Register      Login
Soil Research Soil Research Society
Soil, land care and environmental research
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > SR > SR07051
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 45(6)

Relationships between field texture and particle-size distribution in Australia and their implications

Budiman Minasny A D , Alex B. McBratney A , Damien J. Field A , Grant Tranter A , Neil J. McKenzie B and Daniel M. Brough C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.

B CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

C Department of Natural Resources and Water, Indooroopilly, Qld, Australia.

D Corresponding author. Email: b.minasny@usyd.edu.au

Australian Journal of Soil Research 45(6) 428-437 https://doi.org/10.1071/SR07051
Submitted: 7 May 2007  Accepted: 24 August 2007   Published: 20 September 2007

Abstract

This paper aims to establish the means and ranges of clay, silt, and sand contents from field texture classes, and to investigate the differences in the field texture classes and texture determined from particle-size analysis. The results of this paper have 2 practical applications: (1) to estimate the particle size distribution and its uncertainty from field texture as input to pedotransfer functions, and (2) to examine the criteria of texture contrast soils in the Australian Soil Classification system. Estimates of clay, silt, and sand content for each field texture class are given and this allows the field texture classes to be plotted in the texture triangle. There are considerable differences between field texture classes and particle-size classes. Based on the uncertainties in determining the clay content from field texture, we establish the probability of the occurrence of a texture contrast soil according to the Australian Soil Classification system, given the texture of the B2 horizon and its overlying A horizon.

I enjoy doing the soil-texture feel test with my fingers or kneading a clay soil, which is a short step from ceramics or sculpture. Hans Jenny (1984)


Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Australian Research Council through its funding of a Linkage Project on Soil Inference Systems.


References


Bowman GM , Hutka J (2002) Particle size analysis. In ‘Soil physical measurement and interpretation for land evaluation’. (Eds NJ McKenzie, K Coughlan, HP Cresswell) (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Vic.)

Everitt BS (2002) ‘The Cambridge dictionary of statistics.’ 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK)

Foss JE, Wright WR, Coles RH (1975) Testing the accuracy of field textures. Soil Science Society of American Proceedings 39, 800–802. open url image1

Hodgson JM, Hollis JM, Jones RJA, Palmer RC (1976) A comparison of field estimates and laboratory analyses of the silt and clay contents of some West Midlands soils. Journal of Soil Science 27, 411–419.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Isbell RF (1996) ‘The Australian Soil Classification.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne, Vic.)

Jenny H (1984) My friend, the soil. A conversation with Hans Jenny. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 39, 158–161. open url image1

Johnston RM, Barry SJ, Bleys E, Bui EN, Moran CJ , et al . (2003) ASRIS: the database. Australian Journal of Soil Research 41, 1021–1036.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Kew G , Wetherby K , Zimmermann T , Meissner T (2004) Estimation of readily available waterholding capacity using field hand texture. In ‘Supersoil. 3rd Australian New Zealand Soils Conference’. (ASSSI/NZSSS: Sydney)

Legros JP, Pedro G (1985) The cause of particle-size distribution in soil profiles derived from crystalline rocks, France. Geoderma 36, 15–25.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Marshall TJ (1947) Mechanical composition of soil in relation to field descriptions of texture. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Australia, Bulletin No. 224.

Marshall TJ (2003) Particle-size distribution of soil and the perception of texture. Australian Journal of Soil Research 41, 245–249.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

McDonald RC , Isbell RF , Speight JG , Walker J , Hopkins MS (1990) ‘Australian soil and land survey field handbook.’ 2nd edn (Inkata Press: Melbourne, Vic.)

Minasny B, McBratney AB (2001) The Australian soil texture boomerang: a comparison of the Australian and USA/FAO soil particle-size classification systems. Australian Journal of Soil Research 39, 1443–1451.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Minasny B, McBratney AB (2002) The efficiency of various approaches to obtaining estimates of soil hydraulic properties. Geoderma 107, 55–70.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Northcote KH (1976) ‘A factual key for the recognition of Australian soils.’ 4th edn (Rellim Technical Publications: Adelaide, S. Aust.)

Post DF, Huete AR, Pease DS (1986) A comparison of soil scientist estimations and laboratory determination of some Arizona soil properties. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 41, 421–424. open url image1

Post DF, Parikh SJ, Papp RA, Ferriera L (2006) Evaluating the skill of students to determine soil morphology characteristics. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Science Education 35, 217–224. open url image1

Rawls WJ, Pachepsky YA (2002) Using field topographic descriptors to estimate soil water retention. Soil Science 167, 423–435.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Taylor JA, Minasny B (2006) A protocol for converting qualitative point soil pit survey data into continuous soil property maps. Australian Journal of Soil Research 44, 543–550.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Walker PH, Chittleborough DJ (1986) Development of particle-size distributions in some Alfisols of southeastern Australia. Soil Science Society of America Journal 50, 394–400. open url image1