Skip to content

Posts from the ‘Soils’ Category

Using Pedotransfer Functions to Predict Soil Properties

In this latest chalk talk video, METER soil scientist and application expert, Leo Rivera, discusses the use of pedotransfer functions (PTFs) for predicting soil properties such as hydraulic conductivity and field capacity.

He explains that while direct measurements are ideal, PTFs can provide rapid, cost-effective alternatives. PTFs use soil texture, particle size distribution, and bulk density as inputs, with accuracy depending on the quality of the database and the input data. There are limitations, such as PTFs not accounting for soil structure and organic matter, which can significantly impact hydraulic conductivity, thus, Rivera recommends using PTFs judiciously. PTFs can be especially helpful for large-scale assessments, and he suggests seeking tools that incorporate more parameters for improved accuracy.

Learn more:

Watch our Soil Moisture Master class→

See METER environmental sensors

Video transcript

0:00
Hi. My name is Leo Rivera, and this is a METER Chalk Talk.

0:11
Today I want to talk about a topic that I get asked a lot about, and it has to do with how to predict some of these soil properties that we typically measure. So we often have used tools to measure things like soil hydraulic conductivity, retention curves, predicting field capacity and permanent wilting point. And ideally, that’s the best way we can do it, is by making those measurements. But that’s not always an option. So there are times where we need to be able to more rapidly assess soil properties, where we don’t have the budget to assess some of these more expensive soil properties to measure. And there are tools available to make these predictions rather than making the measurements. And I want to talk about those today to make sure that you understand the capabilities of these tools, that they’re out there, but also understand the limitations. And so the primary tool I’m going to talk about is a pedotransfer function, or a PTF.

So typically, with a pedotransfer function, we’re using something like soil texture. So for example, I have here an image of the soil triangle, and I can say I have a clay loam soil. So I’ve got my clay loam right here. And my goal is to predict field capacity. My goal is to predict field capacity for minus 33 kPa, and permanent wilting point, which is minus 1500 kPa, typically to make those measurements, it’s going to take several days to several months, depending on how you choose to make that measurement. But that’s not always an option. So we can use a petal transfer function to take that property, like soil texture, and predict those values. And pedotransfer functions also can be used to predict things like hydraulic conductivity. So you can see an example of a hydraulic conductivity graph here as well. So a pedotransfer function can be a really powerful tool to predict some of these properties that are typically take more time or more expensive to measure, and maybe you don’t have the time to make those measurements. So it’s really important to understand how a pedotransfer function works before utilizing this tool.

So pedotransfer functions utilize databases, whether it’s soil survey or other generated databases, where you have a lot of soil data, and you have all of these data, like texture, density, where they’ve already measured, hydraulic conductivity and some of these other soil properties. It then takes your input and utilizes that database to best predict what those values are that you’re trying to assess. So if I’m trying to predict, for example, field capacity, you can input parameters like soil texture, particle size distribution and bulk density. And you can do this in various orders. You can use soil texture on its own. You can use particle size distribution on its own, or you can combine particle size distribution and soil bulk density together to make these predictions. And it’s going to go into that database and try and make its best prediction based on the data available on that database.

Your pedotransfer function is only going to be as strong as the data that’s in the database, but it’s also only going to be as powerful as how good of an input you give it to predict these these values. So if we’re using soil texture on its own, as you can imagine, if I was predicting a clay as a soil texture, we’ll just use that as our example. If we look at our clay soil on the on the soil texture triangle, that is a huge range of combinations of sand, silt and clay fraction. So as you can imagine, that’s a pretty broad area that you’re trying to predict from, and there’s a higher potential for error in that prediction. Now, if we were to refine that and use the particle size distribution, so if we knew our exact sand, silt and clay fraction that we were trying to predict, we could then refine our predictions. We’re going to get rid of that circle, and we’re going to refine our prediction, saying, our soil has exactly this amount of sand, silt and clay. And that’s going to refine how the pedotransfer function is pulling those data from in the database to predict those values.

But as we know, soil texture on its own and particle size on its own only tells part of the story. So we can further refine that by adding our bulk density into that prediction, which is going to help improve the prediction of either field capacity or hydraulic conductivity. And in some areas, that should be fine. And so as long as you’re happy with that level of error, that’s fine. But, especially when we’re looking at things like hydraulic conductivity, we know there are other factors that play a big role in hydraulic conductivity, such as soil structure. So ideally, we would be including structure in our prediction, and organic matter in our prediction, because we all we know that these play a significant role in how soil transmits water, but most pedotransfer function, tools like Rosetta and Soil View don’t really take these into account.

So when you’re looking at these values, especially trying to assess measurements like hydraulic conductivity, you need to understand these limitations when using these tools. Now, there are other databases and pedotransfer function tools out there that are doing a better job of taking some of these into account. And if you’re going to use those tools, you want to try to make sure, if you’re if you’re really concerned with the accuracy of your values that you’re using pedotransfer function models that take more of these parameters into account. So the more inputs you can have into your prediction, the more accurate you’re likely going to come out with your predictions of these factors.

I just wanted to cover some of the basics on pedotransfer functions, and if you’re going to use them. They’re really powerful tools if we need to use them, especially when we’re trying to characterize large areas. It’s not always feasible to make measurements across these large areas, and they can help give us a little more data to work off of, rather than just the measurements on their own to try and characterize what’s happening across the large watershed, for example. But we need to understand how our inputs can affect the accuracy of those predictions. If you want to learn more about this or other topics, please visit us on our website www.metergroup.com or on our YouTube channel under meter talk talks and thank you for watching.

The 70,000-landslide storm

In 2017, Hurricane Maria ravaged the island of Puerto Rico, with category 5 winds topping out at 174 mph (282 km/h).

In this mountainous nation with the 9th highest road density in the world, thousands of landslides wreaked havoc on the large number of rural communities that became cut off from supplies and travel. Dr. Stephen Hughes, a professor in the Department of Geology at the University of Puerto Rico Mayagüez, has turned this catastrophe into a lesson by harnessing before and after data to develop a landslide susceptibility map with resolution down to every 5 m. Join us as we discuss with him the process of developing landslide prediction across the entire island nation.

Listen to the podcast here→

Notes

Stephen is a professor in the department of geology at the University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez. He obtained his bachelors in geology and earth science from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his PhD in geology from North Carolina State University. He teaches classes in structural geology, geomorphology, and field geology, and his research projects have focused mostly on tropical landslides and landscape evolution, with the funding of such organizations as the NSF, USGS, USDA-NRCS, and NOAA.

Links to learn more about Dr. Stephen Hughes

Subscribe

Follow us

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast and on this posting are those of the individual speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by METER.

How to analyze soil moisture data

CONTRIBUTORS

You’ve buried soil water content and water potential sensors in the ground, installed an ATMOS 41 in the field, and set up your ZL6 data logger. Your network of instruments has been collecting data for days, weeks, or even all season. Now what? Performing soil moisture data analysis for your research location is one thing. Knowing how to extrapolate meaningful inferences and conclusions to understand what is happening and troubleshoot issues is completely different.

In this article, we will step through multiple data sets to understand how soil water content, soil temperature, soil water potential, and atmospheric measurements can be used to discover the meaning behind the traces. Within this article you will learn how to identify the following events in your data:

  • Behavior of soil moisture sensors in different soil types
  • Infiltration
  • Flooding
  • Soil cracking
  • Freezing
  • Spatial variability
  • Temperature effects
  • Diurnal patterns due to hydraulic redistribution
  • Broken sensors
  • Installation problems

Each example will be represented by a graph. It is not necessary to understand every aspect of information within these graphs. Each one is used as an illustration of common soil moisture data patterns you might run into and how to extrapolate the most useful information possible from the patterns seen. Each graph will have a box in the upper right-hand side corner with the soil type and crop type so you have a better understanding of the variables at play.

All of the data provided was collected by data loggers, such as our ZL6 series, and uploaded to ZENTRA Cloud for remote viewing at the convenience of the user. All data sets are either from METER’s own instrumentation or are supplied by the data owner and are included with their permission.

A photograph of a ZL6 next to a tablet showing ZENTRA Cloud data
Figure 1. ZL6 Basic data logger with data collected and stored within the ZENTRA Cloud platform
Effects of soil types
A graph showing water content and water potential measurements for a turf grass in loamy sand in wet conditions
Figure 2. Water content and water potential measurements for a turf grass in loamy sand in wet conditions

In Figure 2 we see the data from an engineered loamy sand with a cover crop of turf grass. Our goal when executing our experiments in this example was to improve irrigation in turf grass. This grass had a fairly shallow root zone, the middle of which was about six cm deep and the bottom at about 10 cm. Over time, this example showed first relatively wet conditions to start through June and July, a fixed drying period condition in July and August, and drying until the cessation of water uptake in August and September.

This graph shows two soil moisture data types: volumetric water content on the left y-axis and matric potential, or water potential, on the right y-axis. Time is on the x-axis ranging from early summer to the start of fall. To understand what these data clusters can tell us, we must look at each data set individually.

Read the full article

Office Hours Episode 11: Soil Moisture

There’s a lot to consider when collecting soil moisture measurements.

Get your soil moisture questions answered in our Office Hours series.

Join Environment Support Manager, Chris Chambers, and Director of Science Outreach, Leo Rivera, as they discuss submitted questions all about getting the best soil moisture measurements.

In the full episode, they discuss: 

  1. How difficult is the calibration of dielectric sensors? 
  2. How does soilless media affect the operation of dielectric sensors? 
  3. How much can organic soil amendments influence soil moisture? 
  4. Is it possible to determine the soil hydraulic properties from soil water content? 
  5. Why volumetric water content instead of gravimetric water content? 
  6. What is the best way to correct for the temperature sensitivity of sensors? 
  7. And more. 

Watch the full episode now: https://metergroup.com/office-hours-qa/office-hours-11-soil-moisture-measurements/

Building a National Water Potential Network

Champions of water potential

Drs. Kim Novick and Jessica Guo team up to discuss the vital role water potential measurement plays in both plant and soil sciences and the work they are doing to establish the first-of-its-kind nationwide water potential network. Join their discussion to understand how a communal knowledge of these measurements could impact what we know about climate change and ecology as a whole.

A water potential measurement network could increase our understanding of climate change and ecology.

Listen to the podcast→

Notes

Dr. Kim Novick is a professor, Paul H. O’Neill Chair, Fischer Faculty Fellow, and director of the Ph.D. Program in Environmental Sciences at Indiana University.  She earned her bachelor’s and Ph.D. in environmental science at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. Her research areas span ecology and conservation, hydrology and water resources, and sustainability and sustainable development, with specific interests in land-atmosphere interactions, terrestrial carbon cycling, plant ecophysiology, and nature-based climate solutions.

Dr. Jessica Guo is a plant ecophysiologist and data scientist who studies plant-environment interactions under extreme climate conditions. She earned her bachelor’s in environmental biology from Columbia University and her Ph.D. in biological sciences from Northern Arizona University.  She is currently at the University of Arizona, where she blends her passion for reproducible workflows, interactive visualizations, and hierarchical Bayesian models with her expertise in plant water relations.
 

Links to learn more about Dr. Kim Novick

Links to learn more about Dr. Jessica Guo

Subscribe

Follow us

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. 

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast and on this posting are those of the individual speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by METER.

Water Resource Capture: Turning Water Into Biomass

As world water demand increases and supplies decrease, how can we turn more of the water we use for agriculture into biomass? In this webinar, Dr. Campbell dives deep into the measurement and implications of making the most of every drop of water.

Learn how to measure the amount of water a crop will need.

Crops turn sunlight, water, carbon dioxide, and nutrients into food

The availability of those resources puts limitations on the amount of food a crop can produce. A previous webinar considered the limitations of sunlight. In this 30-minute webinar, world-renown environmental biophysicist, Dr. Gaylon S. Campbell, discusses how to measure the amount of water a crop will need and how to use that value to predict the amount of biomass it will produce.

Achieve maximum biomass from every drop

Join Dr. Campbell as he discusses the measurements and calculations needed to know how much biomass a given environment can produce. Dr. Campbell will discuss:

  • How resource capture models work
  • How biomass production and water use are linked
  • Examples of effective uses of water resource capture models
  • Instrumentation needed to determine water and radiation limitations on yield
  • How to use soil and atmospheric measurements to quantify crop water capture
  • Water budgets and how they are used to get transpiration and biomass production

Register here→

Presenter

Dr. Gaylon S. Campbell

Dr. Campbell has been a research scientist and engineer at METER for 19 years following nearly 30 years on faculty at Washington State University. Dr. Campbell’s first experience with environmental measurement came in the lab of Sterling Taylor at Utah State University making water potential measurements to understand plant water status. Dr. Campbell is one of the world’s foremost authorities on physical measurements in the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. His book written with Dr. John Norman on Environmental Biophysics provides a critical foundation for anyone interested in understanding the physics of the natural world. Dr. Campbell has written three books, over 100 refereed journal articles and book chapters, and has several patents.

Next steps

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. 

Determining drought tolerance in plants: How to do it right.

CONTRIBUTORS

Abiotic stress in plants: How to assess it the right way

As a plant researcher, you need to effectively assess crop performance, whether you’re  selecting the best variety, trying to understand abiotic stress tolerance, studying disease resistance, or determining climate resilience. But if you’re only measuring weather data, you might be missing key performance indicators. Water potential is underutilized by plant researchers in abiotic stress studies even though it is the only way to assess true drought conditions when determining drought tolerance in plants. Learn what water potential is and how it can improve the quality of your plant study.

Soil directly impacts plant growth via nutrient availability, disease pressure, root growth, and water availability.

Quantitative genetics in plant breeding: why you need better data

If you’ve studied plant populations, you’re probably familiar with the simplified equation in Figure 1 that represents how we think about the impact of genetics and the environment on observable phenotypes.

Figure 1. Phenotype = Genotype + Environment

This equation breaks down the observed phenotype (plant height, yield, kernel color, etc.) into the effects from the genotype (the plants underlying genetics) and the effects of the environment (rainfall, average daily temperature, etc.). You can see from this equation that the quality of your study directly depends on the kind of environmental data you collect. Thus, if you’re not measuring the right type of data, the accuracy of your entire study can be compromised.

Water potential: the secret to understanding water stress in plants

Drought studies are notoriously difficult to replicate, quantify, or even design. That’s because there is nothing predictable about drought timing, intensity, or duration, and it’s difficult to make comparisons across sites with different soil types. We also know that looking at precipitation alone, or even volumetric water content, doesn’t adequately describe the drought conditions that are occurring in the soil.

Figure 2. The TEROS 21 is a field sensor used to measure soil water potential

Soil water potential is an essential tool for quantifying drought stress in plant research because it allows you to make quantitative assessments about drought and provides an easy way to compare those results across field sites and over time. Let’s take a closer look to see why.

Read the full article→

The Science Behind Growing Food in Space

In our latest podcast, Dr. Bruce Bugbee, Professor of Crop Physiology and Director of the Crop Physiology Lab at Utah State University, discusses his space farming research and what we earthlings can learn from space farming techniques. 

International space station

Find out what happens to plants in a zero-gravity environment and how scientists overcome the particular challenges of deploying measurement sensors in space. He also shares his research on the efficacy of LED lights for indoor growing.

Listen now→

Notes

Dr. Bruce Bugbee is a Professor of Crop Physiology, Director of the Crop Physiology Laboratory at Utah State University, and the President of Apogee Instruments

His work includes collaborating with NASA to develop closed life-support systems for long-term space missions. He’s been involved with the development of crop-growing systems for future life on the Moon, in addition to in-orbit or in-space shuttles. He’s worked on projects for Mars farming, including the use of fiber optics for indoor lighting, And as a part of this research, he was involved in the creation of the NASA Space Technology Research Institute’s Center for the Utilization of Biological Engineering in Space (or CUBES). 

Dr. Bugbee also has long been a critic of the use of indoor farming as a means of solving food shortages, due to the large amount of electricity needed to provide light for photosynthesis. His recent work in this area has included studies into the efficacy of LED lights for indoor growing. (Credit: Wikipedia)

Subscribe:

https://www.metergroup.com/we-measure-the-world/

Follow us:

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. 

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast and on this posting are those of the individual speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by METER.

Chalk Talk: How Many Soil Moisture Measurements Do I Need?

In this chalk talk video, world-renowned soil physicist, Dr. Gaylon Campbell, discusses how many measurements researchers and growers need to characterize soil moisture at a field or research site. He explores the question: What is the relationship between the measurements that you make and the underlying value of water content in the field?

Presenter

Dr. Gaylon S. Campbell has been a research scientist and engineer at METER for 19 years following nearly 30 years on faculty at Washington State University.  Dr. Campbell’s first experience with environmental measurement came in the lab of Sterling Taylor at Utah State University making water potential measurements to understand plant water status.  Dr. Campbell is one of the world’s foremost authorities on physical measurements in the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum.  His book written with Dr. John Norman on Environmental Biophysics provides a critical foundation for anyone interested in understanding the physics of the natural world.   Dr. Campbell has written three books, over 100 refereed journal articles and book chapters, and has several patents.

Next steps

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. 

Transcript

We quite often get a question from customers about how many measurements we need to characterize soil moisture at a site. And so that’s what I want to talk about today. A number of years ago, I knew a man who was wanting to provide a business of making soil moisture measurements for the purpose of irrigation scheduling for farmers. And he came to me wondering how many samples he should take. He figured that he wanted a fairly simple way of determining soil moisture. 

TEROS 12 soil moisture sensor

So, he thought he would go into the field and he would collect soil samples from the field, he would take them back to the laboratory, he would dry them and weigh them and dry them and determine water content. And he wondered how many samples would be required to determine the water content to provide this information for a farmer. 

Now, that’s not so different from the kinds of information that are often required either for practical applications like irrigation scheduling, or for research purposes. We can see the broader applications of the question of, “what’s the relationship between the measurements that we take and the underlying value of water content in the field?” 

Soil water content will vary from place to place.

I think you can see that the same thing would apply whether we were taking samples and bringing them back to the laboratory, or if we were putting in soil moisture sensors, and wanting to monitor soil moisture in the field. So, the first thing we need to talk about soil moisture is a random variable, we need some vocabulary for talking about that. Two terms are important: mean and standard deviation. 

If we were to collect many samples of water content from a field, and we were to plot the number of samples versus the water content of the samples, we would obtain a relationship something like this. We would get the most samples around some central value, and that central value is the mean. 

The standard deviation is a measure of the dispersion around the mean. 68% of the values that we take would be within plus or minus one standard deviation of that mean value. 95% would be within plus or minus two standard deviations of the mean value. 

So, let’s say that we walked out here in the field, and we took a sample and made a measurement on it. And let’s say out of that sample, we determined the water content was 27%. Now let’s say that we assume or we know from some means that the standard deviation is 3%. Then, by these ideas, we would know that the mean value – the expected value for the water content – is or at least there would be a 95% probability that the mean value of the water content would be somewhere between 21% and 33%. The mean value plus two times the standard deviation and the mean value minus two times the standard deviation. 

Now we may say, “well that’s not good enough. We need better values than that. So what do we do? We need to take more samples. And so we take a number of samples and average them. And so we can know what the result of averaging several samples is, with a simple relationship. The uncertainty in the average value that we get–the standard deviation of the mean–is the standard deviation, divided by the square root of the number of samples. 

So let’s say that we went out in the field, and we took 100 samples. Then the standard deviation of the mean, would be our standard deviation that we assumed before, divided by the square root of 100. The square root of 100, of course, is 10. And so that would be 0.3%. If we determined a value of 28% for that mean of the 100 samples, then with 95% confidence, we can say that the water content is between 27.4 (2 standard deviations below the mean), and 28.6.

Now we’re getting closer then to our quest of determining the number of samples that we need to take. We start out with that equation that we just had that the standard deviation of the mean is equal to the standard deviation divided by the square root of the number of samples. We can rearrange that to say that the number of samples that we need is equal to the standard deviation divided by the standard deviation of the mean, and that value squared. So, the error that we normally would talk about in the measurement–if we’re again talking about 95% confidence–the error is half of the standard deviation of the mean. 

This number of samples is two times the standard deviation over the air, and that all squared. So, if we work through a little problem with that, how many samples would we need in order to know the water content within 1%? If the standard deviation is 3%, the way we’ve assumed.

So, the standard deviation is 3%. The error value that we want to get to is 1%. We want to take enough samples so that we have 95% confidence that we’re within 1%. And so the number of samples is 2 times 3%, divided by the air, 1%, and that’s all squared. And that comes out to be 36 samples. Well, when we see that number, typically we get pretty discouraged. That’s more samples than we want to take. More samples probably than we can afford to take. 

To see how that relates to reality, we did a little experiment. Here we have a soccer field out behind the METER (formerly Decagon) building. We went out and took one of our sensors, the GS3, and hooked it up to our little handheld device. And we set up three transects 20 meters long, parallel with each other and spaced a meter apart. We went along and took samples every meter along these transects. And I have a little video here that shows how that sampling went. The result of that sampling is shown in this next slide. 

This slide shows the result of that set of measurements that we made. And you can see it looks about like you would expect it to. We’ve got some variation, we show a mean value and some variation around it. The transects, again, showed variability but seemed to be showing about the same result for each transect. We had 60 samples there. 

The average water content that we computed was 38.6%. The standard deviation was not 3%, but 5%. So, the situation is even worse than we imagined with these calculations that we just did here. With a standard deviation of 5%, if we want to know the water content within 1%, we would need 100 samples to do that. And so even with our 60 samples, here, our standard deviation of the mean is 0.65%. And so our field water content is somewhere between 37.3 and 39.9. 

Well, as I say that usually is discouraging when we get to that point and see how many samples are needed to make a set of measurements, but the thing is that quite often, the thing that we need to know is not an accurate value for the average water content. Quite often, what we want to know is how much the water content is changing. And that we can know in other ways, accurately enough, so that we don’t need that many samples. 

That person that I started out talking about who was wanting to schedule irrigation would need to know water content with an accuracy of 1%. Well, at least with a precision of 1% or better. But that could be achieved much more readily by installing a sensor in situ, where you’re not dealing with the spatial variability in the soil and monitoring that. 

Here I’ve shown some data that we took in the field with one of our 5TE sensors hooked up to a data logger. The water content is sampled every minute, it’s averaged over hour intervals, and the plot that you see here is a plot of the water content measured each hour. Then, you can see a period of time where the soil is drying, because the plants are using water. You can see an increase in water content that results from adding water through irrigation or rain. And then again, the water content decreasing as the water is used. And you see very little variation in those data. 

Now if this guy that wanted to provide the irrigation scheduling service, had wanted to do this same thing by sampling, the next slide shows the result that he would have gotten if he had gone out every hour and taken one soil sample and plotted the result. 

This is what he would have gotten; the blue lines that you see. And you can see that it’s about what you would expect: that the highest values are about 10% higher than the mean value, the lowest values are about 10% lower, and the standard deviation we said is about 5. So, that’s about what we would expect. But from these kinds of data, there’s no possibility that you could ever tell when you should irrigate. 

In the next slide, I show the result that you would have gotten if you went out and took 10 samples every hour. And here you can see the pattern to some extent of when the drying and wetting occur, but there’s still an awful lot of variation. 

The next slide shows the result of taking 100 samples every hour, a ridiculous thought, but again, there’s still some variation in it. It still doesn’t look anywhere near as good as the in situ sample. When we’re just looking for the changes in water content, the water storage, and water use, in situ measurements make a lot more sense than soil moisture sampling. 

So, let me conclude just by a few points that I hope to have made in this. First of all, the soil water content varies from place to place; that’s inherent in nature. It’s something that we expect anytime we go out to measure soil moisture. We usually need to take an average of moisture at several locations in order to know what the water content of a field is, or an experimental site. We usually can’t afford to take enough measurements to really know what it is to have it within the accuracy that we would like to have it. And so we can go through this exercise that I’ve gone through here, we can determine the number that we need, but usually, our budget won’t allow us to put in that many and so we end up compromising to some extent. 

Why We Live Or Die By Soil Health

In our latest podcast, Dr. Cristine Morgan, one of the US’s premier soil scientists and Chief Scientific Officer at the Soil Health Institute shares her views on soil health: what it is, how to quantify it, what’s the payoff, and why it’s so critical to our success as a society.

“Our soils support 95 percent of all food production, and by 2060, our soils will be asked to give us as much food as we have consumed in the last 500 years.” (Credit: https://livingsoilfilm.com/)

Her thoughts? “We all live or die by soil, literally. We just have to remind people that it’s about quality of life. It’s about the food that you eat. It’s about the safety and welfare of your children.” 

LISTEN NOW—>

Notes

Dr. Cristine Morgan is the Chief Scientific Officer at the Soil Health Institute in North Carolina. Learn more about the Soil Health Institute on their website. 

Subscribe:

https://www.metergroup.com/we-measure-the-world/

Follow us:

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. 

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast and on this posting are those of the individual speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by METER.