Analysis of Water Stress Prediction Quality as Influenced by the Number and Placement of Temporal Soil-Water Monitoring Sites

Luan Pan, Viacheslav I. Adamchuk, Richard B. Ferguson, Pierre R. L. Dutilleul, Shiv O. Prasher

Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA.
Department of Bioresource Engineering, McGill University, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Canada.
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Canada.

DOI: 10.4236/jwarp.2014.611091                

Abstract

In an agricultural field, monitoring the temporal changes in soil conditions can be as important as understanding spatial heterogeneity when it comes to determining the locally-optimized application rates of key agricultural inputs. For example, the monitoring of soil water content is needed to decide on the amount and timing of irrigation. On-the-go soil sensing technology provides a way to rapidly obtain high-resolution, multiple data layers to reveal soil spatial variability, at a relatively low cost. To take advantage of this information, it is important to define the locations, which represent diversified field conditions, in terms of their potential to store and release soil water. Choosing the proper locations and the number of soil monitoring sites is not straightforward. In this project, sensor-based maps of soil apparent electrical conductivity and field elevation were produced for seven agricultural fields in Nebraska, USA. In one of these fields, an eight-node wireless sensor network was used to establish real-time relationships between these maps and the Water Stress Potential (WSP) estimated using soil matric potential measurements. The results were used to model hypothetical WSP maps in the remaining fields. Different placement schemes for temporal soil monitoring sites were evaluated in terms of their ability to predict the hypothetical WSP maps with a different range and magnitude of spatial variability. When a large number of monitoring sites were used, it was shown that the probability for uncertain model predictions was relatively low regardless of the site selection strategy. However, a small number of monitoring sites may be used to reveal the underlying relationship only if these locations are chosen carefully.

Keywords

On-the-Go Soil Sensing, Variable-Rate Irrigation, Electrical Conductivity, Site-Specific Water Management, Soil Matric Potential

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Viscarra Rossel, R.A., Adamchuk, V.I., Sudduth, K.A., McKenzie, N.J. and Lobsey, C. (2011) Proximal Soil Sensing: An Effective Approach for Soil Measurements in Space and Time, Chapter 5. Advances in Agronomy 113, 237-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386473-4.00005-1
[2]	Hedley, C. and Yule, I. (2009) A Method for Spatial Prediction of Daily Soil Water Status for Precise Irrigation Scheduling. Agricultural Water Management, 96, 1737-1745. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.07.009
[3]	Kim, Y., Evans, R.G. and Iversen, W. M. (2009) Evaluation of Closed-Loop Site-Specific Irrigation with Wireless Sensor Network. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 135, 25-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2009)135:1(25)
[4]	Omary, M., Camp, C.R. and Sadler, E.J. (1997) Center Pivot Irrigation System Modification to Provide Variable Water Application Depths. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 13, 235-239. http://dx.doi.org/10.13031/2013.21604
[5]	Miranda, F.R., Yoder, R. and Wilkerson, J.B. (2003) A Site-Specific Irrigation Control System. ASABE, St. Joseph, Paper No. 031129.
[6]	Han, Y.J., Khalilian, A., Owino, T.O., Farahani, H.J. and Moore, S. (2009) Development of Clemson Variable-Rate Lateral Irrigation System. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 68, 108-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2009.05.002
[7]	Lesch, S.M. (2005) Sensor-Directed Spatial Response Surface Sampling Designs for Characterizing Spatial Variation in Soil Properties. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46, 153-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2004.11.004
[8]	Minasny, B and McBratney, A.B. (2006) A Conditioned Latin Hypercube Method for Sampling in the Presence of Ancillary Information. Computers and Geosciences, 32, 1378-1388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2005.12.009
[9]	Brus, D.J. and Heuvelink, G.B.M. (2007) Optimization of Sample Patterns for Universal Kriging of Environmental Variables. Geoderma, 138, 86-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.10.016
[10]	de Gruijter, J.J., McBratney, A.B. and Taylor, J. (2010) Sampling for High-Resolution Soil Mapping. Proximal Soil Sensing. Springer Netherlands, 3-14.
[11]	Adamchuk, V.I., Viscarra Rossel, R.A., Marx, D.B. and Samal, A.K. (2011) Using Targeted Sampling to Process Multivariate Soil Sensing Data. Geoderma, 163, 63-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.04.004
[12]	Pan, L., Adamchuk, V.I., Martin, D.L., Schroeder, M.A. and Ferguson, R.B. (2013) Analysis of Soil Water Availability by Integrating Spatial and Temporal Sensor-Based Data. Precision Agriculture, 14, 414-433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11119-013-9305-x
[13]	SAS (2008) Optimality Criteria. SAS/QC User’s Guide, SAS Institute Inc., Cary.
[14]	An, W., Ci, S., Luo, H., Wu, D., Adamchuk, V., Sharif, H., Wang, X. and Tang, H. (2013) Effective Sensor Deployment Based on Field Information Coverage in Precision Agriculture. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcm.2448