Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “soil”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
NASA NTRS1993

Application of neural network to remote sensing of soil moisture using theoretical polarimetric backscattering coefficients

This paper investigates the potential application of neural network to inversion of soil moisture using polarimetric remote sensing data. The neural network used for the inversion of soil parameters is multi-layer perceptron trained with the back-propagation algorithm. The training data include the polarimetric backscattering coefficients obtained from theoretical surface scattering models together with an assumed nominal range of soil parameters which are comprised of the soil permittivity and surface roughness parameters. Soil permittivity is calculated from the soil moisture and the assumed soil texture based on an empirical formula at C-, L-, and P-bands. The rough surface parameters for the soil surface, which is described by the Gaussian random process, are the root-mean-square (rms) height and correlation length. For the rough surface scattering, small perturbation method is used for the L-band frequency, and Kirchhoff approximation is used for the C-band frequency to obtain the corresponding backscattering coefficients. During the training, the backscattering coefficients are the inputs to the neural net and the output from the net are compared with the desired soil parameters to adjust the interconnecting weights. The process is repeated for each input-output data entry and then for the entire training data until convergence is reached. After training, the backscattering coefficients are applied to the trained neural net to retrieve the soil parameters which are compared with the desired soil parameters to verify the effectiveness of this technique. Several cases are examined. First, for simplicity, the correlation length and rms height of the soil surface are fixed while soil moisture is varied. Soil moisture obtained using the neural networks with either L-band or C-band backscattering coefficients for the HH and VV polarizations as inputs is in good agreement with the desired soil moisture. The neural net output matches the desired output for the soil moisture range of 16 to 60 percent for the C-band case. The next case investigated is to vary both soil moisture and rms height while keeping the correlation length fixed. For this case, C-band backscattering coefficients are not sufficient for retrieving two parameters because the Kirchhoff approximation gives the same HH and VV backscattering coefficients. Therefore, the backscattering coefficients at two different frequency bands are necessary to find both the soil moisture and rms height. Finally, the neural nets are also applied to simultaneously invert soil moisture, rms height, and correlation length. Overall, the soil moisture retrieved from the neural network agrees very well with the desired soil moisture. This suggests that the neural network shows potential for retrieval of soil parameters from remote sensing data.

Wang, L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Validation and Scaling of Soil Moisture in a Semi-Arid Environment: SMAP Validation Experiment 2015 (SMAPVEX15)

The NASA SMAP (Soil Moisture Active Passive) mission conducted the SMAP Validation Experiment 2015 (SMAPVEX15) in order to support the calibration and validation activities of SMAP soil moisture data products. The main goals of the experiment were to address issues regarding the spatial disaggregation methodologies for improvement of soil moisture products and validation of the in situ measurement upscaling techniques. To support these objectives high-resolution soil moisture maps were acquired with the airborne PALS (Passive Active L-band Sensor) instrument over an area in southeast Arizona that includes the Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed (WGEW), and intensive ground sampling was carried out to augment the permanent in situ instrumentation. The objective of the paper was to establish the correspondence and relationship between the highly heterogeneous spatial distribution of soil moisture on the ground and the coarse resolution radiometer-based soil moisture retrievals of SMAP. The high-resolution mapping conducted with PALS provided the required connection between the in situ measurements and SMAP retrievals. The in situ measurements were used to validate the PALS soil moisture acquired at 1-km resolution. Based on the information from a dense network of rain gauges in the study area, the in situ soil moisture measurements did not capture all the precipitation events accurately. That is, the PALS and SMAP soil moisture estimates responded to precipitation events detected by rain gauges, which were in some cases not detected by the in situ soil moisture sensors. It was also concluded that the spatial distribution of the soil moisture resulted from the relatively small spatial extents of the typical convective storms in this region was not completely captured with the in situ stations. After removing those cases (approximately10 of the observations) the following metrics were obtained: RMSD (root mean square difference) of0.016m3m3 and correlation of 0.83. The PALS soil moisture was also compared to SMAP and in situ soil moisture at the 36-km scale, which is the SMAP grid size for the standard product. PALS and SMAP soil moistures were found to be very similar owing to the close match of the brightness temperature measurements and the use of a common soil moisture retrieval algorithm. Spatial heterogeneity, which was identified using the high-resolution PALS soil moisture and the intensive ground sampling, also contributed to differences between the soil moisture estimates. In general, discrepancies found between the L-band soil moisture estimates and the 5-cm depth in situ measurements require methodologies to mitigate the impact on their interpretations in soil moisture validation and algorithm development. Specifically, the metrics computed for the SMAP radiometer-based soil moisture product over WGEW will include errors resulting from rainfall, particularly during the monsoon season when the spatial distribution of soil moisture is especially heterogeneous.

SMAPVEX15↗
DOE OSTI2024

Simulating water dynamics related to pedogenesis across space and time: Implications for four-dimensional digital soil mapping

Digital soil mapping (DSM) relies on machine-learning and geostatistics to represent soil property observations across space. DSM techniques are powerful but often empirical, being limited to the quality and density of point samples. Water dynamics are closely related to soil variability, and the physics that govern water movement are well known. Hydrological properties can hence be simulated by physical models through space and time, unveiling key characteristics about soils. We propose the use of hydrologic models to map soils across the surface (2D), depth (1D), and time (1D)–which provides a 4D approach to digital soil mapping (4DSM). The Distributed Hydrology Soil Vegetation Model (DHSVM) was applied to a watershed currently under pasture. Moisture sensors and wells were installed at different depths in the watershed on summit, sideslope and toeslope positions to validate the model. DHSVM simulations of soil moisture distribution and depth to saturation were performed during the hydrological year (October 2008-September 2009). Clusters of similar pixels based on soil moisture values were determined using Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) to align temporal data and K-means. Clustering was performed both seasonally and for the entire year. Temporal patterns simulated by DHSVM matched measurements given by moisture sensors and wells. Seasonal clusters differed from the annual cluster. Distinct clusters were observed for each season and with depth, showing that spatiotemporal soil variability is lost when statically assessing soils. Spatiotemporal clusters corroborated field observations of fragipan occurrence not explicitly spatially mapped by Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO). If a connection can be made between water and soils, static and dynamic soil variability can be predicted using physically based hydrologic models. Hydrologic models can benefit soil mapping by enabling reliable 4D simulation of water dynamics, which are fundamental to soil variability and soil classification and directly relate to biological, physical and chemical soil processes not captured by typical soil sampling protocols.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Examination of L-Band Brightness Temperature Forecasts in the SMAP Level-4 Soil Moisture Analysis

The NASA Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission [4] has been providing L-band (1.4 GHz) passive microwave brightness temperature (Tb) observations since April 2015. By assimilating the Tb observations into the NASA Catchment land surface model [5] using a spatially distributed ensemble Kalman filter, the NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office generates the SMAP Level-4 Soil Moisture (L4_SM) product, which provides global, 3-hourly, 9-km resolution estimates of surface (0-5 cm) and root-zone (0-100 cm) soil moisture with ~2.5-day latency for use in research and applications [6]. The L4_SM product also includes estimates of soil temperature, land surface fluxes, and assimilation diagnostics such as the model forecast and observed Tb values [7]. The output from the L4_SM system is routinely monitored by the L4_SM team. Such monitoring provides valuable information; instances of unusually large Tb observation-minus-forecast (O-F) residuals can indicate events during which soil moisture conditions are poorly described in the land modeling system [7,8]. For example, repeated occurrences of very large Tb O-F values in central Australia were traced back to deficiencies in the gauge-based precipitation product used in the land modeling system through L4_SM Version 5; this discovery prompted the use, beginning in Version 6, of satellite- and gauge-based precipitation observations outside of North America [9]. Recently, a statistical analysis of the Tb O-F residuals revealed systematic errors in the “tau-omega” L-band radiative transfer model that converts the land-model simulated soil moisture and temperature into the forecast Tb prior to the L4_SM analysis. The L4_SM analysis is built on the ensemble Kalman filter and assumes unbiased forecast errors. The presence of systematic Tb forecast errors could thus adversely impact the quality of the analyzed soil moisture. In this paper, we examine the Tb O-F residuals of the latest Version 7 L4_SM data (Science Version ID Vv7030 and Vv7032) [10,11,12]. In the L4_SM Version 7 algorithm, key parameters of the L-band radiative transfer model, including soil roughness, scattering albedo, and a (seasonally varying) climatology of vegetation opacity, are obtained from the SMAP Level-2 Radiometer retrieval product (Version 5) [1]. Additionally, we also use ground measurements of surface soil moisture and soil temperature from the SMAP core validation sites as in situ reference of soil conditions [2,3]. As part of the L4_SM system calibration, the seasonally-varying bias between the model forecast Tb and the observed values is removed prior to the assimilation of the SMAP Tb observations [7]. That is, the L4_SM system is designed to only correct errors in synoptic-scale and interannual variations from the long-term mean seasonal cycle while maintaining the model’s (potentially erroneous) climatology. The Tb O-F residuals examined here are thus computed using SMAP Tb observations after they are rescaled to the mean seasonal cycle of Tb from the modeling system without SMAP data assimilation. Consequently, the long-term average of the Tb O-F residuals has a global mean of only 0.13 K and locally small values, ranging from -1 to 3 K. Despite the small time-average values of the Tb O-F residuals, the model forecast Tb was nevertheless found to exhibit undesirable systematic errors. At some locations, the time-average Tb O-F values strongly depend on surface soil moisture (SM). At the Yanco SMAP core validation site, for example, the Tb O-F residuals typically range from 5 to 15 K under dry soil moisture conditions (SM < 0.15 m3 m-3) yet are predominantly negative under wet soil moisture conditions (SM > 0.25 m3 m-3), with values ranging from 0 to -40 K. This results in soil moisture analysis increments that persistently make the soil drier under dry SM conditions and persistently make the soil wetter under wet SM conditions, suggesting an error in the dynamic range of the simulated Tb, soil moisture or soil temperature. In this paper, we describe the higher-order systematic Tb forecast errors in more detail, examine their impact on the L4_SM product quality, and explore potential avenues to further improve the L4_SM algorithm.

Rolf Reichle↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with Mongird et al. (in prep) organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSI+RP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_ep_score_raster.tif solar_msi_ep_score_raster.tif wind_msi_ep_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with the Mongird et al. paper entitled "Can US power grid expansion avoid prime agricultural lands?" and is organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSIxRP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_rp_score_raster.tif solar_msi_rp_score_raster.tif wind_msi_rp_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Remotely Sensed and Modeled Soil Moisture at Forested and Unforested Sites

Soil moisture is an important driver for forest ecosystems, influencing fire occurrence and extent, insect and pathogen impacts, and tree growth, which creates a need for regular, globally extensive soil moisture information that only satellite-based sensors or models can achieve. However, the reliability of soil moisture measurements in forests is not well understood due to a lack of suitable validation sites (especially relative to unforested ecosystems) and interference caused by high vegetation water content on remotely sensed measurements; although recent studies have started to address this gap [1], [2], [3], [4]. Here we validate the performance of multiyear remotely sensed (SMAP/Sentinel), remotely sensed data assimilation modelled (SMAP-L4), and modelled (NLDAS) surface and root zone (0-1 m) soil moisture datasets with data from in-situ sensors at 39 National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) sites throughout the contiguous US. Due to differences in spatial resolution, NEON soil moisture (~0.2 km measurement zone) correlations were expected to be stronger with the SMAP/Sentinel product (3 km resolution) than with coarser resolution SMAP-L4 (9 km resolution) or NLDAS products (13 km resolution). However, given the sensitivity of satellite measurements to vegetation water content we expected a deterioration in the correlations based on remotely sensed measurements (SMAP/Sentinel and SMAP-L4) as aboveground biomass increased, whereas the model-based data (NLDAS) was expected to be largely insensitive to vegetation type. We recognize that the SMAP/Sentinel product was developed for unforested regions, therefore our application is outside its primary use case. Soil moisture is measured at up to 8 depths in five soil plots spaced up to 40 m apart at each NEON terrestrial site. Correlation parameters were calculated for the three remotely sensed and modelled data products relative to in-situ measurement following Entekhabi et al. [5]. The datasets comprised 94 (SMAP-L4), 28 (SMAP/Sentinel), and 106 (NLDAS) sites-years for surface soils and 13 (SMAP-L4) and 14 (NLDAS) site-years for the root zone. At unforested sites, the performance of the three remotely sensed and modelled data products was similar for surface soils (Table 1). For example, unbiased RMSD (ubRMSD), which SMAP uses as its primary performance metric [6], ranged from 0.05 to 0.06 m3 m-3 (Table 1), indicating the ability of all three products to track changes in soil moisture over time. The performance of the three products deteriorated at forested sites, however, while the difference in performance was modest for SMAP-L4 and NLDAS, the deterioration in SMAP/Sentinel performance was substantial. For instance, SMAP/Sentinel ubRMSD increased from 0.06 to 0.11 m3 m-3 and absolute mean difference (Abs MD; which includes measurement bias and spatial representativeness errors) increased from 0.06 to 0.16 m3 m-3, indicating both a reduction in ability to track temporal changes and absolute amounts of soil moisture in forest ecosystems. SMAP-L4 and NLDAS had lower unbiased RMSD for root zone (0-1 m) than surface soils at both forested and unforested sites (Tables 1 and 2; SMAP/Sentinel does not produce a root zone measurement). However, in most cases the correlation coefficient (r) was lower for the root zone than surface soils, suggesting the lower unbiased RMSD may be attributed to greater temporal stability of soil moisture in the root zone rather than improved data product performance. Mean difference and absolute mean difference, which encompass measurement bias and spatial representativeness errors, were greater for root zone than surface soils at unforested sites for both data products, but the opposite was generally true at forested sites. As with surface soils, there was relatively little change in the performance of SMAP-L4 and NLDAS between the unforested and forested sites. In summary, all three data products were able to adequately represent soil moisture at unforested sites, at least when aggregating across sites. However, while the performance of all three products deteriorated at forested sites, SMAP-L4 and NLDAS maintained sufficient performance to remain suitable for some use cases (ubRMSD <0.06 m3 m-3 and RMSD <0.13 m3 m-3). In contrast, the relatively poorer performance of the SMAP/Sentinel product at forested sites seems insufficient for most use cases (ubRMSD >0.1 m3 m-3 and RMSD >0.2 m3 m-3). We attribute the large reduction in the performance of the SMAP/Sentinel product in forests to its use of C-band wavelengths, which are particularly sensitive to vegetation interference, and apparently outweighed any gains provided by its higher spatial resolution. A combined SMAP/NISAR soil moisture product may provide improved performance relative to SMAP/Sentinel due to NISAR’s use of L-band wavelengths, which are less sensitive to vegetation (NISAR is scheduled for launch in early 2024).

Edward Ayres↗
DOE OSTI2025

Photovoltaic Mini-Module Soiling Stations: Cooperative Research and Development (Final Report)

Photovoltaic (PV) panels can become soiled due to a variety of environmental factors. This soiling reduces the amount of light reaching the cells and thus their energy output. The ratio of actual output of the soiled device that of a clean device is known as the soiling ratio. The daily change in soiling ratio is known as the soiling rate. To study soiling for different glass coatings. Two soiling stations were fabricated. The stations were designed to monitor the short-circuit current of PV cells encapsulated with glass featuring different coatings and measure the daily soiling ratio with a pair of reference cells, one of which is automatically brushed daily. This work meets the need to understand how the glass coatings perform in additional environments. The stations are designed to quantify both the soiling ratio (the ratio between actual/expected photovoltaic panel power output) as well as differences in anti-soiling performance of different glass coatings. The design of the dirty/clean reference cell system is described by Toth et al. The soiling ratio is calculated by calculating the average irradiance measured within one hour of solar noon by each of the reference cells and then taking the ratio of these daily near-noon averages. The soiling ratio time series for the station deployed in Georgia is shown in Figure 1. This figure shows that the soiling ratio at the site has not yet fallen below 0.99, indicating that peak daily soiling losses have been below 1%. The site was chosen because it is thought to be affected by pollen soiling. With continued monitoring over the course of at least a full year, we expect to be able to observe and quantify pollen soiling events.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1999

Apollo 17 Soil Characterization for Reflectance Spectroscopy

It is the fine fractions that dominate the observed spectral signatures of bulk lunar soil, and the next to the smallest size fractions are the most similar to the overall properties of the bulk soil. Thus, our Lunar Soil Characterization Consortium has concentrated on understanding the inter-relations of compositional, mineralogical, and optical properties of the <45-micron size fraction and its component sizes (20-44 micron, 10-20 micron, and <10 micron size fractions). To be able to generalize our results beyond the particular sample set studied, it is necessary to quantitatively identify the observed effects of space weathering and evaluate the processes involved. For this, it is necessary to know the chemistry of each size fraction, modal abundances of each phase, average compositions of the minerals and glasses, I(sub s)/FeO values, reflectance spectra, and the physical makeup of the individual particles and their patinas. This characterization includes the important dissection of the pyroxene minerals into four separate populations, with data on both modes and average chemical compositions. Armed with such data, it should be possible to effectively isolate spectral effects of space weathering from spectral properties related to mineral and glass chemistry. Four mare soils from the Apollo 17 site were selected for characterization based upon similarities in bulk composition and their contrasting maturities, ranging from immature to submature to mature. The methodology of our characterization has been discussed previously. Results of the Apollo 17 mare soils, outlined herein, are being prepared for publication in MAPS. As shown, with decreasing grain size, the agglutinitic (impact) glass content profoundly increases. This is the most impressive change for the mare soils. In several soils we have examined, there is an over two-fold increase in the agglutinitic glass contents between the 90-150- micron and the 10-20-micron size fractions. Accompanying this increase in agglutinitic glass is a definite decrease in pyroxenes and to lesser extents, the oxides (ilmenite), volcanic glass, and olivine. Unexpectedly, however, the absolute plagioclase abundances stay relatively constant throughout the different grain sizes, although the abundance of plagioclase relative to the mafic minerals increases with decreasing particle size. These soils were chosen for study based upon their similarities in FeO and Ti02 content, allowing for direct comparisons between evolutions of chemistry between size fractions and among different maturities of soils. The bulk chemistry of these fractions was determined by EMP analyses of fused glass beads. In contrast to the systematic variations in bulk chemistry discussed below, the relatively uniform composition of agglutinitic glass with grain size and soil maturity is illustrated. The composition of the bulk fraction of each size fraction becomes more feldspathic with increasing maturity, with the effect being most pronounced for the finest fractions. The composition of the agglutinitic glass, however, is relatively invariant and more feldspathic (i.e., rich in Al2O3) than even the <10-micron fraction. This relation not only strengthens the "fusion of the finest fraction" (F(sup 3)) hypothesis, but also highlights the important role of plagioclase in the formation of agglutinitic glass. With decreasing grain size, FeO, MgO, and TiO2 contents decrease, whereas CaO, Na2O, and Al2O3 (plag components) increase for all soils. These chemical variations would appear to be coupled with the significant increase in agglutinitic glass and decrease in oxide (ilmenite),pyroxene, and volcanic glass. These changes in chemistry do not appear to be due to distinct changes in the compositions of individual phases but to their abundances. Values of I(sub s)/FeO increase with decreasing grain size, even though the bulk FeO contents decrease. That is, the percentage of the total Fe that is present as nanophase Fe(sup O) has increased substantially in the smaller size fraction. Note that the increase in nanophase FeO in smaller size fractions is significantly greater than the increase in agglutinitic glass content, with its single-domain FeO component. This would seem to indicate that at least some of the FeO is surface correlated. To illustrate this effect, if it is assumed that the nanophase FeO is entirely surface correlated, then equal masses of 15-micron and 6-micron spheres should have about 3x as much FeO in the finer fraction. The recent findings of Kelleret al. of the major role of vapor-deposited, nanophase FeO-containing patinas on most soil particles is a major breakthrough in our understanding of the distribution of FeO within agglutinitic glass and upon grain surfaces. Bidirectional reflectance spectra for a representative Apollo 17 soil (70181) are shown. The size separates all have similar albedo in the blue and follow a regular sequence in which the continuum slope increases, ferrous bands weaken, and albedo, increases with decreasing particle size. The bulk <45-micron soil is typically close to the 10-20 micron spectrum. It is important to note that although the finest fraction (<10 micron) is close in composition to the abundant agglutinitic glass in each size fraction, this size fraction is relatively featureless and does not dominate the spectrum of the bulk <45-micron soil. It has long been suspected that agglutinitic glass, to a large extent, is the product of melting of the finest fraction of the soils, with a dominance of plagioclase. Given the low abundance of pyroxene in the finest fractions of each soil the source of the FeO in these Apollo 17 agglutinitic glasses is not fully identified. We suspect the abundant volcanic glass in these samples may be a significant contributor and this hypothesis will be tested with the suite under study from other Apollo sites.

Taylor, L. A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Formation of Nanophase Iron in Lunar Soil Simulant for Use in ISRU Studies

For the prospective return of humans to the Moon and the extensive amount of premonitory studies necessary, large quantities of lunar soil simulants are required, for a myriad of purposes from construction/engineering purposes all the way to medical testing of its effects from ingestion by humans. And there is only a limited and precious quantity of lunar soil available on Earth (i.e., Apollo soils) - therefore, the immediate need for lunar soil simulants. Since the Apollo era, there have been several simulants; of these JSC-1 (Johnson Space Center) and MLS-1 (Minnesota Lunar Simulant) have been the most widely used. JSC-1 was produced from glassy volcanic tuff in order to approximate lunar soil geotechnical properties; whereas, MLS-1 approximates the chemistry of Apollo 11 high-Ti soil, 10084. Stocks of both simulants are depleted, but JSC-1 has recently gone back into production. The lunar soil simulant workshop, held at Marshall Space Flight Center in January 2005, identified the need to make new simulants for the special properties of lunar soil, such as nanophase iron (np-Fe(sup 0). Hill et al. (2005, this volume) showed the important role of microscale Fe(sup 0) in microwave processing of the lunar soil simulants JSC-1 and MLS-1. Lunar soil is formed by space weathering of lunar rocks (e.g., micrometeorite impact, cosmic particle bombardment). Glass generated during micrometeorite impact cements rock and mineral fragments together to form aggregates called agglutinates, and also produces vapor that is deposited and coats soil grains. Taylor et al. (2001) showed that the relative amount of impact glass in lunar soil increases with decreasing grain size and is the most abundant component in lunar dust (less than 20 micrometer fraction). Notably, the magnetic susceptibility of lunar soil also increases with the decreasing grain size, as a function of the amount of nanophase-sized Fe(sup 0) in impact-melt generated glass. Keller et al. (1997, 1999) also discovered the presence of abundant np-Fe(sup 0) particles in the glass patinas coating most soil particles. Therefore, the correlation of glass content and magnetic susceptibility can be explained by the presence of the np-Feo particles in glass: small particles contain relatively more np-Fe(sup 0) as glass coatings because the surface area versus mass ratio of the grain size is so increased. The magnetic properties of lunar soil are important in dust mitigation on the Moon (Taylor et al. 2005). Thus material simulating this property is important for testing mitigation methods using electromagnetic field. This np- Fe(sup 0) also produces a unique energy coupling to normal microwaves, such as present in kitchen microwave ovens. Effectively, a portion of lunar soil placed in a normal 2.45 GHz oven will melt at greater than 1200 C before your tea will boil at 100 C, a startling and new discovery reported by Taylor and Meek (2004, 2005). Several methods have been investigated in attempts to make nanophase-sized Feo dispersed within silicate glass; like in the lunar glass. We have been successful in synthesizing such a product and continue to improve on our recipe. We have performed extensive experimentation on this subject to date. Ultimately it will probably be necessary to add this np-Fe(sup 0) bearing silicate glass to lunar soil stimulant, like JSC-1, to actually produce the desired magnetic and microwave coupling properties for use in appropriate ISRU experimentation.

Liu, Yang↗
NASA NTRS2011

SMOS/SMAP Synergy for SMAP Level 2 Soil Moisture Algorithm Evaluation

Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) satellite has been proposed to provide global measurements of soil moisture and land freeze/thaw state at 10 km and 3 km resolutions, respectively. SMAP would also provide a radiometer-only soil moisture product at 40-km spatial resolution. This product and the supporting brightness temperature observations are common to both SMAP and European Space Agency's Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) mission. As a result, there are opportunities for synergies between the two missions. These include exploiting the data for calibration and validation and establishing longer term L-band brightness temperature and derived soil moisture products. In this investigation we will be using SMOS brightness temperature, ancillary data, and soil moisture products to develop and evaluate a candidate SMAP L2 passive soil moisture retrieval algorithm. This work will begin with evaluations based on the SMOS product grids and ancillary data sets and transition to those that will be used by SMAP. An important step in this analysis is reprocessing the multiple incidence angle observations provided by SMOS to a global brightness temperature product that simulates the constant 40 degree incidence angle observations that SMAP will provide. The reprocessed brightness temperature data provide a basis for evaluating different SMAP algorithm alternatives. Several algorithms are being considered for the SMAP radiometer-only soil moisture retrieval. In this first phase, we utilized only the Single Channel Algorithm (SCA), which is based on the radiative transfer equation and uses the channel that is most sensitive to soil moisture (H-pol). Brightness temperature is corrected sequentially for the effects of temperature, vegetation, roughness (dynamic ancillary data sets) and soil texture (static ancillary data set). European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) estimates of soil temperature for the top layer (as provided as part of the SMOS ancillary data) were used to correct for surface temperature effects and to derive microwave emissivity. ECMWF data were also used for precipitation forecasts, presence of snow, and frozen ground. Vegetation options are described below. One year of soil moisture observations from a set of four watersheds in the U.S. were used to evaluate four different retrieval methodologies: (1) SMOS soil moisture estimates (version 400), (2) SeA soil moisture estimates using the SMOS/SMAP data with SMOS estimated vegetation optical depth, which is part of the SMOS level 2 product, (3) SeA soil moisture estimates using the SMOS/SMAP data and the MODIS-based vegetation climatology data, and (4) SeA soil moisture estimates using the SMOS/SMAP data and actual MODIS observations. The use of SMOS real-world global microwave observations and the analyses described here will help in the development and selection of different land surface parameters and ancillary observations needed for the SMAP soil moisture algorithms. These investigations will greatly improve the quality and reliability of this SMAP product at launch.

Bindlish, Rajat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parameters Impacting Columnated Granular Soil Pneumatic Seal Performance

The ability of a column of loose granular soil to form a pneumatic seal was investigated by varying the diameter of the soil column, the effective column height, and the level of compaction in the soil. The soil column diameter was tested at three levels using pipes with inner diameters measuring 5.08, 10.16, and 15.24 centimeters (2, 4, and 6 inches). Soil was filled in each pipe to form 15, 30, and 45 centimeter (6, 12, and 18 inch) tall soil columns. Each diameter/height configuration was also tested at three levels of soil compaction, compared by calculating the bulk density of the soil with mass and volume measurements. GRC-1a simulant was used, with approximate low/medium/high bulk densities of 1.6, 1.75, and 1.9 g/cc achieved with a combination of vibration and tamping. The order of tests for a given column diameter was randomized and repeated three times. With the top of the soil open to atmosphere at room temperature, compressed air was injected through a small diffuser at the column base with several small downward-facing holes. The number and size of these holes was scaled such that a constant total inlet orifice area to column cross sectional area ratio was maintained for each column diameter. Inlet air pressure was slowly increased via a precision regulator to preserve quasi-static equilibrium in the soil column to minimize the impact of dynamics. Air pressure was increased all the way through the static and bubbling regimes until slugging or turbulent behavior was observed in the soil to ensure that the entire static regime had been captured during data collection. A three-factor, three-level analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical analysis was performed on the resulting data to determine the extent to which each physical parameter impacted the soil column seal performance. It was concluded that there is statistically significant evidence that column height, and the interaction between column height and diameter impact soil seal performance. In all other cases there was insufficient data to identify a statistically significant causal relationship. Additionally, plots were generated comparing experimental data to the predictive formula developed by Ogino et al. for fluidized beds in 1993. Because this model was developed for industrial spouted fluidized beds, the accuracy of its output prior to fluidization in the static seal ‘edge case’ is unknown, especially considering in this application the working gas was diffused across the column base rather than being injected through a spout. Further, the fidelity of the model had not yet been tested with lunar soil simulants. Plotting the Ogino et al. model alongside test data allows for a more intuitive sense of the impact of test parameters on soil seal performance, as well as providing a quick means to further tune this predictive model for more accurate use with static seals across granular lunar soil simulants. The model provided by Ogino et al. was further tuned using test data to determine the degree to which a spouted bed model could be applied to a slightly modified set of testing conditions: lunar soil simulants and a more diffuse, homogeneous application of pneumatic pressure. A Matlab script was created to test different values for the leading coefficient and exponents in Ogino’s formula. The script swept preset ranges, then iterated with higher resolutions across narrower ranges to converge on the optimal value for each parameter. The resulting adjusted model was compared to the original, as well as test data with noticeable improvements across the entire test domain.

Jack Stewart↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pore Structures in Detritusphere of Soils Under Switchgrass and Restored Prairie Vegetation Community

Root detritusphere, that is, the soil in the vicinity of decomposing root residues, plays an important role in soil microbial activity and C sequestration. Pore structure (size distributions and connectivity of soil pores) in the detritusphere serves as a major driver for these processes and, in turn, is influenced by the physical characteristics of both soil and roots. This study compared pore structure characteristics in the root detritusphere of soils of contrasting texture and mineralogy subjected to > 6 years of contrasting vegetation: monoculture switchgrass and polyculture prairie systems. Soil samples were collected from five experimental sites in the US Midwest representing three soil types. Soil texture and mineralogy were measured using a hydrometer and x-ray powder diffraction, respectively. The intact cores were scanned with x-ray computed micro-tomography to identify visible soil pores, biopores, and particulate organic matter (POM). We specifically focused on pore structure within the detritusphere around the POM of root origin. Results showed that the detritusphere of coarser textured soils, characterized by high sand and quartz contents, had lower porosity in the vicinity of POM compared with finer textured soils. POM vicinities in finer textured soils had high proportions of large (> 300 μm diameter) pores, and their pores were better connected than in the coarser soils. Lower porosity in the outer (> 1 mm) parts of the detritusphere of switchgrass than of prairie suggested soil compaction by roots, with the effect especially pronounced in the coarser soils. Here, the results demonstrated that soil texture and mineralogy played a major, while vegetation played a more modest, role in defining the pore structure in the root detritusphere.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Microbial Proxies for Anoxic Microsites Vary with Management and Partially Explain Soil Carbon Concentration

Anoxic microsites are potentially important but unresolved contributors to soil organic carbon (C) storage. How anoxic microsites vary with soil management and the degree to which anoxic microsites contribute to soil C stabilization remain unknown. Sampling from four long-term agricultural experiments in the central United States, we examined how anoxic microsites varied with management (e.g., cultivation, tillage, and manure amendments) and whether anoxic microsites determine soil C concentration in surface (0–15 cm) soils. We used a novel approach to track anaerobe habitat space and, hence, anoxic microsites using DNA copies of anaerobic functional genes over a confined volume of soil. No-till practices inconsistently increased anoxic microsite extent compared to conventionally tilled soils, and within one site organic matter amendments increased anaerobe abundance in no-till soils. Across all long-term tillage trials, uncultivated soils had ~2–4 times more copies of anaerobic functional genes than their cropland counterparts. Finally, anaerobe abundance was positively correlated to soil C concentration. Even when accounting for other soil C protection mechanisms, anaerobe abundance, our proxy for anoxic microsites, explained 41% of the variance and 5% of the unique variance in soil C concentration in cropland soils, making anoxic microsites the strongest management-responsive predictor of soil C concentration. Our results suggest that careful management of anoxic microsites may be a promising strategy to increase soil C storage within agricultural soils.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Soil microbiome interventions for carbon sequestration and climate mitigation

Mitigating climate change in soil ecosystems involves complex plant and microbial processes regulating carbon pools and flows. Here, we advocate for the use of soil microbiome interventions to help increase soil carbon stocks and curb greenhouse gas emissions from managed soils. Direct interventions include the introduction of microbial strains, consortia, phage, and soil transplants, whereas indirect interventions include managing soil conditions or additives to modulate community composition or its activities. Approaches to increase soil carbon stocks using microbially catalyzed processes include increasing carbon inputs from plants, promoting soil organic matter (SOM) formation, and reducing SOM turnover and production of diverse greenhouse gases. Marginal or degraded soils may provide the greatest opportunities for enhancing global soil carbon stocks. Among the many knowledge gaps in this field, crucial gaps include the processes influencing the transformation of plant-derived soil carbon inputs into SOM and the identity of the microbes and microbial activities impacting this transformation. As a critical step forward, we encourage broadening the current widespread screening of potentially beneficial soil microorganisms to encompass functions relevant to stimulating soil carbon stocks. Moreover, in developing these interventions, we must consider the potential ecological ramifications and uncertainties, such as incurred by the widespread introduction of homogenous inoculants and consortia, and the need for site-specificity given the extreme variation among soil habitats. Incentivization and implementation at large spatial scales could effectively harness increases in soil carbon stocks, helping to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Genomic fingerprints of the world’s soil ecosystems

Despite the explosion of soil metagenomic data, we lack a synthesized understanding of patterns in the distribution and functions of soil microorganisms. These patterns are critical to predictions of soil microbiome responses to climate change and resulting feedbacks that regulate greenhouse gas release from soils. To address this gap, we assay 1,512 manually curated soil metagenomes using complementary annotation databases, read-based taxonomy, and machine learning to extract multidimensional genomic fingerprints of global soil microbiomes. Our objective is to uncover novel biogeographical patterns of soil microbiomes across environmental factors and ecological biomes with high molecular resolution. We reveal shifts in the potential for (i) microbial nutrient acquisition across pH gradients; (ii) stress-, transport-, and redox-based processes across changes in soil bulk density; and (iii) greenhouse gas emissions across biomes. We also use an unsupervised approach to reveal a collection of soils with distinct genomic signatures, characterized by coordinated changes in soil organic carbon, nitrogen, and cation exchange capacity and in bulk density and clay content that may ultimately reflect soil environments with high microbial activity. Genomic fingerprints for these soils highlight the importance of resource scavenging, plant-microbe interactions, fungi, and heterotrophic metabolisms. Across all analyses, we observed phylogenetic coherence in soil microbiomes—more closely related microorganisms tended to move congruently in response to soil factors. Collectively, the genomic fingerprints uncovered here present a basis for global patterns in the microbial mechanisms underlying soil biogeochemistry and help beget tractable microbial reaction networks for incorporation into process-based models of soil carbon and nutrient cycling.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗