Effect of biogas waste applications on soil moisture characteristic curve and assessment of the predictive accuracy of the Van Genuchten model

Abstract

Biogas production has recently become an important issue in countries where alternative energy sources are gaining importance. The study investigates the use of waste, the final product of production, as a soil conditioner and fertilizer for sustainable soil management. The study examines the effects of different amounts of biogas waste [0 (B0), 1 (B1), 2 (B2), 3 (B3) and 4 (B4) ton da-1] on some soil properties and soil moisture characteristic curve (pF). In addition, the van Genuchten model, which has been long and widely used in many studies for the prediction of hydraulic properties, was compared with the pF curves that were obtained using the predicted and real values obtained from the applications. The results of the study showed that although biogas waste applications were more effective in the wet region of the moisture characteristic curve, B3 was the most effective dose that improved the physical properties of the soil. The B4 application had a decrease of about 16% in the penetration resistance and an increase of about 21% in the wilting point compared with those of the control group. The decrease in the macro pore volume due to biogas waste applications was not statistically significant, while biogas waste applications caused a statistically significant increase in the micro pore volume (P <0.05). Among the van Genuchten model parameters, the moisture content in saturation (θS) and residual water (θr) had realistic results in all biogas waste applications. Moreover, the air entry value (1 / α) was estimated to be 41.667 cm in the B0 application and 55.556 cm in the B4 application. In conclusion, high-accuracy estimates were obtained using the van Genuchten model with a R2 value of 0.901 and root mean square error (RMSE) value of 0.061 cm3 cm-3 in the moisture characteristic curve of the control (B0) soil.

Keywords

• Biogas waste
• van Genuchten model
• pF
• soil physical properties

References

1. Abdulwahhab, Q.R., 2020. Determınatıon of the effects of lime, organic matter and soil compaction on some hydrodynamic properties of different textured soils. PhD Thesis. Selçuk University, Institute of Science, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Konya, Turkey. 199p. [in Turkish].
2. Alaboz, P., 2019. The development of prediction models to determine some soil moisture constants by penetration resistance measurements. PhD Thesis. Süleyman Demirel University, Institute of Science. Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Isparta, Turkey. 142p. [in Turkish].
3. Alaboz, P., Işıldar, A.A., 2019. Evaluation of pedotransfer functions (PTFs) for some soil physical properties. Turkish Journal of Science and Engineering 1(1): 28-34. [in Turkish].
4. Barzegar, A.R., Yousefi, A., Daryashenas, A., 2002. The effect of addition of different amounts and types of organic materials on soil physical properties and yield of wheat. Plant and Soil 247: 295-301.
5. Birol, Y., 2010. Effect of hazelnut husk compost on physical properties of compacted a clay-loam soil. MSc Thesis. Ordu University, Institute of Science, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Ordu, Turkey. 59p. [in Turkish].
6. Bouyoucos, G.J., 1962. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal 54(5): 464-465.
7. Calonego, J.C., Rosolem, C.A., 2011. Least limiting water range in soil under crop rotations and chiseling. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 35(3): 759-771.
8. Danielson, R.E., Sutherland, P.L., 1986. Porosity. In: Methods of Soil Analysis Part 1-Physical and Mineralogical Methods, Klute, A. (Ed.)., Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Madison. Wisconsin. pp. 443-461.

9. Fashi, H.F., Gorji, M., Sharifi, F., 2017. Least limiting water range for different soil management practices in dryland farming in Iran. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 63(13): 1814-1822.
10. Gliński, J., Horabik, J., Lipiec, J., 2011. Encyclopedia of agrophysics. Springer, Berlin, Germany. pp. 264-267.
11. Gülser, C., Candemir, F., 2012. Changes in penetration resistance of a clay field with organic waste applications. Eurasian Journal of Soil Science 1(1): 16 – 21.
12. Hazelton, P., Murphy, B., 2016. Interpreting soil test results: What do all the numbers mean?. CSIRO publishing. 152p.
13. IPCC, 2019. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
14. Islam, Md.R., Rahman, S.M.E., Rahman, Md.M., Oh, D.H., Ra, C.S., 2010. The effects of biogas slurry on the production and quality of maize fodder. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 34(1): 91-99.
15. Kacar, B., 2009. Soil Analysis. Nobel Publishing Distribution, Ankara. Turkey. 467p. [in Turkish].
16. Kılıç, Ç.F., 2011. Solar energy, its recent status in Turkey and production technologies. Mühendis ve Makina 52(617): 94-106. [in Turkish].
17. Liyanage, T.D.P., Leelamanie, D.A.L., 2016. Influence of organic manure amendments on water repellency, water entry value, and water retention of soil samples from a tropical Ultisol. Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics 64 (2): 160-166.
18. Mualem, Y., 1976. A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resources Research 12(3): 513–522.
19. Mujdeci, M., Işıldar, A.A., Uygur, V., Alaboz, P., Unlu, H., Senol, H., 2017. Cooperative effects of field traffic and organic matter treatments on some compaction-related soil properties. Solid Earth 8(1): 189-198.
20. Müjdeci, M., Demircioğlu, A. C., Alaboz, P., 2020. The effects of farmyard manure and green manure applications on some soil physical properties. Yuzuncu Yıl University Journal of Agricultural Sciences 30(1): 9-17.
21. Soil Survey Field and Laboratory Methods Manual, 2014. Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 51 Version 2. USDA-NRCS. National Soil Survey Center, Kellog Soil Survey Laboratory. Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1244466.pdf
22. Soil Survey Staff, 1993. Soil survey manual. Handbook No: 18. USDA Handbook 18. Washington, D.C. USA. Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1335011.pdf
23. Şenol, H., Elibol, E.A., Açıkel, Ü., Şenol, M., 2017. Major organic waste sources in Ankara for biogas production. Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 6(2): 15-28 [in Turkish].
24. TUIK, 2012. Turkish Statistical Institute. Number of enterprises irrigating and irrigated area according to irrigation sources, Ankara. Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: https://www.tuik.gov.tr/Home/Index
25. Unguraşu, A.N., Anel, F.D., Florian Stătescu, F., 2012. Estimation of soil hydraulic parameters with the help of rosetta program. Lucrări Ştiinţifice seria Agronomie 55: 281-284.
26. van Genuchten, M.T., 1980. A closed‐form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 44(5): 892–898.
27. van Genuchten, M.T., Leij, F.J., Yates, S.R., 1991. The RETC Code for Quantifying the Hydraulic Functions of Unsaturated Soils. Version 1.0. EPA Report 600/2-91/065, U.S. Salinity Laboratory, USDA, ARS, Riverside, California. Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: https://www.pc-progress.com/Documents/programs/retc.pdf
28. Van Wambeke, A.R., 2000. The Newhall Simulation Model for estimating soil moisture & temperature regimes. Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA. Available at [Access date: 11.04.2020]: http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/dgr2/research/nsm/nsmt.pdf
29. Wang, Y., Cui, Y.J., Tang, A.M., Tang, C.S., Benahmed, N., 2015. Effects of aggregate size on water retention capacity and microstructure of lime-treated silty soil. Géotechnique Letters 5(4): 269-274.
30. Yang, X., You, X., 2013 Estimating parameters of van genuchten model for soil water retention curve by ıntelligent algorithms. Applied Mathematics & Information Sciences 7(5): 1977-1983.
31. Yaraşır, N., Erekul, O., Yiğit, A., 2018. The effect of different doses of liquid biogas fermentation wastes on yield and quality of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 15(2): 9-16.