Professional Documents
Culture Documents
J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. (2002), 165, 479±486 (2002) WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH, D-69451 Weinheim, 2002 1436-8730/02/0408-479 $17.50+.50/0
480 Schwärzel, Renger, Sauerbrey, and Wessolek
2.2 Research methods necessary prerequisites (standard distribution, variance homogeneity, and
the necessary extent of samples) were examined as follows. The standard
The characteristics determined in the laboratory and the methods used are distribution was examined using the Komolgorov-Smirnov-test (Sachs,
listed in Tab. 1. 1997). The variance homogeneity was tested with the Levene-test (Sachs,
1997). If ANOVA led to a significant F-value, the mean values that
2.3 Statistical evaluation differed significantly from the other mean values were examined using the
In order to summarize the distribution of the characteristics the ScheffØ-test (Sachs, 1997). The stochastic context was calculated using the
arithmetical average to mark the central tendency and the standard product-moment-correlation coefficient according to Pearson (Sachs,
deviation to mark the variation of the data were used. Variance analyses 1997).
were carried out in order to verify hypotheses on the differences. The
Table 2: Classification of fen peat soil horizons (AG Boden, 1994; from
Figure 1: Location of the study area Schäfer, 1996), W1 = Water index according Schmidt (1986)
Abbildung 1: Lage des Untersuchungsgebietes
Tabelle 2: Klassifikation der Niedermoorhorizonte (AG Boden, 1994; aus
Schäfer 1996), W1 = Einheitswasserzahl (Schmidt, 1986)
Table 1: Laboratory methods
Tabelle 1: Labormethoden Symbol Description Characteristics
Unsaturated hydraulic Stationary and non-stationary according to nHt Shrinkage Subsoil-horizon, vertical cracks and
conductivity Plagge (1991) with threefold repetition on horizon coarse prismatic structure caused by
10 cm high short core samplers (237 i.e. shrinkage
550 cm3)
nHr Peat horizon Permanently below the ground or
Shrinkage Measuring with a caliper rule after each perched water-table and preserved in a
pF-level reduced state
Soil physical characteristics of peat soils 481
Table 3: Soil physical parameters of substrate-horizon-groups of drained and agriculturally used fen soils (standard deviation in brackets).
X = ignition loss, P = porosity, AC = air capacity, AWC = available water capacity (pF 1.8 to pF 4.2), GPII = é <50 ± 10 mm, MPI = é <10 ± 3 mm
Tabelle 3: Bodenphysikalische Kennwerte von Substrat-Horizont-Gruppen entwässerter und landwirtschaftlich genutzter Niedermoore (in Klammern
Standardabweichungen).
X = Glühverlust, P = Porosität, AC = Luftkapazität, AWC = nutzbare Feldkapazität (pF 1.8 bis pF 4.2), GPII = é <50 ± 10 mm, MPI = é <10 ± 3 mm
nHm Strongly own 10 76a 0.36a 77a 13ab 29a 9ab 20a
earthified (2) (0.04) (4) (4) (5) (4) (6)
Peat, Zeitz 79 ± ± 79 24 27 6 21
X < 70 M.-% (1992) (3) (8) (6) (9) (7)
nHv Earthified Own 24 80b 0.31a 80a 11a 31a 6ab 24a
Peat, (3) (0.06) (3) (6) (9) (4) (7)
X < 70 M.-% Zeitz 79 ± ± 82 14 38 7 39
(1992) (5) (6) (13) (6) (12)
nHt Reed- own 16 86c 0.18bc 88bc 12ab 49b 8ab 39b
Sedge- (2) (0.03) (2) (3) (6) (4) (4)
Mixed-Peat, Zeitz 30 ± ± 88 15 44 9 35
X < 80 M.-% (1992) (3) (7) (10) (7) (11)
Identical letters refer to statistically not confirmable differences between the characteristic values of peat groups from own evaluations (p ³ 0.05). Unequal
letters refer to statistically secured differences between the respective characteristic values of peat groups from the own survey (p £ 0.05).
Rhinluch) between 1975 and 1985. The derivation of the topsoil is decreased by 15 to 20 percent compared to
distribution of the pore size from the water retention curve, peat soils of deeper layers.
as well as plant-available water, serves only to distinguish (3) The characteristic value of available water capacity
between peat substrates. Especially high water tensions can illustrates the influence of pedogenic peat alteration due
cause a misinterpretation of the pore size distribution due to to use (Zeitz, 1992; Okruszko, 1993; Schäfer, 1996). In
shrinking processes and, consequently, amount of plant- contrast to peat soils of the nHr horizon, the available
available water (see Fig. 5). water capacity of strongly earthified peat soils was
The characteristic values determined by us deviated only decreased by roughly 40 %; from 50 to < 30 vol-%.
slightly from the corresponding values of the investigations (4) There are no statistically secure differences regarding
by Zeitz (1992). The high scattering of our own values, the soil physical characteristic values of earthified and
which is at times almost as high as the values from Zeitz strongly earthified peat topsoils.
(1992), is conspicuous. This is remarkable because the (5) There are also no statistically secure differences
values of Zeitz (1992) were based on a much greater data set between the soil physical characteristic values of reed-
and the samples were taken from diverse regions of Northern sedge-peat soils from the subsoil horizons nHa and nHt.
Germany.
Fig. 3 shows the high scattering of the individual values on 3.2 Shrinkage
the basis of the characteristic values for humus content (loss
of weight on ignition), bulk density, and available water An important characteristic of organic soils is the shrinkage
capacity. Furthermore, it became clear that the characteristic that accompanies the drainage and the resulting decrease of
losses on ignition and bulk densities were excellent the base volume. One has to differentiate between the
indicators for pedogenetic changes in peat soils. irreversible and the reversible shrinkage. The latter can be
The letters behind each mean value in Tab. 3 indicate observed as the so called mire-breathing. Moreover, in
whether statistically secured differences existed between the strongly drained fen peat soils, high evaporation rates can
mean values of the individual SHG. Unequal letters show lead to reversible shrinkage cracks and clefts (Schmidt et al.,
differences in the mean values between the respective 1981; Schothorst, 1982).
characteristic values. For example, the characteristic value The shrinkage of the soil material, especially the initial
of available water capacity (AWC) shows no differences shrinkage (lowering of groundwater), leads to strong
between the mean values of strongly earthified and alterations of the special pore structure (Sauerbrey et al.,
earthified peat soils (identical letters) but reveals differences 1988). In the course of establishing a water retention curve
between the earthified peat soils and the reed-sedge peat in the laboratory, the peat shrinkage after each pressure level
soils of the nHa horizon (unequal letters). was quantified for some horizons by measurement with a
calliper rule.
The facts presented in Tab. 3 and Fig. 2 and 3 allow for the The base volume of the peat was decreased due to the
following conclusions regarding the influence of soil shrinkage, as proven for the cases illustrated in Fig. 4. The
development on the soil-physical characteristics: shrinking behavior of peat soils during drainage was
(1) Progressive soil development increases the bulk density dependent on the peat condition i.e. the type of horizon.
due to subsiding, shrinkage or mineralization. On the Peat soils of a strongly earthified horizon started to
other hand, the content of organic substance and the noticeably shrink at pF 3.5 (5 % loss of volume). Peat soils
porosity decrease significantly (see also McLay et al., of an aggregated horizon (nHa) showed shrinking behavior
1992; Brandyk et al., 1995; Schäfer, 1996; Silins and at pF 3.0 (loss of volume at pF 3.5: 7 vol.-%). Peat soils from
Rothwell, 1998). deeper layers (nHr) showed shrinkage as early as pF 1.8 (loss
(2) The higher bulk density of pedogenically altered peat of volume at pF 3.5: 37 % vol.). Our results support the
soils modifies the special structure of the pores (see also conclusions of Hennings (1996) which state that the
Zeitz, 1992; Schäfer, 1996; Silins and Rothwell, 1998). shrinking behavior of peats is dependent on the degree of
For example, the share of medium pores in a peat of the secondary decompositon and the intensity of drainage.
3.4 Hysteresis
It is well known that the relation between soil humidity and
Figure 5: Water retention (laboratory, desorption) of peat soils with and water tension is subject to the hysteresis. The causes of this
without consideration of shrinkage. phenomenon can be the inclusion of air, the formation of
Moss peat = depth: 95 bis 105 cm, nHr; Reed-Seedge-Peat = 35 bis 45 cm,
nHa water-repelling films (hydophobia), effects of the pore
Abbildung 5: Wasserretention (Labor, Desorption) von Torfen mit und geometry (ink-bottle-effect), as well as alterations of the
ohne Berücksichtigung der Schrumpfung. spatial structure of pores due to shrinkage.
Braunmoostorf = Tiefe: 95 bis 105 cm, nHr; Schilf-Seggen-Torf = 35 bis
45 cm, nHa
During the field experiments, hysteresis loops of the water
retention were recorded for different peat horizons. One can
What influence does peat shrinkage caused by drainage infer from Fig. 7 that the differences between the curves for
have on the course of the water retention? Fig. 5 compares
the water retention curves of two slightly decomposed peat
soils, with and without shrinkage consideration.
The water retention curves that considered shrinkage-
induced decreased base volume showed a steeper ascent in
high water tension than the curves that were drawn up
without acknowledging the shrinkage. Taking the shrinkage
into consideration, peat soils showed a substantially higher
volumetric water content at ranges of high water tension and,
consequently, higher shares of fine pores than without
shrinkage consideration. Therefore, deriving the distribution
of the pore size from the water retention is prone to errors Figure 6: Water retention (desorption, without consideration of the
when knowledge of the shrinkage behavior of peat soils at shrinkage) from the laboratory and the field for two peat horizons
high water tensions is not known. These errors were greater (Rhinluch).
^ Laboratory values, & * ~ ´: Field values of various measurement sites
the less the peat was subjected to pedogenic processes. Silins Abbildung 6: Wasserretention (Desorption, ohne Berücksichtigung der
and Rothwell (1998) also observed an underestimation of Schrumpfung) aus Labor und Feld für zwei Torfhorizonte (Rhinluch).
water content owing to shrinkage. ^ Laborwerte, & * ~ ´: Feldwerte unterschiedlicher Messplätze
484 Schwärzel, Renger, Sauerbrey, and Wessolek
Table 4: Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity of the investigated peat soils in dependence on pedogenic development.
mean values, standard deviation in brackets, n = number of horizons, a = 2 horizons, Hn = peat of low to medium decomposition, Hav = earthified peat,
Ham = strongly earthified peat
Tabelle 4: Ungesättigte hydraulische Leitfähigkeit der untersuchten Torfe in Abhängigkeit der pedogenen Entwicklung.
Mittelwerte, in Klammern Standardabweichungen, n = Anzahl der Horizonte, a = 2 Horizonte, Hn = Torf geringer bis mittlerer Zersetzung, Hav =
vererdeter Torf, Ham = vermulmter Torf
reasons for the good water conductivity of strongly aggregated horizon were established for one horizon only.
earthified peat soils can also be explained by earthifying. However, Hennings (1996) also found conductivity values
This process is marked by increasing of a fine granular for a peat soil of the aggregation horizon that were ten times
structure in the topsoil and, consequently, an increasing lower than that for the earthified horizon at the same water
share of continuous macropores. tension. This peat, showing a polyhedral fabric with more or
At first it seems contradictory that peat soils with clearly less large fragments and sharp edges (see Tab. 2), had a
recognizable plant tissue have a lower hydraulic conducti- hydraulic conductivity comparable to that of earthified and
vity at water tensions of 30 to 100 hPa than strongly strongly earthified peat soils at water tensions of ca. 300 hPa.
earthified peat soils, regardless of a comparable air capacity. Due to soil genetic factors, this peat had a significantly lower
However, one has to keep in mind the sponge-like structure hydraulic conductivity in the region close to saturation.
of peat soils with recognizable plant tissue. The high air Such layers with clearly reduced hydraulic conductivity
capacity of these peat soils is ensured mainly by the high can often be found at strongly drained and degraded peat
amount of macropores. Silins and Rothwell (1998) reported locations. At present it is not clear whether these layers
that greater peat bulk density after drainage and subsidence result from peat degradation or whether, in turn, the low
was associated with a loss of macropores (>600 mm é) with water conductivity was the reason for degradation. However,
a concurrent increase in micropores (3±30 mm é). If these Schmidt et al. (1981) proved that the soil development due to
macropores are drained, the hydraulic conductivity is drainage and use of fens does not necessarily result in
considerably reduced (Baird, 1997). In the water tension strongly degraded fen peat soils.
range of 100 to 200 hPa, there are almost no differences
between the conductivity of the individual groups. The
4 Conclusions
courses of the conductivity of the individual peat groups do
not diverge again until water tensions of 300 hPa and above. In general, the predicted soil physical parameters showed
Peat soils with recognizable plant tissue show higher good agreement with the results of Zeitz (1992). Never-
conductivity values than earthified or strongly earthified theless, we proved that peat shrinks during draining cycles,
peat soils. This fact can be explained by the continuously especially at higher water tensions. Taking this shrinkage
decreasing share of medium pores (é 10 to 2 mm, see Tab. 3) into consideration, peat soils showed a substantially higher
in the course of the secondary soil formation. volumetric water content at high water tensions. Therefore,
Our findings do not support the conclusions of Hennings deriving the pore size distribution only from water retention
(1996) and Sauerbrey and Zeitz (1999) which state that data leads to an underestimation of water content for high
progressive soil development decreases the unsaturated water tensions. These errors decreased with the degree of
hydraulic conductivity. Silins and Rothwell (1998) found soil pedogenic processes. Results show the effect of
that the mean unsaturated conductivity of drained peat was hydrophobicity on soil wetting at the end of the summer
roughly five times greater than undrained peat in the water drought. The high wetting resistance of peat soils inhibits the
tension range of 25 to 1000 cm. soil water uptake by plants. As a result of water repellency
Fig. 8 describes graphically the relations between water processes, the water infiltration moves faster to greater
tension and hydraulic conductivity for strongly pedogeneti- depths and the groundwater level rises very quickly. In this
cally altered peat soils. Noteworthy is the comparably low case, a preferential transport of water and solutes to the
conductivity of the strongly decomposed and segregated groundwater might be possible.
peat. Results for the strongly decomposed peat of the In contrast to the water retention, the unsaturated hydraulic
conductivity functions, especially that of high degraded peat
layers, are underrepresented in the modeling literature. More
research is needed to understand the relation between peat
soil development and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity.
Acknowledgment
We would like to thank the German Research Association (Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG) for the financial support of this work. This
study was developed within the scope of the DFG research group.
References
Figure 8: Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (Ku) of pedogenically AG Boden (1994): Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung. 4th edn. Hannover,
altered fen peat soils of the Rhinluch E. Schweitzbart©sche Verlagsbuchhandlung
laboratory results; strongly earthified peat: n = 6; earthified peat: n = 6; Baird, A. J. (1997): Field estimation of macropore functioning and surface
strongly decomposed peat: n = 1 hydraulic conductivity in a fen peat. Hydrol. Process. 11, 287±295.
Abbildung 8: Ungesättigte hydraulische Leitfähigkeit (Ku) pedogen
Brandyk, T., J. Szuniewicz, K. Skapski, and J. Szatylowicz (1995): The soil
veränderter Niedermoortorfe des Rhinluchs
Laborwerte; vermulmter Torf: n = 6; vererdeter Torf: n = 6; stark zersetzter moisture regime study of fen peat soils in the Middle Biebrza Basin as a
Torf: n = 1 Basis for soil protection.. Z. Kulturtechnik Landentw. 36 (2), 78±83.
486 Schwärzel, Renger, Sauerbrey, and Wessolek
DIN 19683 (1998): Physikalische Untersuchungen von Böden. Schmidt, W., and K. Illner (1976): Die Bodenformen landwirtschaftlich
Hennings, H. H. (1996): Zur Wiedervernässbarkeit von Niedermooren. genutzter Niedermoore. Z. Melioration. Landwirtschaftsbau 10, 166±
PhD, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany. 168.
Kellner, E., and S. Halldin (2002): Water budget and surface-layer water Schmidt, W. (1986): Zur Bestimmung der Einheitswasserzahl von Torfen.
storage in Sphagnum bog in central Sweden. Hydrol. Process. 16, 87± Archiv Acker- Pflanzenbau Bodenkd. 30, 251±257.
103. Schmidt, W., G. Mundel, A., W. Scholz, and W. v. d. Waydbrink (1981):
Letts, M. G., N. T. Roulet, N. T. Comer, M. R. Skarupa, and D. L. Verseghy Kennzeichnung und Beurteilung der Bodenentwicklung auf Niedermoor
(2000): Parametrization of peatland hydraulic properties for the unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Degradierung. Forsch.-Bericht
Canadian Land Surface Scheme. Atmosph. Ocean. 38 (1), 141±160. Inst. Futterproduktion Paulinenaue AdL der DDR.
McLay, C. D. A., F. R. Allbrook, and K. Thompson (1992): Effect of Schothorst, C. J. (1982): Drainage and Behaviour of Peat Soils. Proc.
development and cultivation on physical properties of peat soils in New Symp. On Peatlands below the Sea Level, Wageningen.
Zealand. Geoderma 54, 23±37. Schwärzel, K. (2000): Dynamik des Wasserhaushaltes von Niedermooren.
Ohde, J. (1951): Neue Erdstoff-Kennwerte. Die Bautechnik 27, 345±351. PhD, TU Berlin, FG Standortkunde/Bodenschutz, Germany.
Okruszko, H. (1993): Transformation of fen-peat soil under the impact of Silinis, U., and R. L. Rothwell (1998): Forest Peatland drainage and
draining. Pols. Akad, zesz. 406, 3-75. subsidence affect soil water retention and transport properties in an
Plagge, R. (1991): Bestimmung der ungesättigten hydraulischen Leitfä- Alberta peatland. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 62, 1048±1056.
higkeit. PhD, TU Berlin, FG Bodenkunde, Germany. Weiss, R., J. Alm, R. Laiho, and J. Laine (1998): Modeling moisture
Renger, M., G. Wessolek, K. Schwärzel, R. Sauerbrey, and C. Siewert retention in peat soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 62, 305±313.
(2002): Aspects of peat conservation and water management. J. Plant Wessolek, G., K. Schwärzel, M. Renger, R. Sauerbrey, and C. Siewert
Nutr. Soil Sci. 165, 487±493. (2002): Soil hydrology and CO2 release of peat soils. J. Plant Nutr. Soil
Royer, J. M., and G. Vachaud (1975): Field Determination of Hysteresis in Sci. 165, 494±500.
Soil-Water Characteristics. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 39, 221±223. Zeitz, J. (1992): Bodenphysikalische Eigenschaften von Substrat-Horizont-
Sachs, L. (1997): Angewandte Statistik. Springer Verlag, Berlin. Gruppen in landwirtschaftlich genutzten Niedermooren. Z. Kulturtech-
Sauerbrey, R., E. Gebhardt, and H. Raasch (1988): Methodische nik Landentw. 33, 301±307.
Untersuchungen der pF-Bestimmungen an Niedermoortorfen und daraus Zeitz, J. (1993): Zustandserfassung und Kartierung der Moorböden im
ableitbare Schluûfolgerungen. Tag.-Ber., Akad. Landwirtsch.-Wiss. Niedermoorgebiet Oberes Rhinluch als Grundlage für die Planung von
DDR, Berlin 269, 581 ± 584. standortangepassten, umweltschonenden Nutzungsformen. MUNR For-
Sauerbrey, R., and J. Zeitz (1999): Handbuch der Bodenkunde. Kap. 3.3.3.7 schungsbericht, Germany.
6. Erg. Lfg. 7/99 S. 1±24.
[P96/2B]
Schäfer, W. (1996): Changes in physical properties of organic soils induced
by land use. Proc. 10th International Peat Congress, Vol. 4, 77±83,
Bremen.