Is the laser diffraction method reliable for soil particle size distribution analysis?

Yang Yang, Lijuan Wang, Ole Wendroth, Baoyuan Liu, Congcong Cheng, Tingting Huang, Yangzi Shi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Scopus citations

Abstract

The laser diffraction method (LDM) has been increasingly applied for quantifying soil particle size distribution (PSD), owing to its advantages of rapid analysis, high reproducibility, and continuous PSD measurement for a wide range of size fractions. However, some ambiguities exist regarding the comparability of results with those obtained using other classical methods. The objective of the current study was to evaluate LDM-derived PSDs via comparisons with PSDs obtained with the standard sieve–pipette method (SPM) and from the absolute method of microscopy. A total of 277 soil samples were collected at different soil depths in a typical cropland in the northeast mountainous region of Beijing and analyzed with both SPM and LDM. Due to time and labor constraints, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed on 100 samples randomly selected for the PSDs within the clay fraction withdrawn by SPM. The results manifested on the average 18.9% underestimation of clay content and 25.3% overestimation of silt content by LDM compared to SPM. These disagreements directly caused the shifts of soil texture class in 44.8% of the soil samples. Significant linear regression equations were generated to convert LDM–derived sand and silt contents to SPM–derived ones (p < 0.01). The linear conversions for the clay content were only significant for the calibration samples, but possessed negative coefficients of determination for the validation set. According to SEM, silt-sized particles were wrongly included in the clay fraction identified by SPM. Eliminating such particles, the clay contents corrected by SEM were significantly lower when assuming the shape of clay particles < 2 µm as plates or discs with constant thickness–diameter ratio of 1/10, and higher when considering the clay particles as spheres for volume calculation, in contrast to those measured by LDM (P < 0.01). Detailed volume-based PSDs within the clay fraction were further compared between SEM and LDM, revealing dissimilar PSD patterns but statistically similar median particle diameters. These findings suggest the effectiveness of LDM in soil PSD determination. Future work is needed to systematically quantify the impact of other possible factors such as clay mineralogy and refractive index on LDM-derived PSDs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)276-287
Number of pages12
JournalSoil Science Society of America Journal
Volume83
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 8 2019

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41571130082, 41730748 and 41601277) and the Project supported by State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (No. 2017-ZY-09). Third author (O.W.) acknowledges support by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Multistate Project KY006093. This is publication No. 18-06-063 of the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station and is published with the approval of the Director.

Publisher Copyright:
© Soil Science Society of America, 5585 Guilford Rd., Madison WI 53711 USA. All Rights reserved.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Soil Science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is the laser diffraction method reliable for soil particle size distribution analysis?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this