3

Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution

at a Watershed Scale
Manoj K. Jha
North Carolina A&T State University
USA

1. Introduction
Soil moisture content is a very vital component of the hydrological cycle. It is a key variable
controlling water and energy fluxes in soils (Vereecken et al. 2007). It provides the plant-
available transpirable pool of water for vegetative life. In addition, the availability or
retention of moisture in the soil controls the rainfall-runoff process. Despite its importance
to vital lives and ecosystem, the distribution of soil moisture varies tremendously over the
time and space. Spatial patterns of soil moisture are determined by a number of
pysiographic factors that affect vertical and lateral redistribution of water in the unsaturated
zone. These include topography and landscape position, slope aspect, vegetation, and
texture. Temporal patterns depend on meteorological factors and their variation over the
time. During the dry period (nonrainly periods), spatial variation in soil moisture is
controlled by vegetation (Seyfried and Wilcox 1995). Different vegetation will have different
impacts on soil moisture as their uptake will vary widely. Moisture content also exerts a
strong control on soil biogeochemistry including microbial activity, nitrogen mineralization,
and biogeochemical cycling of nitrogen and carbon (Turcu et al. 2005). Therefore,
understanding the spatio-temporal distribution and quantity of available soil moisture that
can be used without damaging the natural ecosystem are keys to sustainable development
and prevention of ecosystem decline.
Soil moisture has been traditionally measured through point measurements, which is useful
to understand field-scale soil water dynamics (Topp and Ferre 2002), and predominantly
developed for applications in agriculture. Recent advancements in remote sensing
technologies has developed capabilities that contribute to understanding of soil moisture
distribution at very large scales such as large basins or continental or global scales; however,
these prediction needs to be validated through a large number of ground based point
measurements. It would be difficult to provide such information on a larger scale. Several
techniques used in the past to represent spatial variation of soil moisture on a large scale
using geostatistical anslyses tools such as kringing and semivariogram analysis, but these
require a dense sampling character of the soil moisture field. The concept of temporal
stability was able to capture spatial variation but limited to smaller scales (Brocca et al.
2010). Robinson et al. (2008) have extensively reviewed and summarized the challenges and
opportunities for soil water content measurement in terms of laboratory, equipment,
monitoring, remote sensing, and modelling challenges.

www.intechopen.com
36 Soil Health and Land Use Management

Recent advancement in watershed scale hydrology models have increasingly been adopted
for soil and water management (Jha et al. 2007, 2010a, 2010b). These models provide a more
holistic approach of modelling complex interconnected and nonlinear hydro-geological
movement of water across all physical processes. This study used a watershed scale
hydrologic model, called Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) (Arnold et al. 1998), to
quantify long-term variation in spatial distribution of soil moisture on a medium-size
watershed located in Midwestern USA. SWAT has been shown to perform well on both
large river basins and small watersheds in terms of annual water and sediment yield (Arabi
et al. 2006, Gitau et al. 2004, Spruill et al. 2000, and Jha et al. 2011, among may other studies).
Gassman et al. (2007) has reviewed over a hundred of peer-reviewed SWAT related peer-
reviewed publications, which speaks of the magnitude and reliability of model use for
hydrology and water quality analyses.
The combination of favourable climate and fertile soil makes the Midwest one of the most
productive agricultural areas in the world. However, this brings an enormous application of
fertilizers and manures on the cropland, unmanaged and overapplication, which led water
quality problems in the local rivers and ultimately to larger ecosystems, e.g. hypoxia
problem in the Gulf of Mexico (Rabalais et al. 1996). Many conservation practices have been
proposed and implemented over decades. One such practice is the inclusion of winter cover
crops in the traditional corn-soybean rotation. Winter cover crops can reduce nitrogen (N)
leaching by extending the growing season and the uptake of N beyond that for corn and
soybean (Shepherd and Webb 1999). These crops take up residual N, released by
mineralization during fall and spring, and N released from fall-applied anhydrous
ammonia. The cover crops then release this N as their residue decays the next spring or
summer. While this practice was shown to have a tremendous potential for N reduction
(Kaspar et al. 2005, Singer et al. 2011), it might have implication in soil moisture dynamics
over a long period of time. This study analyzed the impacts of this conservation practice on
spatial distribution of soil moisture.
The main objective of this present study is to use SWAT model to quantify soil moisture
distribution on a watershed scale and evaluate the impact of applying cover crop
conservation practice on soil moisture content.

2. Methods and materials

2.1 Watershed description
The Raccoon River Watershed (RRW) covers nearly 3,630 mi2 area in portions of 17 Iowa
counties in west central Iowa (Figure 1). The North and Middle Raccoon Rivers flow
through the recently glaciated (< 12,000 years old) Des Moines Lobe landform region, a
region dominated by low relief and poor surface drainage. In contrast, the South Raccoon
River drains an older (> 500,000 years old) Southern Iowa Drift Plain landscape region
characterized by higher relief, steeply rolling hills, and well-developed drainage. The RRW
is dominated by agricultural row crop production, with over 70% of the areas planted
primarily in corn and soybeans. Other main land use includes grassland (16.3%), woodland
(4.4%), and urban (4.0%). The grasses and trees generally are scattered throughout the South
Raccoon basin on terrain difficult to cultivate. Figure 2 show the land use ypes in the
watershed. As explained by the landorm region, north Raccoon is mostly tiled due to
inadequate soil drainge property. Figure 3 depicts the tile drainage densitiy in the
watershed that was very extenstively done in North Raccoon. The RRW stream system has

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 37

been impacted by elevated levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, sediment, and bacteria pollutants
during recent decades, primarily from nonpoint sources (Hatfield et al., 2009; Jha et al., 2010;
Schilling et al., 2008).

Fig. 1. Location of the study watershed

The modeling framework of the SWAT model for RRW was adapted from Jha et al. 2010. It
has used SWAT vesion 2005 and relied on standard 12-digit watersheds (USGS 2009) as a
basis for the subwateshed delineation. The process of watershed delineation and HRU
creation was performed using the ArcView SWAT interface (AVSWATX). The resulting
watershed configuration consisted of 112 subwatersheds. The hydrologica response unites
(HRUs) were then created by overlaying Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) data (USDA-
NRCS, 2008) and 2002 land cover data obtained from IDNR (2008). All together, a total of
3640 HRUs were created for modeling. Daily weather data was obtained from the National
Weather Service COOP monitoring sites available through the Iowa Environmental Mesonet
(www.mesonet.agron.iastate.edu). AVSWATX assigned the appropriate weather station
information to each subwatershed based on the proximity of the station to the centroid of
the subwatershed. Ten weather stations were used to provide the temperature and
precipitation data for the entire simulation time frame. The SWAT model was run on a daily
time step for the 1986 to 2004 period, with the first ten years (1986 to 1995) consisting of a
model calibration period and a second nine year period (1996 to 2004) comprising a model
validation period. The Penman-Monteith method was selected to estimate potential
evapotranspiration and the Muskingum method was selected for channel flow routing
simulation. Model calibration required varying model parameters within their ranges for

www.intechopen.com
38 Soil Health and Land Use Management

Fig. 2. Land use pattern in the Raccoon River Watershed

match observed variables with the simulated variables. Figure 4 shows the monthly
comparison of flow at the watershed outlet for both calibration and validation periods.
Details on modeling setup can be found in Jha et al. 2010. Over the entire simulation period,
the modeled average annual streamflow at the outlet (220 mm) was very close to the
measured value (215 mm). Comparison of monthly values resulted in R2 and E (Nash-
Sutcliffe’s coefficient) values of 0.86 and 0.86 for calibraiton and 0.88 and 0.87 for validation.

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 39

The modeled average monthly streamflow (18.4 mm) closely matched the measured
monthly average (17.9 mm) over the 228 months (19 years) simulation period. These
statistical results can be viewed as quite strong for the resutls when viewed in the context of
the suggested criteria by Moriasi et al. (2007).

Fig. 3. Soils with probable tile drainage in the watershed (adapted from Schilling et al. 2008)

www.intechopen.com
40 Soil Health and Land Use Management

Fig. 4. Long-term average (1986-2004) streamflow comparison at the watershed outlet

(adapted from Jha et al. 2010)

2.2 Description of the watershed model, SWAT

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT; Arnold et al. 1998) model is a watershed-based
hydrologic and water quality model that operates on a daily times step and is capable of
modeling the impact of different land use and management practices on hydrology and
water quality of the watershed . It was developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and has experienced continuous evolution
since the first releases in the early 1990s. Major model components include hydrology,
weather, soil temperature, crop growth, nutrient, bacteria, and land management. In SWAT,
watersheds are divided into subwatersheds, which are further delineated by HRUs that
consist of homogeneous soil, land use and management characteristics. The HRUs represent
percentages of a subwatershed area and thus are not spatially defined in the model. The
water balance of each HRU is represented by four storage volumes: snow, soil profile,
shallow aquifer, and deep aquifer. Flow generation, sediment yield and pollutant loadings
are summed across all HRUs within a subwatershed, and the resulting alues are then routed
through channels, ponds, and/or reservoirs to the watershed outlet. The model has several
options to estimate potential evapotranspiration including Hargreaves method, Penman-
Monteith method, and others. Two options are available to simulate channel routing:
variable storage method and Muskingum method. SWAT simulates a complete plant
growth process and model nutrient dynamics throughout several interconnected nutrient
pools.
Water that enters the soil profile may move along one of several different pathways. The
water may be removed from the soil by plant uptake or evaporation. It can percolate past
the bottom of the soil profile and ultimately become aquifer recharge. A final option is that
water may move laterally in the profile and contribute to streamflow. Of these different
pathways, plant uptake of water removes the majority of water that enters the soil profile.
Two stages of water content are recognized: field capacity (water held at a tension of 0.033
MPa) and permanent wilting point (water held at a tension of 1.5 MPa). The amount of
water held in the soil between field capacity and permanent wilting point is considered to
be the water available for plant extraction. SWAT directly simulates saturated flow only.
The model records the water contents of the different soil layers but assumes that the water

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 41

is uniformly distributed within a given layer. This assumption eliminates the need to model
unsaturated flow in the horizontal direction. Unsaturated flow between layers is indirectly
modelled with the depth distribution of plant water uptake (Equation 1) and depth
distribution of soil water evaporation (Equation 2).
Depth distribution of plant water uptake:

, =[ ]
. [1 − exp − . ] (1)

Where wup,z is the potential water uptake from the soil profile to a specified depth, z, on a
given day (mm), Et is the maximum plant transpiration on a given day (m), βw is the water-
use distribution parameter, z is the depth from the soil surface (mm), and zroot is the depth of
root development in the soil (mm). The potential water uptake from any soil layer can be
calculated by solving above equation for the depth at the top and bottom of the soil layer
and taking the difference.
Depth distribution of soil water evaporation:

Esoil,ly = Esoil,zl – Esoil,zu (2)

Where Esoil,ly is the evaporative demand for layer ly (mm), Esoil,zl is the evaporative demand
at a lower boundary of the soil layer (mm), and Esoil,zl is the evaporative demand at the
upper boundary of the soil layer (mm).

2.3 Design experiment for soil moisture analyses

The calibrated SWAT model was examined for predicting the hydrological response at a
subwatershed level. The level of spatial detail framed in this study is the size of the
subwatershed (total number of which is 112 in the Raccoon River watershed with an
average area of about 83.5 km2). Various hydrological processes including precipitation,
water yield, evapotranspiration, and soil water content were looked at from the perspective
of spatial distribution across the watershed on a long-term average annual basis. While the
spatial distribution of precipitation was derived from historical climatic observation from 10
weather stations located in and around the watershed, other parameters are simulated
outcomes from the calibrated SWAT model.
It is hypothesized that the total water yield (surface runoff and baseflow) is very close (if not
equal) to the difference between precipitation and evapotranspiration, while soil moisture
content remains unaffected over a long-period of time. This hypothesis was tested at a
subwatershed level to evaluate the model’s ability to predict hydrological processes at
smaller spatial scales. There is no set specific criterion to evaluate the hypothesis, but it was
assumed that the model performance would be considered acceptable if the bias was found
to be less than or equal to 10%. Model prediction of soil moisture was not directly validated
by comparing with actual measurement due to the lack of available data on such a large
scale (a motivation of this study). However, the reasonable prediction of other hydrological
parameters by the model satisfied the validity of the model’s ability to replicate hydrological
response of the watershed through prediction of hydrological processes.
After the model validation, it was used to evaluate the effect of incorporating winter cover
crops into standard corn soybean rotation in the watershed. In this scenario, rye was planted
after the corn and soybean harvest. Harvest of the rye crop was not simulated but was
simply plowed in prior to corn or soybean planting. This scenario provided an opportunity
to assess the impact of adoption of this practice on soil moisture content on a long-term

www.intechopen.com
42 Soil Health and Land Use Management

basis. Winter cover crops provide ground cover on cultivated cropland after the growing
season. Rye, oats, and alfalfa have been used as cover crops in cropland areas in the
Midwest for number of years, and continuously increasing. It has shown a promise of
significant reduction in N losses from agricultural lands (Kaspar et al. 2004) thereby
protecting local streams from nonpoint source pollution, and contributing positively to
regional ecosystems. Implementation of this practice into vast majority of traditional corn
and soybean rotation in the Midwest has potential to reduce N loss significantly, and
ultimately reducing the concern of delivering significant nutrient loadings from Iowa and
Illinois watersheds into the Mississippi and ultimately to the Gulf of Mexico.

3. Results and discussion

Meteorological input to the modelling system was from 10 weather stations located in and
around the watershed. Spatial distribution of the most important hydrological driver
precipitation is shown in Figure 5. It can be seen that the distribution does not vary

Fig. 5. Spatial representation of precipitation on a long-term annual basis

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 43

significantly over the watershed spatially, and values range from 805 to 885 mm on a long-
term average annual basis over the period of 19 years (1986-2004). Based on the input on
temperature, other meteorological data, and information on land cover, SWAT estimated
evapotranspiration (ET) using Penman-Monteith method (Figure 6). Spatial distribution of
ET ranged from 470 to 660 mm with higher values in north and central portion of the
watershed. Average ET among subwatersheds was found to be 564 mm with standard
deviation of 36.

Fig. 6. Estimated evapotranspiration (ET) over a subwatershed scale on a long-term annual

basis
Hydrological model performed daily water balance on scale much finer than subwatershed
(at HRU or response unit level). The total water yield (sum of surface runoff and baseflow)
calculated at each response unit were aggregated at subwatershed level. The distribution of

www.intechopen.com
44 Soil Health and Land Use Management

water yield at the subwatershed level is show in Figure 7. This was achieved after the model
was calibrated for overall watershed hydrology and then for time-series data of streamflow
at the watershed outlet. Our hypothesis about water yield be equal to precipitation minus
evapotranspiration on a long term basis, was tested for each subwatershed individually for
the calibrated model. It was found that the absolute deviation of water yield values as
compared with the difference in precipitation and evapotranspiration values were very
small (mean = 3 mm, standard deviation = 3 mm, and values range from +6 to -10 mm) over
the entire watershed. This is the error of less than 1% in predicting water yield on a long-
term basis on such a large scale. This validates the accuracy of model prediction on a long-
term average annual basis. The resulting soil water content and its spatial distribution are
shown in Figure 8. Its value ranges from 164 to 300 mm with an average value of 250 mm
and standard deviation of 25mm. Higher moisture content was seem to exist mostly in the
eastern portion of the watershed.

Fig. 7. Total water yield distribution as predicted by SWAT on a long-term basis

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 45

Fig. 8. Soil moisture content predicted by SWAT at subwatershed scale on a long-term basis
Once the model was successfully tested to predict soil moisture content, a scenario was
conducted to examine the impact on soil moisture content for a promising land management
practice: inclusion of winter cover crops into cropland (corn and soybean in this case). A
winter cover crop, rye, was simulated to be planted after corn and soybean harvest each
year. While this practice is well known for both soil and water quality and conservation, this
study attempts to quantify its impact on soil moisture content. The modelling setup was run
with cover crop simulation included into the original baseline condition, and soil moisture
content was predicted at each subwatershed. The long-term impact of this management
practice on soil moisture content is reflected as shown in Figure 9. Soil moisture content was
found to reduce significantly across the watershed with a new mean of 167 mm and

www.intechopen.com
46 Soil Health and Land Use Management

standard deviation of 21. The range of values across subwatershed was found to be 116 to
207 mm, while compared to the baseline condition which was 164 to 300 mm. Spatial
distribution of soil moisture was consistent with the original baseline condition where
Eastern part of the watershed had higher moisture content. Moreover, the reduction in
moisture content was found to be consistent on a spatial scale. The magnitude of reduction
was found significant as evident by reduction in mean by 67%. Even though it is an outcome
of a simulation model, the signal of impact is very high. Figure 10 show the spatial
distribution of reduction in soil water content due to inclusion of winter cover crops in
standard corn-soybean rotation on a long-term basis.

Fig. 9. Soil moisture content (after introducing winter cover crop) as predicted by SWAT at
subwatershed scale on a long-term basis

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 47

Fig. 10. Reduction in soil moisture content due to inclusion of winter cover crops in standard
corn-soybean rotation on a long-term basis
Significant reduction in soil water content raises the sustainability concern of the future crop
production and regional ecosystem. As soil water content is very vital for crop growth and
other ecosystem variables, it is imperative that it needs to be conserved. Added to that, the
uncertainties in climate change with a certain increase of temperature and uncertain changes
(may increase or decrease) in the amount of precpitation pose more threat to the sustainable
agriculture system. It is warranted that the large scale implementation of winter cover crops
should be examined with caution for changes in soil moisture content and its impact on
future use of the land for agricultural production.

4. Conclusion
Understanding the spatio-temporal distribution and quantity of available soil moisture that
can be used without damaging the natural ecosystem are keys to sustainable development

www.intechopen.com
48 Soil Health and Land Use Management

and prevention of ecosystem decline. This study attempted to quantify the distribution of
soil moisture content on a 3,630 mi2 Raccoon River Watershed located in the Midwest
United States through the use of a watershed scale hydrologic model SWAT. After a
successful test of SWAT’s ability to predict soil moisture content, it was used to quantify the
impact of introducing winter cover crops in standard corn-soybean rotation in the Midwest.
The unit of analyses was at a subwatershed scale; a finer unit with total number of 112
comprise the entire watershed. Successful calibration of the SWAT modelling setup for the
watershed input parameters and databases was found to produce total water yield very
accurately (less than 1% error) which lead to the accurate estimation of soil moisture content
at a subwatershed scale. While introducing winter cover crops has shown to be effective
positively for both soil quality as well as water quality, this modelling study on the impact
of this change in soil moisture found to have an adverse impact on a long-term basis. Soil
moisture content was found to reduce significantly across the watershed with a mean of 167
mm and standard deviation of 21. The range of values across subwatershed was found to be
116 to 207 mm, while compared to the baseline condition which was 164 to 300 mm. The
magnitude of reduction was found significant as evident by reduction in mean by 67%. Even
though it is predicted by simulating a well calibrated model, signal of the impact is very
high. It is warranted that the large scale implementation of winter cover crops should be
examined with caution for changes in soil moisture content and its impact on future use of
the land for agricultural production.

5. References
Arabi, M.; Govindraju, R.S. & Hantush, M.M. (2006). Role of watershed subdivision on
evaluation of long-term impact of best management practices on water quality,
Journal of American Water Resources Association, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 513-528.
Arnold, J.G.; Srinivasan, R.; Muttiah, R.S. & Williams, J.R. (1998). Large area hydrologic
modeling assessment: Part 1. Model development, Journal of American Water
Resources Association, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 73-89.
Brocca, L.; Morbidelli, R.; Melone, F. & Moramarco, T. (2007). Soil moisture spatial
variability in experimental areas of central Italy, Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 333, No.
2–4, pp. 356–373.
Gassman, P.W.; Reyes, M.; Green, C.H. & Arnold, J.G. (2007). The Soil and Water
Assessment Tool: Historical development, applications, and future directiosn,
Transactions of the ASABE, Vol. 50, pp. 1211-1250.
Gitau, M.W.; Veith, T.L. & Gburek, W.J. (2004). Farm-level optimization of BMP placement
for cost-effective pollution reduction, Transactions of the ASABE, Vol. 47, No. 6, pp.
1923-1931.
Hatfield, J.L.; McMullen, L.D. & Jones, C.S. (2009). Nitrate-nitrogen patterns in the Racoon
River Basin related to agricultural practices, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,
Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 190-199. Doi: 10.2489/jswc.64.3190.
IDNR (2008). Natural resources geographic information systems library. Iowa City, Iowa:
Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey.
http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu/nrgislibx/, accessed July 2008.
Kaspar, T.C.; Jaynes, D.B.; Parkin, T.B. & Moorman, T.B. (2007). Rye Cover Crop and
Gamagrass Strip Effects on NO3 Concentration and Load in Tile Drainage, Journal
of Environmental Quality, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 1503-1511.

www.intechopen.com
Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale 49

Jha, M.K.; Arnold, J.G. & Gassman, P.W. (2007). Water quality modeling for the Raccoon
River Watershed using SWAT, Transactions of the ASABE, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 479-
493.
Jha, M.K.; Wolter, C.F.; Schilling, K.E. & Gassman, P.W. (2010a). Assessment of total
maximum daily load implementation strategies for nitrate impairment of the
Raccoon River, Iowa, Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 39, pp. 1317-1327. Doi:
10.2134/jeq2009.0392.
Jha, M.K.; Schilling, K.E.; Gassman, P.W. & Wolter, C.F. (2010b). Targeting land-use change
for nitrate-nitrogen load reductions in an agricultural watershed, Journal of Soil and
Water Conservation, Vol. 65, No. 6, pp. 342-352. Doi: 10.2489/jswc.65.6.342.
Jha, M.K. (2011). Evaluating hydrologic response of an agricultural watershed for watershed
analysis. Water, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 604-617.
Moriasi, D.N.; Arnold, J.G.; Van Liew, M.W.; Binger, R.L.; Harmel, R.D. & Veith, T. (2007).
Model evaluating guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in water
simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 885-900.
Rabalais, N. N.; Turner, R.E.; Justic, D.; Dortch, Q.; Wiseman, Jr., J. W. & Sen Gupta, B.K.
(1996). Nutrient changes in the Mississippi River, Estuaries, Vol. 19, No. 2B, pp. 385-
407.
Robinson, D.A.; Campbell, C.S.; Hopmans, J.W.; Hornbuckle, B.K.; Jones, S.B.; Knight, R.;
Ogden, F.; Selker, J. & Wendroth, O. (2008). Soil moisture measurement for
ecological and hydrological watershed-scale observations: A review, Vadose Zone
Journal, Vol. 7, pp. 358-389. Doi: 10.2136/vzj2007.0143.
Schilling, K.E.; Wolter, C.F.; Christiansen, D.E.; Schnoebelen, D.J. & Jha,M.K. (2008). Water
quality improvement plan for Raccoon River, Iowa. TMDL Report. Watershed
Improvement Section, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, pp. 202. Available
at:
http://www.iowadnr.gov/water/watershed/tmdl/files/final/raccoon08tmdl.pdf
Seyfried, M.S. & Wilcox, B.P. (1995). Scale and the nature of spatial variability: Field
examples having implications for hydrologic modeling, Water Resources Research,
Vol. 31, pp. 173–184.
Shepherd, M. A. & Webb, J. (1999). Effects of overwinter cover on nitrate loss and drainage
from a sandy soil: Consequences for water management? Soil Use Management, Vol.
15, No. 2, pp. 109-116.
Singer, J.W.; Malone, R.W.; Jaynes, D.B. & Ma, L. (2011). Cover crop effects on nitrogen load
in tile drainage from Walnut Creek, Iowa, using root zone water quality model
(RZWQM), Agricultural Water Management, Vol. 98, No. 10, pp. 1622-1628.
Spruill, C.A.; Workman, S.R. & Taraba, J.L. (2000). Simulation of daily and monthly stream
discharge from small watersheds using the SWAT model, Transactions of the ASBE,
Vol. 43, No. 6, pp. 1431-1349.
Topp, G.C. & Ferre, P.A. (2002). Th ermogravimetric method using convective oven-drying.
p. 422–424. In J.H. Dane and G.C. Topp (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 4.
Physical methods. SSSA, Madison, WI.
Turcu, V.E.; Jones, S.B. & Or, D. (2005). Continuous soil carbon dioxide and oxygen
measurements and estimation of gradient-based gaseous flux, Vadose Zone Journal,
Vol. 4, pp. 1161–1169.

www.intechopen.com
50 Soil Health and Land Use Management

USDA-NRCS. (2008). Overview and history of hydrologic units and the watershed
boundary dataset (WBD). Washington, D.C.: USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/watershed/history.html,
accessed July 2008.
USGS. (2009). Federal guidelines, requirements, and procedures for the National Watershed
Boundary Dataset. U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, Reston,
VA and Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/tm11a3/.
Vereecken, H.; Kamai, T.; Harter, T.; Kasteel, R.; Hopmans, J. & Vanderborght, J. (2007).
Explaining soil moisture variability as a function of mean soil moisture: a stochastic
unsaturated flow perspective, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L22402. Doi:
10.1029/2007GL031813.

www.intechopen.com
 Soil Health and Land Use Management
Edited by Dr. Maria C. Hernandez Soriano

ISBN 978-953-307-614-0
Hard cover, 332 pages
Publisher InTech
Published online 25, January, 2012
Published in print edition January, 2012

Soils play multiple roles in the quality of life throughout the world, not only as the resource for food production,
but also as the support for our structures, the environment, the medium for waste disposal, water, and the
storage of nutrients. A healthy soil can sustain biological productivity, maintain environmental quality, and
promote plant and animal health. Understanding the impact of land management practices on soil properties
and processes can provide useful indicators of economic and environmental sustainability. The sixteen
chapters of this book orchestrate a multidisciplinary composition of current trends in soil health. Soil Health and
Land Use Management provides a broad vision of the fundamental importance of soil health. In addition, the
development of feasible management and remediation strategies to preserve and ameliorate the fitness of
soils are discussed in this book. Strategies to improve land management and relevant case studies are
covered, as well as the importance of characterizing soil properties to develop management and remediation
strategies. Moreover, the current management of several environmental scenarios of high concern is
presented, while the final chapters propose new methodologies for soil pollution assessment.

How to reference
In order to correctly reference this scholarly work, feel free to copy and paste the following:

Manoj K. Jha (2012). Quantifying Soil Moisture Distribution at a Watershed Scale, Soil Health and Land Use
Management, Dr. Maria C. Hernandez Soriano (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307-614-0, InTech, Available from:
http://www.intechopen.com/books/soil-health-and-land-use-management/quantifying-soil-moisture-distribution-
at-a-watershed-scale

InTech Europe InTech China

University Campus STeP Ri Unit 405, Office Block, Hotel Equatorial Shanghai
Slavka Krautzeka 83/A No.65, Yan An Road (West), Shanghai, 200040, China
51000 Rijeka, Croatia
Phone: +385 (51) 770 447 Phone: +86-21-62489820
Fax: +385 (51) 686 166 Fax: +86-21-62489821
www.intechopen.com
© 2012 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This is an open access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.