Cargando…

Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels

Non-destructive soil water content determination is a fundamental component for many agricultural and environmental applications. The accuracy and costs of the sensors define the measurement scheme and the ability to fit the natural heterogeneous conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate fiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Matula, Svatopluk, Báťková, Kamila, Legese, Wossenu Lemma
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5134571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27854263
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s16111912
_version_ 1782471483431321600
author Matula, Svatopluk
Báťková, Kamila
Legese, Wossenu Lemma
author_facet Matula, Svatopluk
Báťková, Kamila
Legese, Wossenu Lemma
author_sort Matula, Svatopluk
collection PubMed
description Non-destructive soil water content determination is a fundamental component for many agricultural and environmental applications. The accuracy and costs of the sensors define the measurement scheme and the ability to fit the natural heterogeneous conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate five commercially available and relatively cheap sensors usually grouped with impedance and FDR sensors. ThetaProbe ML2x (impedance) and ECH(2)O EC-10, ECH(2)O EC-20, ECH(2)O EC-5, and ECH(2)O TE (all FDR) were tested on silica sand and loess of defined characteristics under controlled laboratory conditions. The calibrations were carried out in nine consecutive soil water contents from dry to saturated conditions (pure water and saline water). The gravimetric method was used as a reference method for the statistical evaluation (ANOVA with significance level 0.05). Generally, the results showed that our own calibrations led to more accurate soil moisture estimates. Variance component analysis arranged the factors contributing to the total variation as follows: calibration (contributed 42%), sensor type (contributed 29%), material (contributed 18%), and dry bulk density (contributed 11%). All the tested sensors performed very well within the whole range of water content, especially the sensors ECH(2)O EC-5 and ECH(2)O TE, which also performed surprisingly well in saline conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5134571
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51345712017-01-03 Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels Matula, Svatopluk Báťková, Kamila Legese, Wossenu Lemma Sensors (Basel) Article Non-destructive soil water content determination is a fundamental component for many agricultural and environmental applications. The accuracy and costs of the sensors define the measurement scheme and the ability to fit the natural heterogeneous conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate five commercially available and relatively cheap sensors usually grouped with impedance and FDR sensors. ThetaProbe ML2x (impedance) and ECH(2)O EC-10, ECH(2)O EC-20, ECH(2)O EC-5, and ECH(2)O TE (all FDR) were tested on silica sand and loess of defined characteristics under controlled laboratory conditions. The calibrations were carried out in nine consecutive soil water contents from dry to saturated conditions (pure water and saline water). The gravimetric method was used as a reference method for the statistical evaluation (ANOVA with significance level 0.05). Generally, the results showed that our own calibrations led to more accurate soil moisture estimates. Variance component analysis arranged the factors contributing to the total variation as follows: calibration (contributed 42%), sensor type (contributed 29%), material (contributed 18%), and dry bulk density (contributed 11%). All the tested sensors performed very well within the whole range of water content, especially the sensors ECH(2)O EC-5 and ECH(2)O TE, which also performed surprisingly well in saline conditions. MDPI 2016-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5134571/ /pubmed/27854263 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s16111912 Text en © 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Matula, Svatopluk
Báťková, Kamila
Legese, Wossenu Lemma
Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title_full Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title_fullStr Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title_full_unstemmed Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title_short Laboratory Performance of Five Selected Soil Moisture Sensors Applying Factory and Own Calibration Equations for Two Soil Media of Different Bulk Density and Salinity Levels
title_sort laboratory performance of five selected soil moisture sensors applying factory and own calibration equations for two soil media of different bulk density and salinity levels
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5134571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27854263
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s16111912
work_keys_str_mv AT matulasvatopluk laboratoryperformanceoffiveselectedsoilmoisturesensorsapplyingfactoryandowncalibrationequationsfortwosoilmediaofdifferentbulkdensityandsalinitylevels
AT batkovakamila laboratoryperformanceoffiveselectedsoilmoisturesensorsapplyingfactoryandowncalibrationequationsfortwosoilmediaofdifferentbulkdensityandsalinitylevels
AT legesewossenulemma laboratoryperformanceoffiveselectedsoilmoisturesensorsapplyingfactoryandowncalibrationequationsfortwosoilmediaofdifferentbulkdensityandsalinitylevels