@article{fdi:010090515,
  title = {{E}valuation of soil hydraulic properties in {N}orthern and {C}entral {T}unisian soils for improvement of hydrological modelling},
  author = {{H}maied, {A}. and {P}odwojewski, {P}ascal and {G}harnouki, {I}. and {C}haabane, {H}. and {H}ammecker, {C}laude},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{T}he hydrological cycle is strongly affected by climate changes causing extreme weather events with long drought periods and heavy rainfall events. {T}o predict the hydrological functioning of {T}unisian catchments, modelling is an essential tool to estimate the consequences on water resources and to test the sustainability of the different land uses. {S}oil physical properties describing water flow are essential to feed the models and must therefore be determined all over the watershed. {A} simple but robust ring infiltration method combined with particle size distribution ({PSD}) analysis ({BEST} method) was used to evaluate and derive the retention properties and the hydraulic conductivities. {P}hysically based and statistical pedotransfer functions based on {PSD} were compared to test their potential use for different types of {T}unisian soils. {T}he functional sensitivity of these parameters was assessed by employing the {H}ydrus-1{D} software ({PC} {P}rogress, {P}rague, {C}zech {R}epublic) for water balance computations. {T}his evaluation process involved testing the responsiveness and accuracy of the parameters in simulating various water balance components within the model. {T}he evaluation of soil hydraulic parameters across the three used models highlighted significant variations, demonstrating distinct characteristics in each model. {W}hile notable differences were evident overall, intriguing similarities emerged, particularly regarding saturated hydraulic conductivity between {BEST} and {R}osetta, and the shape parameter (n) between {A}rya-{P}aris and {R}osetta. {T}hese parallels indicate shared hydraulic properties among the models, underscoring areas of agreement amid their diverse results. {S}ignificant differences were shown for scale parameter alpha for the various methods employed. {M}arginal differences in evaporation and drainage were observed between the {BEST} and {A}rya-{P}aris methods, with {R}osetta distinctly highlighting a disparity between physically based models and statistical models.},
  keywords = {watershed ; hydraulic conductivity ; {BEST} method ; particle size ; distribution ; pedotransfer functions ; retention properties ; {TUNISIE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{L}and},
  volume = {13},
  numero = {3},
  pages = {385 [17 ]},
  year = {2024},
  DOI = {10.3390/land13030385},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010090515},
}