during the Expert Panel in Göttingen 22-23.2015 we made decisions on the revisions needed for the Soil Solution Manual Update to be confirmed at the Task Force Meeting in Ljubljana on the 20th May. Please, find attached a Word-file containing the parts of the Manual under revision. All revisions are marked as Track-changes. As we need to get the revisions ready in good time for the Task force, only comments made within the coming week can still be taken into account.
With my best wishes,
Tiina M. Nieminen
with regard to the section on pooling of samples, i think it would be good to mention that new lysimeters should always be followed up separately during a ’test period’ after installation, because there might be an installation effect (often indicated by an elevated pH, NO3, NH4, TN and EC). Only when a more or less stable chemical composition is reached, the sample of the new lysimeter should be pooled with the other samplers. I sent you a number of small corrections as track changes by email.
Dear Tiina, dear all,
I've added a few small comments.
Have a nice weekend!
Thanks for the update. I have three comments:
1) Section 4.1 "However, in cases where tension lysimeter techniques cannot be used on certain plots or depths due to, for example, extremely arid conditions: remove "extremely" because semi-destructive methods would not be useful in such conditions.
2) Section 4.4.1 "In case of pooling, the soil solution volume to be reported is the sum of individual volumes of the pooled samples, i.e. total volume of the sampler group". This should be corrected also in the SSM form for data submission (column 38-42).
3) Table 2 does not illustrate the problem of changing the Sampler_ID when you start to pool the samples. I also find strange that samples at 0.05 cm and 80 cm are pooled and not at 20 cm in this example. I would assume that if you pool the samples, you pool them at all depths. In this table, I would show 2 single lysimeters for two depths (e.g. -0.05 and -0.50) in 2003 and the pooling of those two lysimeters for both depths in 2004. This would make 6 lines in the table. Please note that the depth should be negative
Dear Arne, Nicholas and Elisabeth,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments. I took your corrections into account and modified slightly the version to be presented next week at Task Force by Nathalie Cools.
The data submisson format will be changed later, after the acceptance of the updat by Task Force.
with my best wishes,