NARA Discovery
Article Details
← Back to Search Results
Journal Article

Estimating the Soil Water Retention Inflection Point Using Pedotransfer Functions

Samaneh Abadani; Ali Rasoulzadeh; Javad Ramezani Moghadam; Javanshir Azizi Mobaser; Jesús Fernández-Gálvez
Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition · Vol. 26, Issue 1 · pp. 4074-4086 · 2026

Abstract

The inflection point of the soil water retention curve (SWRC) is increasingly recognized as a key indicator of soil physical quality, as it reflects critical changes in pore structure and water availability. This study aims to develop and validate pedotransfer functions (PTFs) to estimate the water content ( θ i ), matric suction head ( h i ), and slope ( S i ) at the SWRC inflexion point from basic soil physical properties. A dataset comprising 219 soil samples, including laboratory-measured and UNSODA database entries, was used. The inflection point parameters were computed analytically from van enuchten model fits. Linear, nonlinear, and polynomial regression techniques were applied to derive PTFs using soil organic matter, bulk density, geometric mean particle diameter, and geometric standard deviation as input variables. Model performance was evaluated using root mean square error (RMSE), normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), correlation coefficient ( r ), and Taylor diagrams. A dataset comprising 219 soil samples, including laboratory-measured and UNSODA database entries, was used. The inflection point parameters were computed analytically from van Genuchten model fits. Linear, nonlinear, and polynomial regression techniques were applied to derive PTFs using soil organic matter, bulk density, geometric mean particle diameter, and geometric standard deviation as input variables. Model performance was evaluated using root mean square error (RMSE), normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), correlation coefficient ( r ), and Taylor diagrams. Six PTFs were developed for θ i (best model: r = 0.90; NRMSE = 8.6%), six for S i (best model: r = 0.71; NRMSE = 14.8%), and three for h i (best model: r = 0.46; NRMSE = 39.4%). θ i and S i were estimated with good to excellent accuracy, while h i proved more difficult to predict due to its dependence on microstructural properties not captured by standard soil descriptors. The developed PTFs for θi and Si are reliable and practical tools for assessing soil hydraulic behavior and physical quality. In contrast, accurate estimation of hi remains challenging, suggesting the need for additional structural or imaging-based predictors in future models.

Bibliographic Information

JournalJournal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
PublisherSpringer
Publication Date2026-03-01
Publication Year2026
Volume26
Issue1
Pages4074-4086
Document TypeJournal Article
Print ISSN0718-9508
eISSN0718-9516
DOI10.1007/s42729-026-03117-8

Access Information

NARA Access Coverage2019-01-01~Current
Journal Homepagehttps://www.springer.com/journal/42729
Publisher PageOpen Publisher Page
Full-text access depends on NARA's subscribed coverage and institutional access.