Relationship between soil electrical conductivity and water content: A multiscale petrophysical calibration
Abstract
Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) is widely used to study water transfer dynamics in soils, but accurate quantification depends on petrophysical relationships that must be calibrated. Traditionally, calibration is done either in the laboratory on undisturbed samples or directly in the field. This innovative study addresses a crucial scientific question by exploring how spatial scale influences petrophysical relationships and its implications for water content estimation. This study uses a novel experimental setup that compares three distinct footprints within a heterogeneous soil profile: (1) laboratory calibration on centimetric samples, (2) field calibration using decimetric quadrupole (QDR) arrays, and (3) decametric ERT profiles. The results reveal consistent value ranges across scales. The main results show that it is preferable to choose laboratory calibration method to prevent generating additional systematic errors that can be created by ERT and QDR approaches. Moreover, it is preferable to use a calibration based on multiple samples to better capture soil heterogeneity at decametric scales. These findings provide insights into how petrophysical relationships should be considered in heterogeneous natural soils and highlight the uncertainties of corresponding water content estimates.
Related
- Rapid assessment of fern spore quality using microscale electrical conductivity testing
- Moderately High Nutrient Solution Electrical Conductivity Re-Shapes Stage Specific Carbon Metabolism Linked to Flavor For-Mation in Tomato Fruit
- Ameliorating effects and mechanisms of therapeutic electrical stimulation on the recurrent laryngeal nerve injury model in rats
- How well does electrical source imaging reconstruct neural time series? Evidence from simultaneous scalp and intracranial EEG recordings
- Comparable phosphene size and contrast properties, but differing detection reliability for optogenetic versus electrical stimulation of macaque V1
BibTeX
@article{pavageau2026relationship,
title = {{Relationship between soil electrical conductivity and water content: A multiscale petrophysical calibration}},
author = {Clémence Pavageau and Pierre Fischer and Damien Jougnot and Philippe Cosenza and Laurent Caner},
journal = {Vadose Zone Journal},
year = {2026},
month = jun,
doi = {10.1002/vzj2.70111},
url = {https://hal.science/hal-05777156v1},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Relationship between soil electrical conductivity and water content: A multiscale petrophysical calibration
AU - Clémence Pavageau
AU - Pierre Fischer
AU - Damien Jougnot
AU - Philippe Cosenza
AU - Laurent Caner
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/06/12
JO - Vadose Zone Journal
DO - 10.1002/vzj2.70111
UR - https://hal.science/hal-05777156v1
AB - Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) is widely used to study water transfer dynamics in soils, but accurate quantification depends on petrophysical relationships that must be calibrated. Traditionally, calibration is done either in the laboratory on undisturbed samples or directly in the field. This innovative study addresses a crucial scientific question by exploring how spatial scale influences petrophysical relationships and its implications for water content estimation. This study uses a novel experimental setup that compares three distinct footprints within a heterogeneous soil profile: (1) laboratory calibration on centimetric samples, (2) field calibration using decimetric quadrupole (QDR) arrays, and (3) decametric ERT profiles. The results reveal consistent value ranges across scales. The main results show that it is preferable to choose laboratory calibration method to prevent generating additional systematic errors that can be created by ERT and QDR approaches. Moreover, it is preferable to use a calibration based on multiple samples to better capture soil heterogeneity at decametric scales. These findings provide insights into how petrophysical relationships should be considered in heterogeneous natural soils and highlight the uncertainties of corresponding water content estimates.
SN - 1539-1663
ER -