| Plants grown in a field lysimeter on two soil types were subjected to progressive drought during vegetative growth. |
|
| The lysimeter waste packages were removed, analyzed and shipped off-site for disposal. |
|
| For this project, a lysimeter comprising contaminated sediments over a natural soil was instrumented with hydrogeochemical sensors. |
|
| In addition, the Scientific Committee noted that three unknown polar compounds were detected in a lysimeter. |
|
| The Committee noted that it is possible that lysimeter studies demonstrate lack of leaching for one or more use scenarios but none were reported. |
|
| Over that period, 201 mm moisture drained from the ET lysimeter, compared to 292 mm in the CSC lysimeter. |
|
| Convection-dispersion modelling was first attempted using the lysimeter data. |
|
| A third lysimeter may also be placed immediately below the humus layer. |
|
| Water and chemical fluxes were measured at the lysimeter bases. |
|
| To this end, they used lysimeter cases equipped with EnviroScan® capacitative probes for tracking the development of soil volume humidity at 50 cm of depth. |
|
| Two different soil structures were set up in the lysimeter. |
|
| Business premises was supplemented in the year 2003 by an outdoor exposure test field with integrated lysimeter station, a weather station as well as a soil-hydrologic measuring plot. |
|
| A sampling port was installed in the centre of the base of the lysimeter to allow collection of leachate. |
|
| In lysimeter samples, a few sequences were assigned to TM7, Spirochaetes, Verrucomicrobia, and Chlamydiae phyla. |
|
| Differences between the upgradient lysimeter and piezometer at the aerobic treatment unit site were attributed to hydrological and construction differences. |
|
