cited in the Thesis) BARTH, C., 2003: Die Wirksamkeit der Kapillarsperre als Deponieoberflächenabdichtung:

Feldversuche auf der Deponie Bayreuth. – http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/archive/ 00001829/01/Barth_Christoph.pdf, Dissertation, LMU München, Fakultät für Geowissenschaften, 119 p

BASF Agrarzentrum Limburgerhof, n.d.: Düngemittel Produktentwicklung, Agrikultur-

chemisches Labor. – CAD_DK_Lysimeteranlage.doc, Limburgerhof, 4 p EDER, G., 1993: Bericht über die Auslandsdienstreise vom 17. bis 21. Mai 1993 in die Neuen

Bundesländer der BRD zur Besichtigung von Lysimeteranlagen, 4 p Fachhochschule Nordostniedersachsen FB Bauingenieurwesen (Wasserwirtschaft und Umwelt-

technik), 2004: Vorstellung des F und E-Vorhabens „Optimierungsversuche zur Verbesserung der Entgasung bestehender Reaktordeponien mit dem Ziel der Inertisierung“. – http://www.deponie-stief.de/deponie/siwa/infiltration/ubafg00/holweg_ubaFG0012.pdf, Suderburg, 3 p

FANK, J. et al., 1996: Agri-Environmental Measures and Water Quality in Mountain Catchments.

– Report AGREAUALP January 1995–December 1995, Institut für Hydrogeologie und Geothermie & Institut für Technologie und Regionalpolitik, Graz, 79 p

FANK, J. et al., 1997: Agri-Environmental Measures and Water Quality in Mountain Catchments

January 1996–December 1996. – Report AGREAUALP (Austria), Institut für Hydrogeologie und Geothermie & Institut für Technologie und Regionalpolitik, Graz, 157 p

FEICHTINGER, F. and W. HARTL, 1997: Nutrient losses to the groundwater as influenced by

organic fertilization compared to mineral fertilization, experimental outlines. – Poster, CIEC-Kongressband; Gent/Sept. 7-13 1997

Felduntersuchungen zur Validierung der Modelle, n.d.: Feldbericht.doc, 2 p

http://www.kommdesign.de/texte/index.htm

http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/archive/�00001829/01/Barth_Christoph.pdf

http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/archive/�00001829/01/Barth_Christoph.pdf

http://www.deponie-stief.de/deponie/siwa/infiltration/ubafg00/holweg_ubaFG0012.pdf

9 References

124

HARTL, W. et al., 1998: Lysimeter Lobau, Kooperationsprojekt Ludwig Boltzmann-Institut für biologischen Landbau mit BAW-IKT mit Unterstützung der Magistratsabteilung 48 der Stadt Wien. – Zusammenstellung anlässlich der Exkursion der Arbeitsgruppe Lysimeter (30. 6. 1998), Vienna, 8 p

HELLIWELL, R., n.d.: Site descriptions of Allt a’Mharcaidh and The Culardoch Experimental Sites,

3 p (and two sketches, provided for survey 2004) HENKEN-MELLIES, W. U., 2003: Die Bedeutung der Rekultivierungsschicht für die Wirksamkeit

von Deponie-Oberflächenabdichtungen. – 2003_LGA-Deponieseminar.pdf, 16 p HENKEN-MELLIES, U. and E. GARTUNG, 2004: Long-term observation of alternative landfill

capping systems – field tests on a landfill in Bavaria. – 2004_Land Contamination.pdf, EPP Publications Ltd, Land Contamination & Reclamation, Volume 12, Number 1, 8 p

IKT/Institut für Kulturtechnik und Bodenwasserhaushalt, 2000: Endbericht: Auswirkung

verschiedener Zwischenbegrünungen auf Sickerwasseranfall und Nährstoffverfrachtung ins Grundwasser – Lysimeteranlage Langenschönbichl. – LSB-Endbericht 101100.pdf, Bundesamt für Wasserwirtschaft (BAW), 39 p

KLEIN, W., 1995: PELMO Pesticide Leaching Model, Vers. 2.01, Oct 1995, User's manual. –

http://www.ime.fraunhofer.de/download/expomodels/focus_pelmo/usermanual_pelmo.pdf, Fraunhofer-Institut für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikolgie, Schmallenberg, 91 p

Landesanstalt für Umweltschutz Baden-Württemberg, 2004: Wasser und Altlasten. – LFU_

126_146.pdf, pp 126-146; Lysimeter und Regenmesser der LfU, Lysimetermessnetz.pdf, 1 p MESIC, M., n.d.: Influence of mineral nitrogen fertilization on nitrogen leaching, experimental

field near Popovača, 3 p (excursion handout 2004) NESTROY, O., 2002: Vergleichende Darstellung Österreichischer und internationaler Boden-

systematiken, basierend auf der bereinigten Fassung der Europa-Bodenkarte 1:1 Mio. vom Jahre 1998. – Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft, Heft 65, Vienna, pp 1-23

Umweltinstitut des Landes Vorarlberg, 2003: Der Waldboden im Pfändergebiet, Zustand und

Stoffdynamik. – http://www.vorarlberg.at/pdf/derwaldbodenimpfaenderge1.pdf, Schriftenreihe Lebensraum Vorarlberg, Band 55, Bregenz, 27 p

Umweltinstitut des Landes Vorarlberg, 2004: Bodenschutz, Einfluss der Salzstreuung auf den

Bodenzustand. – http://www.vorarlberg.at/pdf/kurzbericht_streusalzbela.pdf, Gesamtbearbei-tung: Josef Scherer, Bregenz, 18 p

VESELIČ, M., B. ČENČUR CURK, 2004: Field Research Facility of Sinji Vrh in the Epikarst Zone of

Trnovo Plateau Karst Aquifer. – Groundwater Research Facilities of IRGO, Ljubljana, 10 p VRBEK, B. and I. PILAŠ, n.d.: Method of Monitoring Deposition of Deposited Matter in Forest

Ecosystems. – Forest Research Institute, Jastrebarsko, 10 p VRBEK, B., 2003: Svojstva tala šume hrasta lužnjaka I običnoga graba (Carpino betuli–Quercetum

roboris Hr. 1938) Pokupskog bazena, Česme i Repaša/Soil Charactersitics in peduncled oak and common hornbeam forest (Carpino betuli-Quercetum roboris Ht. 1938) of the Pokupsko Basin, Česma and Repaš. – Forest Research Institute/Rad. Šumar. inst. 38 (2), Jastrebarsko, pp 177-194 (and excursion handouts 2004)

http://www.ime.fraunhofer.de/download/expomodels/focus_pelmo/usermanual_pelmo.pdf

http://www.vorarlberg.at/pdf/derwaldbodenimpfaenderge1.pdf

http://www.vorarlberg.at/pdf/kurzbericht_streusalzbela.pdf

9 References

125

ZAHNOW, V. et al., 1992: Wasserumsatz im Boden, Ergebnisse der Lysimeter-, Bodenfeuchte- und Verdunstungsmessungen 1971 – 1990, Teil I: Südhessen. – Hessische Landesanstalt für Umwelt, Umweltplanung, Arbeits- und Umweltschutz, Heft Nr. 139, Wiesbaden, 96 p

ZAHNOW, V. et al., 1994 a and b: Wasserumsatz im Boden, Ergebnisse der Lysimeter-,

Bodenfeuchte- und Verdunstungsmessungen 1971 – 1990, Teil II: Mittelhessen and Teil III Nordhessen. – Hessische Landesanstalt für Umwelt, Umweltplanung, Arbeits- und Umwelt-schutz, Heft Nr. 159 and 177, Wiesbaden, 59 and 57 p

Further Web Sites (All Visited from July to October 2004) Department of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Agronomy & Field Crops, 2004: Current

Research Projects and Publications, Research Project: Effect of some agricultural practices on nitrogen leaching in a soybean-maize crop rotation (since 1987), http://www.dpvta.uniud.it/agro/Agro_ric.htm

Diplomandenexkursion vom 31.Mai 1999 bis 04.Juni 1999, Exkursionsleitung Dr. Peter

CEPUDER, Berichterstattung: MITTERMAYR Chr., SCHLEDERER W., CEPUDER P. (2001), 2004: http://ihlww.boku.ac.at/Book/Lehre/Exber99.htm

HASEKE, H. (1998), 2004: Nationalpark Kalkalpen, Oberösterreich/Upper Austria, The Karst

Research Program – Participant Projects: http://ftp-waldoek.boku.ac.at/kalkalp/ npkabst2.HTM

nano online (3sat, 2003), 2004: Bäume wiegen, Lysimeter-Forschung gegen sinkenden

Grundwasser-Spiegel, http://www.3sat.de/nano/cstuecke/48207/ Niedersächsisches Landesamt für Bodenforschung (2003), 2004: Feldlysimeterstationen,

http://www.nlfb.de/ SAYLER, M. D. et al., WWRC-84-09 (December 1984), 2004: Design and Installation of a

Weighing Lysimeter, http://library.wrds.uwyo.edu/wrp/84-09/84-09.html UFZ (2002), 2004: Lysimeterstation am Standort Brandis, http://www.ufz.de/index.php?de=925 Umweltbundesamt (2003), 2004: Zöbelboden, Oberösterreich,

http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/umwelt/luft/messnetz/zoebelboden/ Universität Rostock, Agrar- und Umweltwissenschaftliche Fakultät, Institut für

Umweltingenieurwesen, 2004: Lysimeterstation Groß Lüsewitz, http://www.auf.uni-rostock.de/uiw/ausstattung.asp#lysimeter

ZENKER, T. (2001), 2004: Die Lysimeteranlage Berlin-Dahlem, http://www.tu-berlin.de/fb7/

ile/fg_wasserkult/Mit/TZ/Lysimeteranlage.html

http://www.dpvta.uniud.it/agro/Agro_ric.htm

http://ihlww.boku.ac.at/Book/Lehre/Exber99.htm

http://ftp-waldoek.boku.ac.at/kalkalp/�npkabst2.HTM

http://ftp-waldoek.boku.ac.at/kalkalp/�npkabst2.HTM

http://www.3sat.de/nano/cstuecke/48207/

http://www.nlfb.de/

http://library.wrds.uwyo.edu/wrp/84-09/84-09.html

http://www.ufz.de/index.php?de=925

http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/umwelt/luft/messnetz/zoebelboden/

http://www.auf.uni-rostock.de/uiw/ausstattung.asp#lysimeter

http://www.auf.uni-rostock.de/uiw/ausstattung.asp#lysimeter

http://www.tu-berlin.de/fb7/�ile/fg_wasserkult/Mit/TZ/Lysimeteranlage.html

http://www.tu-berlin.de/fb7/�ile/fg_wasserkult/Mit/TZ/Lysimeteranlage.html

Appendix A

126

Appendixes

Translation English/German (terms used in chapters 2 and 3)

1 soil = Boden 2 pedosphere = Pedosphäre, Gesamtheit der Böden (SCHEFFER 2002, p 2) 3 ecosphere/biogeosphere = Ökosphäre/Biogeosphäre 4 unsaturated zone = (Wasser)ungesättigte (Boden)Zone 5 soil water, percolating water, infiltration water = Bodenwasser, Sickerwasser oder Wasser der

ungesättigten Bodenzone (HÖLTING 1996, p 75) 6 groundwater/phreatic water, zone of saturation = Grundwasser, [wasser]gesättigte Zone 7 upper confining bed/groundwater level = Grundwasserspiegel; water table = Grundwasseroberfläche,

Grundwasserspiegel 8 clay-fraction = Tonfraktion 9 clay, silt, sand = Ton, Schluff, Sand 10 coarse soil = Grobboden 11 fine soil = Feinboden 12 texture/texture of soil = Textur/Bodentextur 13 composition of soil fractions/particles = Bodenart 14 loam = Lehm 15 pore or pore space = Pore oder Poren[hohl]raum 16 soil porosity (P) = Porosität oder Porenvolumen (PV oder n ): Veränderung des Porenanteils

(VP = Vp) wird auf das gesamte Bodenvolumen (VT = Vg) bezogen 17 void ratio (e) = diese Relationszahl ist die Porenziffer (e, ε oder PZ): Veränderung des Volumens

zum nicht veränderbaren Feststoffvolumen (VS = Vf) 18 effective porosity = nutzbare Porosität, (speicher)wirksames oder nutzbares Porenvolumen; auch

durchflusswirksamer Hohlraumanteil nf oder Porositätsfaktor P* laut HÖLTING 1996, S 86 19 adherent water = Haftwasser (das gegen die Schwerkraft adhäsiv gehaltene Wasser, HÖLTING 1996,

S 76) 20 density of the solid soil/particle density = Dichtewert der festen Substanz (ρS oder ρF) 21 bulk density of soil (ρB) = Lagerungsdichte: Masse des bei 105 °C getrockneten Bodens mS = mf,

bezogen auf das Gesamtvolumen 22 percolating water = Sickerwasser 23 adherent water, soil moisture = Haftwasser, Bodenfeuchte 24 soil water - deutsche Übersetzung in PFANNKUCH 1969 dazu: Bodenfeuchte, Bodenwasser 25 soilwater zone - deutsche Übersetzung in PFANNKUCH 1969 dazu: bodennahe Zone (nach bisherigen

Erläuterungen zu Boden und ungesättigter Zone aber keine korrekte Übersetzung; Bodenwassergürtel: diese Übersetzung entspricht der (Wasser)ungesättigten (Boden)Zone, siehe oben

26 soil-moisture meter = Bodenfeuchtemessgerät 27 soil water content/water content = (Boden)Wassergehalt; volumetric soil water content =

volumetrischer Wassergehalt: Volumen des Bodenwassers durch gesamtes Bodenvolumen 28 shrinkage and swelling = Schrumpfung und Quellung: Volumen/Wassergehaltsabnahme und

Volumenausdehnung im Boden; Quellung tritt nur nach einer vorhergehenden Entwässerung auf

Appendix A

127

29 total potential = Gesamtpotenzial, Teilpotenziale (in der Reihenfolge, wie im Text bzw. in der

Formel vorkommend, Abkürzungen sind bei SCHEFFER 2002, S 212-213 nachzuschlagen: Gravitationspotenzial, Matrixpotenzial (früher auch Kapillarpotenzial genannt), osmotisches Potenzial (Lösungspotenzial), Gaspotenzial, Druck- oder piezometrisches Potenzial

30 pressure potential = Matrixpotenzial (von Tensiometern gemessen) 31 water potential (soil water) pressure head = Matrixpotential Wasserspannung; 32 soil water retention curve (SWRC) = Wasserspannungs-/Wassergehaltskurve,

Bodenwassercharakteristik 33 matric suction = Wasserspannung; in Zusammenhang mit der Beziehung zwischen Wasserspannung

und Wassergehalt wird bei SCHEFFER 2002, p 215-216 auch hier der Ausdruck Matrixpotential verwendet. Hingegen wird in der Grundlagenliteratur weder im Englischen noch im Deutschen der Ausdruck tension/Tension für Wasserspannung verwendet.

34 pF curve = pF-Kurve; pF-Wert entspricht dem logarithmierten Wert der Wasserspannung: pF = log|cmWS, hPa|; (1 cm = 1 hPA)

35 field capacity = Feldkapazität (FK): Wassergehalt, bei dem sich allmählich ein ausgeglichenes hydraulisches Potenzial im Boden einstellt, dies ist bei länger andauernden Niederschlägen etwa nach ein bis zwei Tagen der Fall.

36 permanent wilting point = permanenter Welkepunkt (PWP): Jener Punkt (Bereich), ab dem der noch vorhandene Wasseranteil im Boden den Pflanzen nicht mehr zur Verfügung steht, die Pflanze welkt. Das Wasser ist nur noch in den Feinporen gebunden und der PWP ist daher stark vom Tongehalt abhängig.

37 hysteresis = Hysteresis: Wasserspannungskurve ist auch von der Richtung der Wassergehalts-ändeurng abhängig – sie zeigt bei Be- und Entwässerung verschiedene Verläufe (SCHEFFER 2002, p 217)

38 propagation velocity = Ausbreitungsgeschwindigkeit 39 DARCY’s law = DARCY’s Gesetz; im Folgenden werden die im englischen und deutschen Sprach-

gebrauch üblichen Abkürzungen angegeben, falls diese sich unterscheiden: eine Wassermenge (Q) [m³/s], die eine bestimmte Fläche/einen Fließquerschnitt (A = F) [m²] hindurchfließt ist dem Druck-höhenunterschied der Wasserspiegellagen (siehe im Beispiel Gefäße auf rechter und linker Seite) (∆h = h) und einer Filtermedium spezifischen Konstanten (KS = kf) direkt proportional, aber umgekehrt proportional zur Fließlänge (L = l). Ih = der hydraulische Gradient/das Gefälle (J) und beschreibt das Verhältnis ∆h/L bzw. h/l

40 hydraulic conductivity KS (former coefficient of permeability) = hydraulische Leitfähigkeit, Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert, Durchlässigkeitskoeffizient kf oder kf-Wert: Größe, die vom durchflossenen Medium und dessen Reibung sowie von den Eigenschaften des Wassers (Dichte, Viskosität, Temperatur) abhängt

41 flow in a saturated medium v = Fließgeschwindigkeit v, der die Filtergeschwindigkeit vf entspricht 42 mean water flow rate in the soil pores vp = Abstandsgeschwindigkeit va, die zur Errechnung der

tatsächlichen Geschwindigkeit des Wassers benötigt und durch das durchflusswirksame nutzbare Porenvolumen korrigiert wird

43 permeability wird für die im Deutschen verwendeten Begriffe Durchlässigkeit (= aber definitionsgemäß nach DIN 4049 die hydraulische Leitfähigkeit!, HÖLTING 1996, S 107) und Permeabilität gebraucht; intrinsic permeability (Kp) = Permeabilität/Durchlässigkeit im eigentlichen Sinne: gesteinsspezifische Konstante, beschreibt die Beschaffenheit des Porensystems unabhängig von den Fluideigenschaften

44 transmissivity T = Transmissivität T (genormter Begriff), auch als Transmissibilität bezeichnet „Produkt aus kf-Wert und Mächtigkeit (M) der Grundwasserleitenden Schicht“, HÖLTING 1996, S 119: T = kf . M

45 infiltration = Einsickerung (PFANNKUCH 1969, S 60)

Appendix A

128

46 percolation = Sickerströmung, Filterströmung; to percolate = durchsickern, durchströmen

(PFANNKUCH 1969, S 83) 47 infiltration rate = Infiltrationsrate: gibt jene Wassermenge an, die pro Zeiteinheit versickert; früher

auch Einsickerfähigkeit (infiltration capacity) genannt 48 capillary rise: Kapillarer Aufstieg: umgekehrter Vorgang der Infiltration 49 soil solution = Bodenlösung 50 leaching loss = (Stoff)Austrag 51 suction cup = Saugkerze; suction plate = Saugplatte; nach Anlegen eines Unterdrucks wird die

Bodenlösung in eine Sammelflasche/in ein Vorratsgefäß gesaugt und aufgefangen 52 soil water balance = Bodenwasserbilanz: Änderung des Wassergehalts im Boden/Änderungen des

gespeicherten Bodenwasservorrates (∆W, W oder ∆S), Niederschlag (P oder N), eventuelle Bewässerungen (I), Oberflächenabfluss (A oder RO), Abfluss in das Grundwasser/die Grundwasserneubildung (D oder RS), Evapotranspiration (E oder ET), zusammenfassend für Transpiration und Evaporation; BAUMGARTNER und LIEBSCHER 1990, S 396 beziehen auch den oberflächennahen Abfluss Ron sowie die Interzeption/den Interzeptionsverlust (durch die Pflanzen aufgefangener Niederschlag, der entweder absorbiert wird oder später verdunstet, abgekürzt hier ebenso als I) ein. Interzeption kann auch einen Gewinn für die Pflanzen darstellen, wenn Feuchtigkeit aus der Luft absorbiert wird, ohne dass Niederschlag fällt.

53 “a lysimeter is a device/vessel that isolates a volume of soil or earth between the soil surface and a depth given and includes a percolating water sampling system at its bottom” = “ein Lysimeter ist ein Gerät/ein Behälter, der ein Boden- oder Erdvolumen zwischen der Bodenoberfläche und einer gegebenen Tiefe isoliert und an seinem unteren Ende eine Vorrichtung zur Sickerwassersammlung aufweist”

54 Sickerwassersammler wurden auch „Kleinlysimeter“, „Feldlysimeter“ oder „Krumenlysimeter“ genannt. SWS im eigentlichen Sinne haben aber keine seitliche Berandung bis zur Bodenoberfläche und sollten somit nicht als „Lysimeter“ bezeichnet werden.

55 “groove lysimeter” = Rillenlysimeter; module groove system = modules Rillensystem 56 “virtual lysimeter” = “virtuelles Lysimeter” 57 soil hydrological measuring site = bodenhydrologischer Messplatz (SHMS)

Appendix B

129

Questionnaire for lysimeter facilities and research centres for soil hydrology: goals, equipment, data gathering Name of the facility, location Operated by (name of organisation address, URL, contact: phone, fax, e-mail) Facility in operation since/from … to Goals and purpose of this research centre/lysimeter facility Geographical description Position (provide co-ordinates or Mean annual temperature [°C]:

attach map) Mean annual precipitation [mm]: Altitude above sea level: Parent material (rock, sediment): Topographic feature of the Kind of soil/particles (sand, loam ...): surrounding area: (e.g. terrace, slope) Soil type: LYSIMETER Lysimeter facility A Lysimeter facility B Lysimeter facility C Lysimeter type Purpose Number of lysimeters (this type) Year of construction/operating since

if inactivated: year of inactivation

if location of the lysimeter is different from the location mentioned above please include a description of the location for this lysimeter type: Location (community)

Position (co-ordinates or map) Altitude above sea level

Topographic feature Parent material (rock, sediment)

Mean annual temperature [°C] Mean annual precipitation [mm]

Appendix B

130

General data Size: Length x Width x Depth [m]

Small lysimeters: Seepage water collector or

percolation sampler or field lysimeter Standard size lysimeter (0.5 - 1 m²)

Large lysimeter Vessel lysimeter

Building material of vessel/container Material/feature of the

lysimeter bottom Lysimeter cellar existing: yes/no

if yes: building material of the cellar

Groundwater (gw), negative pressure/suction no gw contact: without suction control

suction-controlled lysimeter groundwater lysimeter:

groundwater level is invariable variable

weighable lysimeter: yes/no if yes: weighing equipment

Seepage water/leachate

Determination: with suction cups through leakage

other method (e.g. drain pipes) Investigation of nutrients/substances

in the seepage water Measuring interval(s) of substances Nutrient balances prepared: yes/no

if yes: which balances?

Appendix B

131

Vegetation and cultivation Fallow/uncultivated

Grassland Wood/forest (which kind of trees?)

Arable land/field What kind of field crop (permanent?), crop rotation and for which period?

Ground cultivation Use of fertilizers: yes/no

if yes: fertilizer used or organic manure Amount of fertilizer(s) used [kg/ha]

Fertilization period Use of pesticide: yes/no

Irrigation: yes/no if yes: amount of irrigation [mm/year]

Filling method of soil

undisturbed (monolithic) disturbed (filled in)

Soil thickness [m] Kind of soil/particles (S, CS, LS, L, C, Si, Lsi, etc.) and soil profile (horizons) [cm]

(e.g.: A 0 - 20 cm LS) A B C …

Soil type Further soil parameters (e.g. porosity, distribution of soil particles sizes, permeability ...)

Appendix B

132

SOIL HYDROLOGY Sensors

Tensiometer and/or gypsum blocks

Suction cups Suction plates

TDR (Time domain reflectometry) Sensor(s) for soil temperature

Storing and managing data

Data logger Server, data base

other details (data formats ...)

Model used (specify goal of investigation and used model)

Further investigations, measurement techniques or equipment (e.g. determination of root mass)

METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS Temperature Precipitation

Relative humidity Atmospheric pressure

Global radiation Short wave reflex radiation

of the lysimeter surface Radiation balance/

net radiation Radiation from sky

Appendix B

133

Wind velocity (in m altitude) ( m ) ( m ) ( m ) Evaporation pan existing Which formula is used to determine evaporation?

Water balance determination (formula)

Other analyses/applications and formulas used

Other facilites Specifications about any malfunctions or problems and how they were repaired/corrected

Future developments, intentions, perspectives Remarks Attachments and additional information Map of lysimeter/research centre position attached? yes no Research reports (in English or German) available and attached (e.g. pdf oder MS Word document) ? yes no Sketch(es)/graphics/pictures, etc. of the lysimeter facility available and attached (e.g. jpg, pdf …)? yes no Are there any research reports (in English or German) or sketches/graphics/pictures available on a Web site? Please provide Web address (URL): Other: Note: This questionnaire will only be used for gathering information about the European lysimeter facilities and research centres for soil hydrology for my master's thesis. The results and descriptions will also be presented on the Web site of the Austrian Lysimeter Research Group (http://www.lysimeter.at). Thank you very much for your help!

Appendix C

134

Appendix C

135

Appendix D

136

(provided by the Hydrographic Service Austria, G. FUCHS 2004) Abkürzungen/Abbreviations: UZWG – Wassergehaltsmessung/determination of water content UZT – Temperatur/temperature UZHSG – Gipsblöcke/gypsum blocks UZHSRG – Referenzgipsblöcke (größte Trockenheitsstufe)/reference gypsum blocks (highest dryness) UZST – Tensiometer/tensiometer

Appendix E

137

Table a) Lysimeter/SWS sites operating (including lysimeter sites with soil hydrology measuring sites/SHMS) (current as of November 2004)

Name of site, location Lysimeter/SWS type Vessels Map (Nr.)

Freistadt (Fachschule) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 2 AT 2 Eferding NON-WEIGHABLE BACKBACKFILLED GRAVITATION FIELD LYSIMETER 4 AT 4 Schwertberg SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 2 AT 5 Schwertberg NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION FIELD LYSIMETER 2 AT 5 Tullner Becken SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/SHMS 6 AT 6 Traun SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 2 AT 7 Petzenkirchen NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER 3 AT 8 Lysimeter facility Hirschstetten/Wien NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 18 AT 9 Lobau, Wien NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER 3 AT 10 Lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 AT 11 Lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 6 AT 11 Lysimeter facility Groß-Enzersdorf NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER 1 AT 11 Obere Pettenbachrinne, Mayersdorf NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER/SHMS 1 AT 12 a Obere Pettenbachrinne, Pettenbach NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER/SHMS 1 AT 12 b Research centre/lysimeter facility Seibersdorf NON-WEIGHABLE AND WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 18 AT 13 Research centre/lysimeter facility Seibersdorf NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 AT 13 Zöbelboden SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/SHMS AT 14 Winklhof, Oberalm bei Hallein NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 6 AT 17 Achenkirch/Mühlegger Köpfl FUNNEL LYSIMETER (SNOW) 1 AT 18 Achenkirch/Mühlegger Köpfl NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 1 AT 18 Kaserstattalm (alpine region Stubaital) WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 4 AT 20 Lysimeter facility BAL Gumpenstein (Irdning) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 12 AT 21 Lysimeter facility BAL Gumpenstein (Irdning) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 5 AT 21 Lysimeter facility BAL Gumpenstein (Irdning) NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER 5 AT 21 Lysimeter facility BAL Gumpenstein (Irdning) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 9 AT 21 Höhenhansl (Pöllau) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/SOIL HYDROLGY MEASURING SITE 3 AT 23 Bierbaum (Zettling-Unterpremstätten) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/SHMS 4 AT 25 Lysimeter facility Wagna I/II NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 AT 27 Lysimeter facility Wagna II WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC FIELD LYSIMETER/SHMS 2 AT 27 8 different locations in southern Styria SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (ACCORDING TO STENITZER) 8 AT 28 Lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 BE 1 Lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 3 BE 1

Appendix E

138

Lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 3 BE 1 Lysimeter facility Lausanne, EPFL site NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 4 CH 1 Lysimeter facility Lausanne, EPFL site WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 1 CH 1 Lysimeter facility Lausanne, EPFL site WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 1 CH 1 Lysimeter facility Bern-Liebefeld WEIGHABLE AND NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 64 CH 2 Lysimeter facility Zürich-Reckenholz WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 12 CH 3 Lysimeter facility Agroscope FAT, Ettenhausen NON-WEIGH. MONO. GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/ZERO-TENSION LYSIMETER 6 CH 4 Filipov UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 60 CZ 1 Sklenařice UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 24 CZ 2 Vysoké UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 36 CZ 3 Testing station Chrastava (Chrastava) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 4 Testing station Žatec (Žatec) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 5 Location Závišín (Závišín) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (4 LAYERS) 4 CZ 6 CISTA station on a private plot (Krásné Údolí) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 7 Testing station Pusté Jakartice UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 8 Testing station Vysoká (Vysoká) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 9 Testing station Hradec nad Svitavou UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 10 CISTA station on a private plot (Domanínek) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 11 Testing station Lípa (Lípa) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 12 Testing station Věrovany (Věrovany) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 13 Testing station Horažďovice (Horažďovice) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 14 Testing station Libějovice (Libějovice) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 15 Testing station Jaroměřice (Jaroměřice) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 16 Testing station Uherský Ostroh UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 17 Testing station Lednice (Lednice) UNDISTURBED SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (3 LAYERS) 1 CZ 18 Kiel NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 8 DE 1 Langeoog (Ostfriesland) NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 DE 2 in Schleswig-Holstein NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 1 DE 3 Lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 6 DE 4 Lysimeter facility Groß Lüsewitz NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETERS 4 DE 4 Lysimeter facility Oldenburg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 16 DE 5 Lysimeter facility Oldenburg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 48 DE 5 Lysimeter facility Dedelow (Dedelow) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 32 DE 6 Heiliges Meer (Emsland, Lingen) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/FUNNEL 11 DE 7 Grumsmühlen (Emsland, Lingen) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/FUNNEL 9 DE 7 Lysimeter facility Falkenberg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 DE 8

Appendix E

139

Lysimeter facility Falkenberg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 117 DE 8 Lysimeter facility Falkenberg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 4 DE 8 Lysimeter facility Falkenberg WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 4 DE 8 St. Arnold/Rheine LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA 3 DE 10 Braunschweig-Völkenrode WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 2 DE 11 a Lysimeter facility Braunschweig Völkenrode FAL WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 8 DE 11 b Lysimeter facility Colbitz, Ohrekreis WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 12 DE 12 Lysimeter facility Colbitz, Ohrekreis (Magdeburg) LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA 1 DE 12 Groundwater lysimeter facility Paulinenaue NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 103 DE 13

Berlin-Dahlem (urban area) WEIGHABLE GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER AND SUCTION CONTROLLED LYSIMETER 12 DE 14

Lysimeter facility Senne, Bielefeld WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 DE 15 Lysimeter facility Göttingen NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 4 DE 16 Lysimeter facility Göttingen NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 4 DE 16 Lysimeter facility Mönchengladbach-Rheindahlen WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 DE 17 Lysimeter facility Mönchengladbach-Rheindahlen WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 DE 17 Lysimeter facility Waldfeucht NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 DE 18 Lysimeter facility Waldfeucht NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 DE 18 Lysimeter facility Waldfeucht WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 DE 18 Lysimeter facility Geb. 6680, Monheim NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 DE 19 Lysimeter facility Geb. 6680, Monheim WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 DE 19 Lysimeter facility Schmallenberg NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 32 DE 20 Lysimeter facility Grünewalde NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 9 DE 22 Lysimeter facility Grünewalde NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 16 DE 22 Merzenhausen, Krauthausen (near Jülich) WEIGHABLE FIELD LYSIMETER/SHMS 1 DE 23

Lysimeter facility Jülich NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/ZERO-TENSION LYSIMETER 20 DE 23

Lysimeter facility Jülich WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER/ZERO-TENSION LYSIMETER 10 DE 23 Lysimeter facility Jülich NON-WEIGHABLE/WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 30 DE 23 Halle/Saale WEIGHABLE LYSIMETER 3 DE 24 Lysimeter facility Buttelstedt/Großobringen WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 2 DE 25 Lysimeter facility Buttelstedt/Großobringen WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 2 DE 25 Leipzig-Möckern NON-WEIGHABLE GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 60 DE 26 Lysimeter faciltiy Brandis WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 24 DE 27 Lysimeter faciltiy Brandis NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 19 DE 27 Naunhofer Forst MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 2 DE 28

Appendix E

140

Lysimeter facility Deutzen GROOVE LYSIMETER (RILLENLYSIMETER) 27 DE 29 Seelingstädt/test area LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA DE 30 Ronneburg/deposit area Lichtenberg LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA DE 30 Lysimeter facility Koblenz-Niederwerth WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 4 DE 31 Lysimeter facility Koblenz-Niederwerth NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 4 DE 31 Lysimeter facility Geisenheim/Rhein WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 14 DE 32 Lysimeter facility Geisenheim/Rhein WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 DE 32 Lysimeter facility Geisenheim/Rhein WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 DE 32 Lysimeter facility Limburgerhof WEIGHABLE AND NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 18 DE 33 Lysimeter facility Limburgerhof NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 234 DE 33 Speyer/Rinkenbergerhof WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 DE 34 Dump "Im Dienstfeld", Aurach LARGE LYSIMETER (E 35)/TEST AREA 1 DE 35 Dump "Im Dienstfeld", Aurach LARGE LYSIMETER (E 50)/TEST AREA 1 DE 35 TZW lysimeter station Büchenau (Bruchsal) NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 3 DE 36 Büchig WEIGHABLE LYSIMETER 1 DE 37 Sanitary landfill Karlsruhe-West (I) LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA 1 DE 38 Sanitary landfill Karlsruhe-West (II) LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA 1 DE 38 Province of Baden-Württemberg NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 34 DE 39

different locations NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/ZERO-TENSION LYSIMETER 29 DE 40

Lysimeter facility IGÖ Neuherberg NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 DE 41 GSF lysimeter facility Neuherberg WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC AND BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 24 DE 41 GSF lysimeter facility Neuherberg WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 DE 41 GSF lysimeter facility Neuherberg WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 4 DE 41 Private compost lysimeter München-Freimann NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 1 DE 42 Lysimeter facility Wielenbach WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 DE 44 Lysimeter stations near Trier NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 15 DE 45 Lysimeter facility/research centre Flakkebjerg NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 DK 1 IRTA lysimeters, Mollerussa EEL fields WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 ES 1 Lysimeter facility Jokioinen NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 8 FI 1 Lysimeter facility Jokioinen NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 88 FI 1 Lysimeter facility Quimper-Kerfily (Finistère) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 8 FR 1 Lysimeter facility St Pol de Leon NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 17 FR 2 Lysimeter facility Plomelin, Kerbernez NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 36 FR 3 Lys. facility Lieury, St Pierre sur dives NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 30 FR 4 Kervalic, Nr. 1 (Bretagne/Finistère) NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 2 FR 5

Appendix E

141

Kervalic, Nr. 2 (Bretagne/Finistère) NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 2 FR 5 Lysimeter facility Rennes - Champ Noel NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 15 FR 6 Boigneville, domaine ITCF NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 2 FR 7 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 1 FR 9 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 1 FR 9 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 3 FR 9 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 2 FR 9 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 2 FR 9 Lys. facility Fagnières NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER 3 FR 9 Lysimeter facility Colmar, INRA (Haut-Rhin) NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 12 FR 11 La Chapelle Saint Sauveur, ITCF NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 2 FR 12 Lysimeter facility Villamblain, Les Hotels, INRA NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 10 FR 13 Levroux, Le Petit Vignol (Centre/Indre) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 2 FR 15 St Michel de Volangis, La Fringale (Centre/Cher) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER/SHMS 2 FR 16 Niort, St Liguaire SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 2 FR 17 St Pierre d'Amilly, ITCF SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 14 FR 18 Villié-Morgon CAPILLARY WICK SAMPLER/SHMS 4 FR 19 Lysimeter facility Cestas, INRA NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 5 FR 20 Lysimeter facility Luxey, Cara (Aquitane/Landes) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 4 FR 21 Lysimeter facility Auzeville, INRA NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 12 FR 22 Lysimeter facility Auzeville, INRA NON-WEIGHABLE FILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/SHMS 18 FR 22 Agronomic Research Center - INRA - Avignon NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER/SHMS 1 FR 23 Montfavet, Domaine St Paul (Vaucluse) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 2 FR 24 Jastrebarsko SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 25 HR 1 Lysimeter facility Zagreb-Maksimir NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER/GARNIER LYSIMETER? 8 HR 2 Jelenščak-Potok near Popovača (Lonjsko polje) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (AFTER EBERMAYER) 10 HR 3 Lysimeter facility Szarvas NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 320 HU 1

Lysimeter facility Karcag NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC AND BACKFILLED ZERO-TENSION LYSIMETER 42 HU 2

Lysimeter facility Karcag WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 6 HU 2 Johnstown Castle, Wexford NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 75 IE 1 Johnstown Castle, Wexford NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 50 IE 1 Spilimbergo SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER IT 1 Friuli Venezia Giulia, Friuli lowland SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 6 IT 1 Lysimeter facility Udine WEIGHABLE AND NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 4 IT 2 Lysimeter facility Udine BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 16 IT 2

Appendix E

142

Lysimeter facility Udine BACKFILLED LYSIMETER IT 2 Lysimeter facility Udine BACKFILLED LYSIMETER IT 2 Lysimeter facility Udine BACKFILLED LYSIMETER IT 2 Lysimeter facility Udine WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED LYSIMETER 16 IT 2 Lysimeter facility Legnaro (Padova) NON-WEIGHABLE GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 20 IT 3 Lysimeter facility central Italy (north of Rome) NON-WEIGHABLE BACKFILLED GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 30 IT 4 Torino ?/LYSIMETERS IT A Gevgelija NON-WEIGHABLE GRAVITATION LYSIMETER (GARNIE) MK B Pulawy GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 25 PL 1 Sundsvall LYSIMETERS SE 1 Apace Valley (near Apace) GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 12 SI 1 Trnovo plateau, trial plot Sinji Vrh SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 1 SI 2 Trnovo plateau, trial plot Sinji Vrh SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER (COLLECTING SEGMENTS) 28 SI 2 Ljubljana (city) ?/LYSIMETER SI A The Culardoch Experimental Site SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER UK 2 Allt a’Mharcaidh Experimental Site (5 plots) SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 3 UK 3 Fenns and Shixall Mosses, Bankhead Moss NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GROUNDWATER LYSIMETER 3 UK 4 Woburn Farm, Bedfordshire NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC LYSIMETER UK 5 Lysimeter facility Rothamsted Research NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER/IN-SITU 2 UK 6 Lysimeter facility Rothamsted Research NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER UK 6 Lysimeter facility North Wyke Research Station SEEPAGE WATER SAMPLER 24 UK 7 Lysimeter facility North Wyke Research Station NON-WEIGHABLE MONOLITHIC GRAVITATION LYSIMETER 16 UK 7 Lysimeter facility North Wyke Research Station LARGE LYSIMETER/TEST AREA 24 UK 7

Appendix E

143

Table b) Soil hydrology measuring sites (SHMS) of Europe (current as of November 2004)

Name of SHMS, location Map (Nr.)

different locations AT 1, 3, 15, Glasenbach AT 16 Leutasch-Kirchplatzl AT 19 Stadlmoar (Zeltweg) AT 22 Zettersfeld AT 24 Kalsdorf AT 26 Ostrau, MP I DE 21 Ostrau, MP II DE 21 Münchner Loch, München Großhadern DE 43 Thibie, Le Haut-Chichard (Champagne-Ardenne/Marne) FR 8 Haussimont, Noue Cochin (Champagne-Ardenne/Marne) FR 8 a Magny-le-camp, Noue Colatte (Champagne-Ardenne/Marne) FR 8 a Vittel, site 1, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Vittel, site 7, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Vittel, site 8, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Vittel, site 13, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Hareville, site 2, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Hareville, site 10, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Valleroy, site 3, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Valleroy, site 6, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Valleroy-le-sec, site 11, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Ligneville, site 4, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Ligneville, site 4, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Ligneville, site 9, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Monthureux, site 12, gite hydrominéral de Vittel FR 10 Villampuy (Centre/Eure) FR 14 Lysimeter facility Legnaro (Padova) IT 3 Agricultural Research Institute, Hillsborough, Co. Down UK 1 Exeter UK 8

Appendix E

144

Table c) Inactivated lysimeters, seepage water samplers (SWS), soil hydrology measuring sites or whole stations (November 2004)

Country Area/Town Number and lysimeter/SWS type Inactivated in Map (Nr.)

Austria different locations in Lower Austria: along the SWS? 2000 - Südbahn, Westbahn, in the Tullner and Marchfeld Austria Weißkirchen, Pucking (Upper Austria) SWS, 1 non-weighable monol. field lysimeter 2001 AT B Austria Eberstallzell (Upper Austria) 1 Non-weigh. monol. field lysimeter/soil hydr. meas. site 2001 (near AT 12) Austria Wolfpassing 24 SWS 2004 AT C Austria Pfänder (Lochau, Vorarlberg) Soil hydrology measuring site 2000 AT D Austria Breitenberg (Vorarlberg) Soil hydrology measuring site 2000? AT E Austria Beschling (Vorarlberg) Soil hydrology measuring site 2000? AT F Austria Oberes Glantal/Upper Glan valley (Carinthia) 10 SWS (according to STENITZER) AT G Austria Seibersdorf 12 Non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters 2003 AT 13 Austria Wagna (Styria) 6 Non-weighable monolithic field lysimeters 2004 AT 27 Austria Wagna (Styria) 3 SWS (according to STENITZER) 2004 AT 27 Belgium Lysimeter facility Louvain-la-Neuve (laboratory) 2 Non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters BE 1 Germany Bad Bramstedt 31 SWS 2002 DE A Germany Lysimeter facility salt-waste dump Bleicherode 14 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters 2001 DE D Germany Lysimeter facility Sindorf 4 Weighable monolithic and backfilled gravitation lysimeters in 1990s DE E Germany Province of Hessen 70 Non-weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters 1990/2004 DE F Germany Forest ecology station Remstecken SWS 1998 DE G Germany Mendig/Eifel 1 Weighable, 1 non-weigh. monolithic gravitation lysimeter late 1990s? DE H Germany Lysimeter facility Senne, Bielefeld (Sennestadt) 3 Weighable monolithic gravitation lysimeters 2003 DE 15 Germany Grünewalde (Gemeinde Lauchhammer) 66 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters 2003 DE 22 Germany IGÖ small lysimeters Neuherberg 5 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters 2004/2005 DE 41 Germany IGÖ small lysimeters Neuherberg 5 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters 2004 DE 41 Ireland Johnstown Castle, Wexford 24 Non-weighable backfilled lysimeters 2004? IE 1 R. of Macedonia Bitola (Gevgelija?) 4 Non-weighable gravitation lysimeter (garnie) 1996 MK A United Kingdom Agric. Research Institute, Hillsborough, Co. Down Soil hydrology measuring site 2003 UK 1 United Kingdom Scotland (different locations) 30 Non-weighable monolithic groundwater lysimeters 1991/1995 (near UK 2/3) United Kingdom Reading (old) lysimeters UK B

Appendix E

145

Table d) Lysimeter stations/facilities or SWS not known if inactivated or still operating (current as of November 2004)

Country Area/Town Number and lysimeter/SWS type Operating start Map (Nr.)

Austria Langenschönbichl 9 Non-weighable monolithic field lysimeters 1989/1995 AT A Germany Suderburg (Dump) 3 Backfilled gravitation lysimeters 2000 DE B Germany Kassel 32 Monolithic lysimeters 1993 DE C Germany Veitshöchheim 173 SWS 1983/1997 DE I Germany Bayreuth 28 Non-weighable backfilled gravitation lysimeters DE J Germany Dump Heinersgrund (Bindlach) 2 Large lysimeters/test areas 1999/2000 DE K

Germany different locations (Gewässerdienst Donau/Bodensee) Not known DE L Germany Freising 32 Non-weighable backfilled lysimeters DE M

Table e) Existing seepage water sampler or lysimeter sites without further details (current as of November 2004)

Country Area/Town Note Map (Nr.)

Estonia Southern Estonia (planned in the North too) lysimeter field trial EE 1 Finland different parts of the country 16 sample plots FI A Germany Northwest/near Osnabrück 16 small lysimeters/SWS? - Italy Torino small lysimeter facility IT A Slovenia Ljubljana new facility SI A Spain Santiago de Compostela lysimeters since 1972 ES A Sweden Sundsvall lysimeters SE A United Kingdom Lancaster large monoliths UK A (all tables prepared according to information of different sources; data provided until November 8, 2004 was analyzed)

Table f) Lysimeters expected at following places (no further details were available until November 8, 2004)

Country Area/Town

Croatia Osijek Croatia Split

Republic of Macedonia Mavrovo (Western part of Macedonia)

United Kingdom Cranfield, Silsoe United Kingdom Jeallot's Hill

lysimeter stations and soil hydrology measuring sites in europe—

Documents