## 2 Materials and Methods
### Methods for Soil Hydraulic Characterisation
#### 2.2.3 Experimental Procedures  
The workflow diagram of the experimental procedures and the corresponding results are shown in Figure 2. For each infiltration test, we collected one disturbed sample (from the first 15 cm) and six undisturbed samples of approximately 100 cm\({}^{3}\), three from a depth of 0-5 cm and three from a depth of 5-10 cm. The disturbed samples were used for texture determination using the pipette method [33] and SOC content using a Thermo Flash 2000 CN analyser (Thermo Fisher Scientific,  
Figure 2: Workflow diagram of the experimental procedures. Waltham, MA, USA) after treatment with HCl to remove the inorganic C. After oven drying for 48 h at 105 \({}^{\circ}\)C, the undisturbed soil samples allowed for the determination of the bulk density \(\rho_{\rm d}\) (g cm\({}^{-3}\)) and the initial volumetric water content by weight \(W_{\rm i}\) (g g\({}^{-1}\)). The initial volumetric water content \(\theta_{\rm i}\) was obtained as \(\theta_{\rm i}=W_{\rm i}\cdot\rho_{\rm d}\). The volumetric water content at saturation \(\theta_{\rm S}\) was computed as \((1-\rho_{\rm d})/2.65\), where the value 2.65 g cm\({}^{-3}\) is the assumed density of the soil particles. In the BEST method, the residual volumetric water content \(\theta_{\rm r}\) is supposed to be zero. When applying the BEST procedure for each sampling point, the averages \(\theta_{\rm i}\) and bulk density of the values measured at the two depths (0-5 cm; 5-10 cm) were used. The infiltration experiments were carried out following the guidelines given in the literature [15]. The positions to perform the tests were chosen randomly, avoiding the portions of soil with evident compaction due to the passage of agricultural machinery. At each position, the aerial apparatus of the vegetation was cut at ground level without altering the soil structure. Then, a metal cylinder 16.3 cm in diameter was inserted approximately 1 cm into the soil to avoid lateral losses. The test consisted of pouring constant volumes of water (\(\approx\)1.465 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-4}\) m\({}^{3}\)) from time t = 0, waiting each time for complete infiltration and noting the required time. The poured volume determined a negligible hydraulic head (\(\approx\) 0.7 cm), in accordance with the basic assumptions of the BEST method. Generally, steady-state conditions are reached using 8 to 15 water volumes depending on soil conditions [15]. Given the possible difficulties in detecting the steady state during field tests, it was decided always to pour at least 15 volumes (i.e., 105 mm) and to identify in post-processing the time when the steady state conditions occurred. In most cases, this ensured the achievement of near-stationary conditions, identified by negligible variations in the infiltration times of the 2-3 consecutive water inputs. The measures were used to derive the I(t) curves. The infiltration test was replicated at least five times for each plot shown in Figure 1. The positions for repetitions were chosen around the first test, spacing them at least 1 m apart. Therefore, 30 tests were performed for LTAE NewSmoca and 60 tests for LTAE Rotation, with at least 10 infiltration tests for each treatment (Figure 1). The experimental cumulative infiltration curve I(t) was analysed using three different algorithms, BEST Slope, BEST Intercept and BEST Steady. The hydraulic parameters obtained from replicated infiltration tests were averaged to obtain characteristic values for the plot based on a specific algorithm. In most cases, to obtain a more robust characterisations [15], the parameters derived from the three algorithms were also averaged in turn. Sometimes, due to the poor fit of some of the algorithms, the corresponding parameters were not considered when calculating the average hydraulic parameters of each plot. All infiltration tests were conducted in a limited time interval (between the last decade of July and the first week of August 2023) without precipitation.