2011
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-06832011000600009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: SUMMARY RESUMO: RETENÇÃO DE ÁGUA NO SOLO E ÍNDICE S INFLUENCIADOS POR ROTAÇÃO DE CULTURAS E ESCARIFICAÇÃO

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
10
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
(11 reference statements)
2
10
1
Order By: Relevance
“…3). Similarly to that reported by Calonego and Rosolem (2011), an increase of the S Dexter index was observed after tillage As reported by several authors (Schwen et al, 2011a(Schwen et al, , 2011bOr et al, 2000;Leij et al, 2002;Moret-Fernández et al, 2013), the rainfall was the main factor that conditions the changes in the θ(ψ) parameters (Table 2, figures 5 and 7). These changes should be related to the wetting process of the freshly tilled soil that promotes the disintegration and deformation of the more unstable soil aggregates (Shiel et al, 1988;Day and Holmgren, 1952).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…3). Similarly to that reported by Calonego and Rosolem (2011), an increase of the S Dexter index was observed after tillage As reported by several authors (Schwen et al, 2011a(Schwen et al, , 2011bOr et al, 2000;Leij et al, 2002;Moret-Fernández et al, 2013), the rainfall was the main factor that conditions the changes in the θ(ψ) parameters (Table 2, figures 5 and 7). These changes should be related to the wetting process of the freshly tilled soil that promotes the disintegration and deformation of the more unstable soil aggregates (Shiel et al, 1988;Day and Holmgren, 1952).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Cunha et al (2011) calculated the S Dexter index under CT and NT, and found that this index under both treatments was lower than 0.035. In contrast, Calonego and Rosolem (2011), in a similar work, working with RT and NT systems, obtained S Dexter values higher than 0.035.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…It should be pointed out that the S‐index values in our study were very high (>0.4), being almost one order of magnitude higher than those reported in the literature for soils having good physical (0.035–0.059) condition (Dexter, ). Similarly, our n values that were in the range of 5–16 (Figures and ) are substantially higher than n values reported by Dexter () for 12 FAO/USDA soil texture classes ( n in the range of 1 to 1.6), or n values reported by Calonego & Rosolem () for tropical soils from Brazil ( n in the range of 1 to 6). It is postulated that our uncharacteristically high S‐index and n values stem from the fact that we studied water retention curves at near saturation, which affects water emptying of meso‐ and macropores only (50–70 and >70‐μm pores, respectively).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These two examples corroborate the observation about "individual soils" by Dexter (2004a) and show that S is not an absolute indicator of soil physical quality. It is, therefore, questionable whether anything can be inferred based on the value of S alone, even if this is common practice in many publications (Calonego & Rosolem, 2011;Cavalieri et al, 2011) Evaluation of soil quality depends on understanding the insertion of soil in the landscape-soil-plantatmosphere system; therefore, it depends on knowledge of how the system functions and the underlying physical, chemical and biological processes. We mentioned in the Introduction that process-based models capable of simulating these processes applied to agronomy, hydrology, ecology and meteorology are being developed by specific research groups and are available to the scientific community.…”
Section: S Versus Relative Densitymentioning
confidence: 99%