the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Hydro-pedotransfer functions: A roadmap for future development
Abstract. Hydro-pedotransfer functions (PTFs) relate easy-to-measure and readily available soil information to soil hydraulic properties for applications in a wide range of process-based and empirical models, thereby enabling the assessment of soil hydraulic effects on hydrological, biogeochemical, and ecological processes. At least more than four decades of research have been invested to derive such relationships. However, while models, methods, data storage capacity, and computational efficiency have advanced, there are fundamental concerns related to the scope and adequacy of current PTFs, particularly when applied to parameterize models used at the field scale and beyond. Most of the PTF development process has focused on refining and advancing the regression methods, while fundamental aspects have remained largely unconsidered. Most system settings are not captured by existing PTFs, which have been built mostly for agricultural soils in temperate climates. Thus. existing PTFs largely ignorie how parent material, vegetation, land use, and climate affect processes that shape soil hydraulic properties. The PTFs used to parameterise the Richards-Richardson equation are mostly limited to predicting parameters of the van Genuchten-Mualem soil hydraulic functions, despite sufficient evidence demonstrating their shortcomings. Another fundamental issue relates to the diverging scales of derivation and application, whereby PTFs are derived based on laboratory measurements while being often applied at field to regional scales. Scaling, modulation, and constraining strategies exist to alleviate some of these shortcomings in the mismatch between scales. These aspects are addressed here in a joint effort by the members of the International Soil Modelling Consortium (ISMC) Pedotransfer Functions Working Group with the aim to systematise PTF research and provide a roadmap guiding both PTF development and use.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(1849 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1849 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1860', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Oct 2023
Dear authors,
Many thanks for submitting a very interesting paper. I enjoyed reading it and think it will be a good benchmark for future work on pedotransfer functions (PTFs) and soil hydrological properties. I did not find major flaws in terms of the review conducted by the authors or with the data analysis presented within the manuscript.
However, i felt the manuscript was very long and a bit hard to follow at times. A summary explaining/outlining the paper's structure could help the reader follow better. This should be provided at the end of the introduction section, and could replace the summary at the subsections' opening. A table or list of abbreviations after the abstract would also be very helpful, as there are too many acronyms, forcing the reader to sometimes go back and forth the text. The study aim and how this was achieved needs to be made much clearer in the abstract and introduction. Some of the key takeaways presented in the last section could also be summarised in the abstract, so the impact and relevance of the study can be highlighted.
Some sections contained too much detail that did not help understand the key message better, or even was unclear how some of the detail/text was explicitly related to the study topic. Some ideas are presented and discussed in multiple sections (e.g., upscaling, establishment of standard methods, etc) whilst conveying the same message, creating some avoidable redundancy. i suggest the authors trim the text down and, to the best of their ability, strive to focus on the main takeaways. For example, Fig. 9 seems to portray many (if not most) of the points the authors are making. Fig. 9 could feature much earlier in the manuscript and be used as a vehicle for presenting or better structuring the discussion.
Last but not least, provided that the authors are providing a concise and comprehensive review of PTFs, I missed some text in the introduction referring to composite soils. In particular, aspects related to how vegetation and soil microbial communities may impact soil hydrological properties and PTFs, though discussed later on in the MS (in more than one section, please condense and merge), I felt it was not given enough attention and that it should be highlighted earlier on (and perhaps in the final declaration, too), as this can open up exciting research opportunities. Perhaps the authors tried to made this implicit when discussing the impact of soil structure on PTFs and the current lack of understanding. If so, i would encourage the authors to make the point more clear.
I am also providing some other specific comments in the attached file. Some are related to the science but most are editorial suggestions.
Best wishes,
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-1860/egusphere-2023-1860-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1860', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Nov 2023
Publisher’s note: a supplement was added to this comment on 9 November 2023.
See attachment
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 08 Nov 2023
Publisher’s note: this comment is a copy of AC3 and its content was therefore removed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1860-AC1 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-1860/egusphere-2023-1860-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 08 Nov 2023
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1860', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Oct 2023
Dear authors,
Many thanks for submitting a very interesting paper. I enjoyed reading it and think it will be a good benchmark for future work on pedotransfer functions (PTFs) and soil hydrological properties. I did not find major flaws in terms of the review conducted by the authors or with the data analysis presented within the manuscript.
However, i felt the manuscript was very long and a bit hard to follow at times. A summary explaining/outlining the paper's structure could help the reader follow better. This should be provided at the end of the introduction section, and could replace the summary at the subsections' opening. A table or list of abbreviations after the abstract would also be very helpful, as there are too many acronyms, forcing the reader to sometimes go back and forth the text. The study aim and how this was achieved needs to be made much clearer in the abstract and introduction. Some of the key takeaways presented in the last section could also be summarised in the abstract, so the impact and relevance of the study can be highlighted.
Some sections contained too much detail that did not help understand the key message better, or even was unclear how some of the detail/text was explicitly related to the study topic. Some ideas are presented and discussed in multiple sections (e.g., upscaling, establishment of standard methods, etc) whilst conveying the same message, creating some avoidable redundancy. i suggest the authors trim the text down and, to the best of their ability, strive to focus on the main takeaways. For example, Fig. 9 seems to portray many (if not most) of the points the authors are making. Fig. 9 could feature much earlier in the manuscript and be used as a vehicle for presenting or better structuring the discussion.
Last but not least, provided that the authors are providing a concise and comprehensive review of PTFs, I missed some text in the introduction referring to composite soils. In particular, aspects related to how vegetation and soil microbial communities may impact soil hydrological properties and PTFs, though discussed later on in the MS (in more than one section, please condense and merge), I felt it was not given enough attention and that it should be highlighted earlier on (and perhaps in the final declaration, too), as this can open up exciting research opportunities. Perhaps the authors tried to made this implicit when discussing the impact of soil structure on PTFs and the current lack of understanding. If so, i would encourage the authors to make the point more clear.
I am also providing some other specific comments in the attached file. Some are related to the science but most are editorial suggestions.
Best wishes,
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-1860/egusphere-2023-1860-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1860', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Nov 2023
Publisher’s note: a supplement was added to this comment on 9 November 2023.
See attachment
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 08 Nov 2023
Publisher’s note: this comment is a copy of AC3 and its content was therefore removed.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1860-AC1 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 01 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-1860/egusphere-2023-1860-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Tobias Karl David Weber, 08 Nov 2023
Peer review completion
Post-review adjustments
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1,019 | 417 | 54 | 1,490 | 31 | 32 |
- HTML: 1,019
- PDF: 417
- XML: 54
- Total: 1,490
- BibTeX: 31
- EndNote: 32
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
1 citations as recorded by crossref.
Tobias Karl David Weber
Lutz Weihermüller
Attila Nemes
Michel Bechtold
Aurore Degré
Efstathios Diamantopoulos
Simone Fatichi
Vilim Filipović
Surya Gupta
Tobias L. Hohenbrink
Daniel R. Hirmas
Conrad Jackisch
Quirijn de Jong van Lier
John Koestel
Peter Lehmann
Toby R. Marthews
Budiman Minasny
Holger Pagel
Martine van der Ploeg
Simon Fiil Svane
Brigitta Szabó
Harry Vereecken
Anne Verhoef
Michael Young
Yijian Zeng
Yonggen Zhang
Sara Bonetti
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1849 KB) - Metadata XML